Rearden_Steel
-
Posts
370 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rearden_Steel
-
-
three, there will be no “crash” of the dollar as it would be a crash of the world system (not just “dislocations”).
He is an example from crash proof I think is relevant.
"Let us suppose six castaways are stranded on a desert island, five Asians and one American. Their problem is hunger. So they sit down and divide labor as follows: One Asian will do the hunting, another will fish, the third will scrounge for vegetation, the fourth will cook dinner, and the fifth will gather firewood and tend the fire. The sixth, the American, is given the job of eating.
So five Asians work all day to feed one American, who spends his day sunning himself on the beach. The American is employed in the equivalent of the service sector, operating a tanning salon that has one customer: himself. At the end of the day, the five Asians present a painstakingly prepared feast to the American, who sits at the head of a special table built by the Asians specifically for this purpose.
Now the American is practical enough to know that if the Asians are going to continue providing banquets they must also be fed, so he allows them just enough scraps from his table to sustain them for the following day's labor.
Modern-day economists would have you look at the situation just described and believe that the American is the lone engine of growth driving the island's economy; that without the American and his ravenous appetite, the Asians on the island would all be unemployed.
THe reality, of course, is that the American is not the engine of growth, but the caboose, and the best thing the Asians could do would be to vote the American off the island--decoupling the caboose from the gravy train. Without the American to consume most of their food, they'd have a lot more to eat themselves. Then the Asians could spend less time working on food-related tasks and devote more time to leisure or to satisfying other needs that now go unfulfilled because so many of their scarce resource are devoted to feeding the American.
Ah, you say, but that analogy is flawed because in the real world the United STates does pay for its "food" and Asians do receive value in exchange for their effort.
Okay, then let's assume the American on the islands pays for his food the same way real-world Americans pay, by issuing IOUs. At the end of each meal, the Asians present the American with a bill, which pays by issuing IOUs claiming to represent payments of food.
The castaways all know that the IOUs can never be collected since the American not only produces no food to back them up, but also lacks the means and the intention of ever providing any. But the Asian accept them anyway, each day adding to the accumulation of worthless IOUs. Are the Asians any better off as a result of this accumulation? Are they any less hungry? Of course not.
Suppose an Asian Central Banker suddenly washes up onto the island and volunteers his services. Now each day the central banker taxes the other Asians on the island by confiscating a portion of the scraps of food the American throws them each day from his table. The central banker then agrees to return these morsels to the other Asians each day, in exchange for each Asian's daily accumulation of the American's IOUs, less a small percentage for himself because he, the central banker, also has to eat.
Does the existence of a central banker change anything? Do the Asians have any more to eat because their own central banker gives them back a portion of the food he took from them in the first place? Do the American IOUs have any more value because they can now be exchanged in this manner? Of course not.
The Asians will be better off without us
The real world lessnon is that if it doesn't make sense for the six make believe Asians to support millions of real-world Americans. The fact that they do so in exchange for worthless IOUs in no way alters this reality.
There is no question that in the short run, by allowing the U.S dollars to collapse (in effect, voting millions of Americans off the island), there will be some disruptions of Asian economies. Of course, there will be some initial losers, particularly among those Asians who currently profit from the present arrangement. However, these profits come only at the expense of greater losses borne by the entire Asian population.
In the end, the cessation of America's excess consumption, which is not a benefit Asians enjoy but rather a burden they now disproportionately bear, will be the best thing that can happen to them. Like the serfs being liberated from their lords, their scarce resources will be freed to satisfy their own needs and desires, and their standards of living will rise accordingly. As their savings finance increased capital investment, rather than being squandered on American consumption, their future standards of living will rise that much faster as well."
-
Bruce,
You and I are defenders of reason, laissez faire capitalism, students of Austrian economics, and great admirers of Ayn Rand, aren't we? Yet, that doesn't give either of us a free pass, does it? No, and it shouldn't.
I am afraid that some have read his book and looked at all the things they like and ignored the rest. I am not being critical of that attitude. We all want to find people out in the world that we can like and support. Schiff's targets are certainly our targets. My complaints are that his arguments concerning the U.S. economy are often unsupported leaps. Maybe he feels that he needs to make these big claims to gain attention. I, as a defender of reason, etc., want my arguments to be as sound as I can make them. I am sure that is true of all on this forum.
Ok lets look at your criticism:
one, neither the dollar or the U.S. economy is worthlessPeter never said that the dollar holds no value but rather that it is overvalued that our level of production is no where near the value of the dollar. I would like to see your source where he says the Dollar has no value. If you want a summary of Peters reasons the dollar will lose value look here.
two, there is a better explanation as to why foreigners accept and keep the U.S. dollarYou need to specify your explanations and how it conflicts with Schiff's. Schiff gives several reasons why foreigners hold our debt. One of the main reasons is to create a favorable trade balance for exporter nations. However, most of the real wealth in the US has dried up and this practice is losing validity.
three, there will be no “crash” of the dollar as it would be a crash of the world system (not just “dislocations”).Peter says there will be a decline in the value of the dollar however he states it will take place over time and that we may see inflation as high as the double digits.
The dollar will decline a significant amount though ( I think you agree with that) its impossible to maintain its current value (even though its fallen 40% since 2001).
However it won't hit other countries as hard as the US. For one they haven't accumulated the amount of debt that we have. Many countries unlike the US especially in Asia still have the capacity to produce wealth. It won't happen over night however their is signs of it every where even today.
Mitul Kotecha, head of currency strategy at Credit Agricole, said:
"The real risk remains that we get a dollar rout. The news from from the US is consistently negative and investors are actually not overly long euros."Decoupling will continue particularly in China, which developed to the point where they no longer depended on the US for growth, and has increased domestic consumption will replace lost U.S exports. China just last year had bought more cars domestically then the US for the first time in history. Some goes for household appliances like refrigerators.
From Crash Proof:
There is no question that in the short run, by allowing the U.S dollars to collapse there will be some disruptions of Asian economies. Of course, there will be some initial losers, particularly among those Asians who currently profit from the present arrangement. However, these profits come only at the expense of greater losses borne by the entire Asian population. -
To the sense of your comment, I agree. I agree wholeheartedly. I am not sure that Schiff means that, however. If you are right, good.
I know that's what he means if you listen to his radio show he talks about it constantly.
From his Europac website:
We borrowed and spent too much money, bought goods we couldn’t afford, built houses we couldn’t carry, and developed a service sector economy completely dependent on consumer credit and rising asset prices. All the while, we allowed our industrial base to crumble and our infrastructure to decay.But Schiff does not say that the dollar is going to fall (Sometimes he does become unclear what he really means, however. He once said what sounded like the “crash” would be slow.). The word Schiff uses is "Crash". He says "dump". He does not mean that the dollar will annually drop 10%, 15%, or even 25% against other currencies. He says it will loose all value. The sky will fall.He never said it would 'lose all value immediately' he has said that hyper-inflation is a possibility depending on the Fed but he does expect the dollar's value to decline once foreign creditors realize that they won't get their money back.
The actions that may be taken in China and Japan will, I am sure, be responses to the dollar's troubles, and Obama's insanity. Neither set of leaders, however, is going to cause an additional mess in their own economies, and undercut their reserves by "dumping" the dollar and causing a "crash". Schiff claims they will.No one is saying they are going to dump the dollar overnight. However, newly elected Japaneses officials including the new PM has stated they will no longer devalue the yen for the sake of export companies. They also indicate that their history of buying US treasuries will most likely end also. Once countries like Japan stop lending us money the US government will no longer afford bailouts and zero percent interest rates.
I will allow that something out there could cause what no one really wants, a real "crash". Just like our recent panic, things can go crosswise fast and badly in our over regulated world, and none of the leaders understands economics. But, that isn't Schiff’s claim either.That's one of the very cores of Peters messages.That the Fed and the government have no understanding of whats happening.
From Peter's article "The Experts Never Learn"
As congress and the president consider the best policies to right our economic ship, it is my hope that they will pursue a strategy first developed by Seinfeld character George Costanza. After wisely recognizing that every instinct he had up unto that point had ended in failure, George decided that to be successful, he had to do the exact opposite of whatever his instincts told him. I suggest our policymakers give this approach a try.I would go back and read his book again. Your writings show that you have little understanding of his work. I would recommend going to the Europac website and reading his article archive. You can also download his radio show on iTunes under the tile "Wall Street unspun". Peter Schiff is a defender of reason, laissez faire capitalism, a student of Austrian economics and a great admirer of Ayn Rand. If you can find anything that points to the contrary I would be interested in hearing it.
-
Congrats Maarten!!! It seems that Objectivism has finally began to dominate local politics.
-
He falls down at the end of the first video interview though when he says, “we don’t need to buy more stuff.” It sounds as if he doesn’t realize that we live in capitalism, and unfettered, capitalism will allow us to buy lots of stuff. Lots! He sounds as if he thinks that we will need to suffer a lot to get rid of the mess we are in. The amazing thing about capitalism in the U.S. is that we can solve this mess quickly, once our creative ability is turned loose. The national debt, the trade deficit, the problems with medicine and retirement incomes would not be problems if we can be free to produce. Does Schiff know this?
Schiff isn't saying buying things are bad. What he is saying is that were buying things on credit that we can't payback is the problem because we are consuming and not producing. Its the same as if I was unemployed and purchased things on my Visa and when the Visa bill came I pay it off with my Mastercard. This is not capitalism this is insanity.
Another problem with Schiff is his insistence that foreigners, he most often mentions China, are going to dump dollars, because the dollar is worthless. As this expectation of his fails to occur, he is going to lose traction. He will be the man who shouted the sky is going to fall, and it didn’t. I don’t think that we want to be very closely connected with his claims. The consequences of our 30 years of exporting made up money will be bad enough without having to fight reactions to Schiff’s claims as well.The dollar is already falling have you seen the DXYO latley? The price of gold has already hit a new high of 1028 and the Chinese government is encouraging their citizens to purchase gold. Also Japans new prime minister ran on a campaign that among other things that Japan should stop devaluing their own currency and stop financing US debt. Japan is currently one of the US's largest debt holders.
Given our astronomically high amount of debt and a crippling trade deficit what makes you think that the dollar won't fall?
-
I currently live on Oahu. The 7-eleven and McDonalds both serve blends with Kona coffee beans, one of the most expensive and sought-after coffees in the world. If I go downtown I can get a cup of 100% Kona peaberry. It is awesome black, no cream no sugar.
I love Kona coffee (one of the few things I like about Hawaii)! Kona and Colombian are the only types I really enjoy. I've been drinking more espresso than coffee lately.
-
I don't know. I do know that no one asked the citizens...
That's because it was a surprise attack. No one saw it coming, even the Russians said it was a brilliant move.
In other news the people in the UK forms are saying they should attack Norway. The only thing holding them back is our mpp with the US.
-
Peter Schiff appeared on Freedom Watch and had a little debate with Dr. Brook on foreign policy (at the end of the video). I won't paraphrase or summarize their conversation because I am too busy
. But I'll just mention that Peter Schiff quoted Thomas Paine: "Government is a necessary evil", to which Dr. Brook responded by saying ... (well, please just watch the video!).Actually, he quoted Thomas Jefferson (however Thomas Pain said it also). I wouldn't say they argued Yaron just corrected Peter when he said the necessity of government wasn't evil. They both agreed that the proper role of Government was to protect individual rights, and that's the important thing.
-
One thing they didn't mention in the show is that Poland has a really high VAT tax.
-
1) Roethlisberger is behind only Tom Brady in yards gained passing. That's ludicrous. I hope it doesn't last. It'd be one thing if the Steelers were turning into a passing team. It's quite another that they ahve to pass because they can't run.
Without Troy Polamalu they won't be a tackling team neither.
3) Chicago proves that Cuttler made the wrong choice. Maybe he just hada bad game, maybe the Bears are the team where QBs go to die. You can't tell from one game, of course. But Mr. Cutler threw four picks tot eh defense. Nasty.A lot of that was the receivers fault. He wouldn't have done any better in Denver anyways.
5) The Cowboys showed good form (who said that?). They played well (who keeps saying these things?), too. But they're still the team most likely to be eliminated in thei first playoff game, assuming they get that far (ah, that's better).My rule of thumb is that if you don't have anything bad to say about the Cowboys then don't say anything at all.
My Seachickens did exceptionally well....maybe not the first quarter. I know it was against St Louis but any blow out in the NFL is worth celebrating.
-
Thanks for the info about fighting. I fought my first battle and gained 20 wellness points from it!
-
I just got to level 5 yesterday so I can start fighting now. I look at some of the battlefields and was confused about how they work. The profiles on both sides were rotating like slot machines? How exactly does this work? If I join a fight does my profile enter into that rotation? If so how many times do I go around? Can I get out when I want to or am I stuck there for a certain amount of time.
Also, the comments on this post are confusing me about the health situation. Many are complaining that the battle depletes your health and reduces your ability to earn, but other comments say a battle is the best way to get health because of the free hospital use. So is fighting good or bad for your overall health?
Sorry about bombarding you guys with questions, I tried looking them up on the wiki but they did not address my questions.
-
I sometimes wonder how far we will have to go before the majority of the country will take notice.
-- The Declaration of Independence[All experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.] -
Det fungerer. Jeg spurte om lønnsforhøyelse (på norsk), og fikk det!
Hvem jobber du for?
-
I joined today. My name is Bruce Bartkowski (same as in real life). I reached level two and started military training.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.#Logos
"Another explanation exists that the bitten apple pays homage to the mathematician Alan Turing, who committed suicide by eating an apple he had laced with cyanide.[122] Turing is regarded as one of the fathers of the computer. The rainbow colors of the logo were rumored to be a reference to the rainbow flag, as a homage to Turing's homosexuality." - Wikipedia
That unfortunately is an Urban Myth. The logo your referring to was the second one after they had already used the apple in relation to newton. They later went to a second designer (Rob Janoff) for the famous multicolored design. As for the "rainbow flag"(which actually isn't a rainbow) Apple theory; Rob Janoff gave multiple designs with lots of colors and different designs ( including a polished steel version they now use). Steve Jobs selected the multicolored one for reasons I had already stated in a previous post.
The Alan Turing theory is a rather new "urban legend" started by the British press. If you look to the source of your wikipedia reference you'll see that even your reference source claims:
While the Turing link to the Apple logo makes for interesting conversation, it doesn’t appear to stand up under close examination.Don't get me wrong though. I think Alan Turing was a genius and certainly deserves a memorial as fitting as the Apple logo; however the actual story is nearly as intriguing.
-
The first Apple Logo Design was by Ron Wayne, who also co-founded the company. It was rather elaborate in comparison to its later incarnations; as it depicted Newton under the famous apple tree, deep in contemplation. Steve Jobs felt it was a little too intellectual, and that the details were hard to distinguish. For those reasons it was only used on the Apple I.
In 1977 a second attempt at Apple logo design was undertaken by art designer Rob Janoff. The logo design was very simple- an apple with a bite taken out of it, adorned with all the colours of the rainbow, albeit in the wrong order. The symbolism here was genius; the bite symbolized knowledge, as in the Garden of Eden, and was also a play on words, as in computer “byte”. The colors suggested vibrancy and energy, but the wrong ordering of these colors suggested a break from the establishment- freedom, daring and enterprise, sentiments most befitting such a revolutionary technology.
-
I'm pretty sure that the modern logo is meant as a salute to Turin. That would make more sense than a religious example.
The Apple was supposed to be representative of Newton's apple, a source of inspiration.
Here is the original company logo:
-
Nor would he do a years long ad campaign based on having cases of different colors, or harp on the prettiness of his design.
And I seriously doubt he'd name a company after fruit
Apple designs its stuff as form follows function. Just look at the imac. They make everything small and easy to use and try to eleminate flashy things like lights and buttons. That's one of Steve Jobs design philosophies, he hates buttons. I think its very Roark-like.
Ohh, and the different colors were when Steve Jobs was in exile from the company (he was forced out when he wouldn't compromise on his projects).
-
We have his son here in Seattle. He is not as colorful as his dad (but who is) but I like him as a coach.
-
That video was awesome!!!! I'm going to see if I can play it in the same class.
Although I wanted to point out the video that was shown was not produced in my class it was just shown by my professor. The class is about communications within businesses. Has nothing to do with producing videos and health care.
Btw, is this is Canada? If so, then why are they getting involved in our debate? The Canadian health care is terrible, and it is socialized, so hopefully they aren't using that as justification.No. I live in Vancouver Washington not Canada, although many people make that mistake especially since the two are so close. I would like to point out however that Vancouver Wa was named in 1825 nearly 30 years before Vancouver Canada and is the forth largest city in Washington and is part of Portland metro area which is 23rd largest in the country.
Thanks for the information. If anyone else runs into anymore good articles or arguments be sure to let me know. I need too keep up to date to keep the Liberal wolves at bay.
-
Here is a video that one of my instructors showed our class today. Keep in mind that this class is about information systems.
-
The health care debate has been heating up at my school and my liberal professors are spreading their bias into our classrooms. They are showing us videos and "informing us" about the truth of universal health care . They are even doing this in classes where the topic isn't even relevant.
If you could link some articles about the moral and practical issue of health care so I can get some more ammunition I would be much obliged.
-
"We're very, very confident we're going to have a customer,"
Can you imagine if a CEO of a private company uttered something like that.
Peter Schiff For Senate!
in Current Events
Posted · Edited by Rearden_Steel
He has already stated numerous times from sources already in this forum that he feel National defense and protection of people is the only job of the government. He stated on Freedom watch that Missie defense is the type of thing the government should be spending money on. He does point out the problem though that we can't defend ourselves with money borrowed from our perceived enemy. It hinders our defense to be paying for the fight against terrorism in the middle east when were paying for it with money borrowed from Saudi Arabia.