My continuing adventures beginning from Residental Hotel Hell to a regular life.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Our Poor people can kick China's Butt.

Here's an article by an economist,I occasionally read though I know little about this American economic system. The "Sub-Prime" mortgage scandal gave us all a "crash course" in U.S free market policy. What's next, one wonders?



I copied this writing of economist Nomi Prins because in the essay she asserts once again a solution to the budget problems that are plaguing the U.S right now, where the treasury secretary, or the FED tells us we have reached a debt ceiling. Congress will have to raise the debt ceiling or pay up, thus make Draconian cuts...in U.S social programs,raising taxes on U.S citizens..partly because of the lack of regulation in the U.S economic policies. Could Ms.Prins solution work?

-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Global Economy Burns, While its Leaders Fiddle

Sunday, May 15, 2011 at 8:05AM
By Nomi Prins

"China is by no means a panacea of economic equality or perfect policy. It has a fast growing portion of billionaires and accounts for nearly a third of the world’s luxury goods consumption, while its per capita GDP ranks 125th globally, and 2.8% of Chinese live below the poverty line (according to ‘official’ stats).

In contrast, the US has an official poverty rate of 14%, though think tanks like the Economic Policy Institute, consider this estimate low. Still, in its latest 5-year economic plan, the Chinese government at least gave lip service to how to deal with its growing inequality - by increasing certain wages by 40%, decreasing taxes on the poor and increasing them on the rich.



The US government has no such strategy, except in campaign speeches, as reflected by our anemic economy. Instead, we witness inane partisan prattling over the deficit and what mini-budget modifications are needed to bring it into line, most of which would disproportionately detract from the people that had the least to do with inflating it. (i.e. anyone not running a bank or hedge fund.)

Yet, like our own, inequality figures will worsen for China, which will ultimately destabilize its economy. The result of attracting that menacing, mercurial entity called ‘global capital’ is inflated growth figures predicated on bulging service sectors and population wealth gaps. The more capital sloshing around a country, the more destabilized it becomes, and the more its leaders pretend that’s not the case.

Global speculative capital (the kind flowing through any major financial entity) is cunning, aggressive, greedy, shortsighted, and yes, cowardly (it doesn’t stick around when things get shaky.) If it were a person, it would smack down minions of grandmothers and infants to get to the door of a fiery building first, and then deny burn victims healthcare. It hates rules, which is why it likes promoting the notion of markets free of them.

Individual investors in silver are the latest casualties of speculative capital’s fickleness. People that invested their own money in silver were snuffed by the entities that borrowed or invested other people’s money to do the same. The COMEX found the anti-speculation religion it never sought during run-ups of commodities prices for items like food and fuel, and raised silver trading margins. Though those hikes were the prevalent reason for silver’s price plummet, all they really did was give fast capital a chance to book profits and alter course.

Any investment is subject to fundamental forces, like supply and demand or how much US economic policy is devaluing its currency. But, it’s more subject to speculative whims, like who's in and out, by how much and how fast, whether its a fund or an entire nation.

The time-honored scheme in which controlling capital cons ordinary people (or governments) to join it before crashing or heading for the hills has devastated many individuals and economies. That ploy ran rampant during the crash of 1929. Banks put up their ‘own’ capital, which was really borrowed capital, to spur individuals to do the same with their savings. When banks pulled out, people were hosed thrice – through the loss of their savings, the decimation of their bank accounts that the powerhouses used for speculative purposes - under the guise of – serving their clients, and by a raging Depression that killed jobs and hopes.

Not much has changed. Matt Taibbi’s recent excoriation of Goldman Sachs reveals how gray the line is between screwing and screwing, one’s clients. Only now, when banks lose money, governments and central banks reward them with trillions of dollars of subsidies, using the excuse of aiding the population and avoiding larger catastrophe. They say things like - it takes time to increase employment, but we can waste no time in propping up our financial system. Or - pensions and teachers caused budget failures, but we’ll keep holding excess reserves, borne of debt, for banks in case they need it, and pay interest on it.

We are in an ongoing global economic depression. The signs are everywhere, even as they are lost on economic leaders that put private banks and short-term speculative capital before citizens and long-term working capital. Central banks use other people’s future money in the form of debt to do this. No central bank holds, and thus enables, more national debt than the Federal Reserve.

I hate to keep repeating this, but until someone of some ability to do anything gets it, I’m going to keep going. Last week, Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, co-enabler with Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner (among others) of our ballooning debt and mis-prioritized economic policy, urged Congress for another debt cap increase, or else. The guy holds about $2.5 trillion of debt on his books, being used for – nothing helpful to the general economy. A simple transfer would solve the debt cap problem in a nanosecond. Going a step further, a simple exchange of any of the $1.5 trillion of excess bank reserves receiving interest from the Fed, would do the same. Instead of defaulting on, how about retiring, some debt? Thinking outside the box.

All around the world, the bodies and countries with the most power keep screwing people (some like IMF head, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, literally) and entire nations, while supporting their banking systems. Last week, S&P announced it would downgrade Portugal if it didn’t play ball with the IMF and EU over its 4-year 78E billion-bailout program in return for hacking public programs.

Echoing our own Congressional goons spewing spending cuts in the face of inadequate revenues and for-bank-manufactured mega-debt, the S&P noted, “Two-thirds of the projected savings in [Portugal’s] 2012 budget will likely come from spending cuts.”

On a roll, the IMF also declared Italy needs ‘structural reform’, meaning labor market reform, less public ownership and more private investment to “unlock its growth potential.” (aka invite more speculative capital at its earliest convenience.)

Meanwhile, thousands of people are again striking in Greece, as the IMF and EU discuss more austerity measures, following the bank bailout that provoked public outrage a year ago, and a rating downgrade by S&P. The EU remains more concerned with investors regaining confidence in Greece than economic stability of its citizens. Then, there’s Ireland, for whom its last bailout didn’t dent its 14.5% unemployment rate, or fill in the gaping holes its banks dug.

In short, the global ‘remedy’ for depressed economies and debt-bloated banking sectors remains to do – more of the same - and pretend this will beget a different outcome. Yet, there is no way this strategy will result in more stable economies. What we can expect instead is further widespread deterioration.
"http://www.nomiprins.com/thoughts/2011/5/15/the-global-economy-burns-while-its-leaders-fiddle.html
-----------------------------------

Note: Just did some of the Math. China is one of the most populous nations in the world. Its population at 1,355,855,436 at present, over a billion people. 2.8 Percent of that is 37,963,952 .

The population of the U.S at present is 312,871,117 persons, 14% of that is 43,801,956.

43,801,956 U.S.A vs 37,963,952 China. Nomi, your right .The U.S.A beats China in the number of people living beloow the poverty line even though China has nearly 4 times the population size.

Thursday, May 05, 2011

Lets invade Switzerland!



I was going to call Obama's presidency a "Harvard death". A Harvard death is that in spite of a Doctor doing everything right to save a patient, the patient dies anyway. Usually because of an undying ,unknown factor. Barack Obama must have understood this sentiment, and decided to undertake some executive action.

He may have shot himself in the foot with killing Osama. Obama, a Harvard law professor gone bad? Wouldn't it have been preferable if they could have gotten Osama alive to appear for trial in the U.S, instead of executing him? Executing the guy by Court of public opinion, rather than "Due Process in a court of law"?

Possibly the reason Osama is dead is because he didn't contribute to Obama's Presidential campaign? Plus Obama looks bad after practically declaring war on Libya and M.Qaddafi, then after a attempted N.A.T.O assassination attempt on Qaddafi, N.A.T.O fails and takes out Qaddafi's son. all an unqualified act of War on Libya, and Qaddafi

Obama "Wags the dog", is the assassination just to boost his "approval rating" and Boost his campaign fund of his contributors to his $35,000.00, $75,000.00 plate dinner fundraisers. Similar to what president Bill Clinton did during his trial in U.S Congress about sexual misconduct,then he stared bombing Kosovo.

How about Obama using his executive power to go after the people who staged, aided and abetted the "Sub-prime mortgage scandal, If you look in the Feb issue of "Mother Jones" some economist estimate the true cost of the T.A.R.P bailout is in the trillions of dollars (14 trillion dollars ,Mother Jone,s Feb 2010)... in which we the tax-payers or the U.S will have to pay. If your out of work, losing your pension, lost your home, can't afford to go to school maybe you blame your leaders in Congress, not Osama Bin Laden.

Obama's only solution to the mortgage scandal in the U.S has been a "Band-Aid" on the problem by installing a "Brooksley Born" type of person around the Federal Reserve types. Only Elizabeth Warren doesn't have nearly the "bite" of a "Brooksley Born".Brooksley born was a female working in a government office attempting to fight for more government regulation of "derivative", during the Clinton Administration under Federal Reserve conman, "Alan Greenspan", and administration members Robert Rubin, and that fat dude.

Possibly the only reason These people aren't in jail is because Wall street owns the Congress of the U.S, including the President. And Obama isn't willing to come clean about it, I wonder if his predecessor will, people like Donald Trump?

I remember, maybe I shouldn't fault Obama too much, after all maybe the message he is really telling us american is they ,(Obama's handlers, don't really care about US.)