|
|
Post by SoloSenior on May 23, 2016 15:12:08 GMT -5
Currencies of the Top 20 economies!
Specifically the top 10, especially the USA, and collectively the European Union.
But no matter, as we say over here "she'll be right". Probably best to leave this subject alone.
SS
|
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 1, 2020 23:46:41 GMT -5
Welcome back SoloSenior.
I too am concerned with the worlds debts and especially derivatives.
|
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Oct 2, 2020 1:02:47 GMT -5
Welcome back SoloSenior. I too am concerned with the worlds debts and especially derivatives.
Huh, the world's debts. Most of that, by the incumbent economic theory, is borrowing against our grandchildrens' income. While running with the assumption that growth is unlimited (yeah, right, we just blow up spaceship earth with some hot air, like a balloon, so we can fit more stuff on the surface -- NOT) and the assumption that debt will, over time, get wiped out by inflation; that is, the 10,000 loan you took out 50 years ago to buy a house is barely worth 2000 in terms of income and buying power today, so easily taken care of.
Derivatives make sense, in some context. Beef futures, pork futures ... that kind of derivative provides security for buyer and seller both. But, they leave a lot of room for speculation. Remember when those clowns tried to corner the silver market? Derivatives of financial products however go beyond the arcane into deep murky waters. And we've seen over the last 2-3 decades just how disasterously that can go wrong. Anyone who dabbles in that, I'd stay well clear of getting financially involved with.
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 2, 2020 4:54:01 GMT -5
Welcome back SoloSenior. I too am concerned with the worlds debts and especially derivatives. He's not back. That's a 2016 post. Even so, our finance thread became about investing. Perhaps this one can be about the widespread fear of sovereign debt, Keynes, and austerity economists (non-Keynesian/Austrian economists) SoloSenior talks of Van Mises when he quotes: "There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved." This quote, according top the Libertarian Party, from his book Human Action written in 1949. SS earlier says he came to understand the profound economic revolution of 1971. I do not think he does. |
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 2, 2020 9:09:41 GMT -5
When I log on to ILIASM, I look for people that are listed as registered and I look if there are any names I haven't observer recently or AT ALL. I saw that SoloSenior logged in (new name to me) so I thought, well another reader but most likely no posts.
So I clicked on the name SoloSenior and sure enough he had posts, he is from Australia and he is a poster with more birthdays than other members. So I read his story, (W=menopausal, he takes care of things himself, she approves, not much animosity) and think he has his situation sort of worked out.
Then his thread goes to national and other typed of debt. I said "welcome Back SoloSenior" hoping he would see the new post and maybe make a few current comments.
On a side note " sovereign debt, Keynes, and austerity economists (non-Keynesian/Austrian economists) I am not educated enough to know the differences or similarities between some of the terms but I believe too much money is owed in many forms to cover in some forms of being in a stressful situation. Covid is an example of one stress that reduced my income because part of my income (dividends-interest) is now gone or greatly reduced. I am OK because I planned ahead and learned and re-learned a couple of times how to live on a strict budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 5, 2020 18:24:54 GMT -5
When I log on to ILIASM, I look for people that are listed as registered and I look if there are any names I haven't observer recently or AT ALL. I saw that SoloSenior logged in (new name to me) so I thought, well another reader but most likely no posts. So I clicked on the name SoloSenior and sure enough he had posts, he is from Australia and he is a poster with more birthdays than other members. So I read his story, (W=menopausal, he takes care of things himself, she approves, not much animosity) and think he has his situation sort of worked out. Then his thread goes to national and other typed of debt. I said "welcome Back SoloSenior" hoping he would see the new post and maybe make a few current comments. On a side note " sovereign debt, Keynes, and austerity economists (non-Keynesian/Austrian economists) I am not educated enough to know the differences or similarities between some of the terms but I believe too much money is owed in many forms to cover in some forms of being in a stressful situation. Covid is an example of one stress that reduced my income because part of my income (dividends-interest) is now gone or greatly reduced. I am OK because I planned ahead and learned and re-learned a couple of times how to live on a strict budget. Saving up and paying down debt applies to people, companies, town, cities, counties, and states. This is good budgeting and economic management. Its also what scares people when they hear their country seems to pile on debt and it never goes down. Barring a few years in the late 90's that were quickly followed by a recession and lots more "debt". The difference if critical though. Nations that "borrow" in their own currency can never go bankrupt and never need to cut back because they run out of money. They may CHOOSE to default on a debt, but it only happens because of self-imposed restrictions (debt ceilings) I am ignoring inflation for now. Just getting each concept taken care of, one by one, so we can hash out disagreements early and build a case for Keynes and Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). |
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 5, 2020 20:44:57 GMT -5
I work at mitigating inflation but inflation is gaining ground on me.
I ordered some chrome goodies for a friends motorcycle. It didn't lit the design of the MC so I sent it back for him. It used to cost under $20 10 or 15 years ago. This time it cost $60.50 to send back a 16# 42"x6"x18" box.
I told the people at the UPS store that is the last time I use their services. USPS would have cost $59.79 by my calculations, so why ship anything?
I looked up UPS ticker and I see they are earning a good profit this year and a more than 50% increase next year. FDX is right up there with UPS.
Back to Keynes and Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). I will have to read more about the concept.
My thoughts now are, the big companies donate to politicians and that is who (big companies and Wall Street) gets the benefits, not the average working guy.
America, a country by big money and for big money. Mr Lincoln, the thing you wrote for the Gettysburg Address had been corrupted and is no longer valid, OR no longer being used, is a better way to say it.
Just like a sports game has rules, money theories need rules that can be and are enforced that do not favor one group of players. We have Corporate America and Wall Street paying big "$$$$$" to play by their rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 5, 2020 22:39:22 GMT -5
OK??? Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) www.investopedia.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-4588060I picked out some nonsense MMT ideas. 1. This means that any government spending can be paid for by the creation of money, with the purpose of taxes being to limit inflation, by controlling the money supply. A. That sounds like counterfeiter talking. The more money a government prints, the less the money's value. My 0.05cent kid candy bars now cost almost a dollar. Tell me how printing money and inflation actually work and I will show you how it has worked for real people. 2. since deficit spending is what builds people's savings. A.So sending is saving? You could have fooled me! 3. "What happens if you were to go to your local IRS office to pay your taxes with actual cash?," Next, he’d count it, give you a receipt. Then, after you, the tax payer, left the room, he’d take that hard-earned cash you just forked over and throw it in a shredder." A. That is laughable. I have fought the IRS for a few dollars of investment club income and they wanted a $2K fine. A friend had her house levied/lean because she applied for a tax exempt ID for her Job's Daughters Club. OK, maybe I googled the wrong MMT. What I see in the link is, up=down, black=white talk. I usually have some respect for Investopedia. OK, OK I will chill out.
4. Political leaders like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders have espoused MMT. A. OOO----KKKKK that makes sense now. |
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 5, 2020 22:42:21 GMT -5
Mirrororchid
PS tell me when BP, XOM, RDS will be earning a profit to support their total previous dividends or something close?
I am happy with my investment in a company that sells gravel and is doing road and construction work. Steady share price and it has a 3.61% yield that it can cover, because its payout ratio is 45%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 5, 2020 23:32:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 6, 2020 6:16:12 GMT -5
I picked out some nonsense MMT ideas. 1. This means that any government spending can be paid for by the creation of money, with the purpose of taxes being to limit inflation, by controlling the money supply. A. That sounds like counterfeiter talking. The more money a government prints, the less the money's value. My 0.05cent kid candy bars now cost almost a dollar. Tell me how printing money and inflation actually work and I will show you how it has worked for real people. 2. since deficit spending is what builds people's savings. A.So sending is saving? You could have fooled me! 3. "What happens if you were to go to your local IRS office to pay your taxes with actual cash?," Next, he’d count it, give you a receipt. Then, after you, the tax payer, left the room, he’d take that hard-earned cash you just forked over and throw it in a shredder." A. That is laughable. I have fought the IRS for a few dollars of investment club income and they wanted a $2K fine. A friend had her house levied/lean because she applied for a tax exempt ID for her Job's Daughters Club. OK, maybe I googled the wrong MMT. What I see in the link is, up=down, black=white talk. I usually have some respect for Investopedia. Well, we come upon the problem so fast. Overload. Macroeconomics is a very large subject and investigation of any facet interacts with the others. It balloons into an all-encompassing picture of the whole. To try to keep the train on the rails for a quarter mile (I cannot expect more), I'll start with the bullet points since they are targeted. First, calling them "nonsense" is indulging your confirmation bias. If they're nonsense, the conversations stops. Surely TV shows are more engaging nonsense to talk about. Why do others find them useful? 0. Do you now have no respect for Investopedia? It wasn't clear how they lost you. Pretty sure you googled the right MMT. Does Investopedia speak well of MMT? Maybe it's worth a harder look? 1. Counterfeiters print copies of authorized money and spend it, threatening the integrity of the real stuff. Yes, printing money devalues the existing supply. Thought experiment: What happens if a one dollar candy bar, given enough time, eventually costs five cents? 2. Most countries have a rising population. (Even if it's through immigration.) If the money supply stays the same, is it possible for everyone to save money? If you decide to increase the money supply so that everyone can have a positive balance, how should you distribute that money to the population? 3. If someone paid with paper money, I suppose it would be possible to shred it, log the amount shredded in a computer and it shows up in the treasury for the same amount. If they send that money to another account and that account needs to withdraw paper money, that bank would supply them with different dollars of identical amount. If the bank runs out of dollars, they get their usual shipment of paper money and the matching amount is detected from digital records, the specific amounts collected from eccentric cash-paying tax payers gets lumped in with an ordinary replenishment. To carry the same paper bills to a bank, when you can convert it to digital money and send it to their central bank, would use manpower, gas, and bank employee time. Starts to sound impractical to mess with the physical paper itself. Only a monetarily sovereign party can do the digital conversation though. Mind you, I do not think they actually do this, but they could, and it might not be absurd to do so. It might be highly efficient and efficient government is something most folks feel is a good thing. As for AOC (I don't lump in a multi-re-elected Senator with a freshman Congressmember. She's not worthy to shine his shoes. Put in some time, champ.), a blindfolded monkey throwing darts hits the bullseye once in a while. Reviled politicians are rarely wrong about EVERYTHING. For example, I'm no Trump fan, but when he says a vaccine is on the way and Biden says tish-tosh, I tear my hair out because a vaccine in stage three trials is a vaccine that's ALREADY here. Distributed to thousands of Americans. It's ignoring facts that are in plain sight thinking you'll get political points out of it. Acknowledge the few things your opponents get right and you can focus on the ways they are wrong and make them look all the worse. Agreed upon points do not help your opponent. |
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 6, 2020 9:29:42 GMT -5
Point#0 (computer default) I agree Macroeconomics is a very large subject and I only know, or think I know, just about the tips of the ice-berg, if Macroeconomics was an ice-berg. Point #1 To me printing money no matter who does it, history demonstrated it lead problems for the people of country. Point #2 I mostly agree with you . I speculate if any country with increasing population stayed on the gold or silver standard would have enough currency=real money to go around at current prices. An unlikely solution would to lower the prices to match the currency available, but most people wouldn't go for that. Point #3 Yes shredded money (or more practical credit only generated on a computer keyboard (for simplistically) could be entered and show up somewhere else in the system. Yes, I agree that printing fiat currency cost more and is wasteful compared to computer entries. Case in point, a neighbor used to fly overnight cash between banks and flew for other bank business trips. That cost money. I think the bank sold the airplane and my neighbor retired. China (and some other areas) seems to have a cell phone app that does most or many of the financial transactions according to what I read. No paper money to print there so there is some savings of raw resources. The down side is no one has any privacy because the CCP in China can check on what people buy and sell. And then there is the maybe national rating system, which can be good if worked in the right direction. I suspect, get on the wrong side of the CCP and that person is screwed. POTUS would do better not exaggerating so much and maybe tweeting less often. I am concerned about what the CCP is doing to it's own people, the S China Sea, and them indebting other small nations construction projects/loans to what it looks like, the CCP taking over part of the small country's lands. How much can the US influence (and a small actual degree POTUS) influence what goes on in the CCP to do better for people in general? To me, even if a vaccine is 60-70% (reduces the severity of Covid symptoms) efficient, that should help people and the world economy. The Bill & Malinda Gates Foundation has some ideas about how many lives will be saved with various effectiveness vaccines and who gets the early doses available.
I did find a bank that is willing to pay 1% interest on a savings account but like my local bank did, the offer was changed quickly back to 1/10% a couple of months later.
In some ways, monitary policy is what I see as numbers in my checking, savings, and retirement fund accounts more so than the than what some big wig people say it should or could be.
OTH, I am willing to read about some of to me, are far fetched ideas and compare those ideas to what has happened in the past history with some parts of an idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 7, 2020 21:11:20 GMT -5
Petrushka Oct 1, 2020 at 11:02pm Derivatives make sense, in some context. Beef futures, pork futures ... that kind of derivative provides security for buyer and seller both. But, they leave a lot of room for speculation.[/b] Petrushka, I am right there with you and agree with your whole post. The speculation part is where I have problems with derivatives. Maybe we both can campaign for president or PM?
NO, NO, cancel that. Maybe just the head of the Securities and Exchange of our respective stock markets. I see presidents hair gray while in office and we both have enough gray hair.  |
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Oct 7, 2020 21:30:25 GMT -5
mirrororchid
1.First, calling them "nonsense" is indulging your confirmation bias.
2.Do you now have no respect for Investopedia? It wasn't clear how they lost you.1.Yes, I show bias when it goes against everything I know to not work for 95 % of the people. Name one example where MMT worked? 2.I still use and like Investopedia for some things like I did before. The site seems to have a way to quickly explain things without getting into details only an expert would comprehend. As far as a government being efficient moving money around where it is needed, Yes most people would say that is a good thing and support it. If it only benefited a few people at the top like it does in some countries in the past, then no, it could be a bad idea. I am still looking for some country that used something like or parts of MMT that worked.
If Japan used MMT their economy (stock market averages) seemed to suffer for the past 10 or 20 years
Like I said, economice seems like a "it depends on the situation" and some of the answers and solutions have to be tried to see if they work or fail, so there is much risk moving forward. I am not much of a risk taker so I go on past outcomes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 9, 2020 4:59:53 GMT -5
mirrororchid
1.First, calling them "nonsense" is indulging your confirmation bias.
2.Do you now have no respect for Investopedia? It wasn't clear how they lost you.1.Yes, I show bias when it goes against everything I know to not work for 95 % of the people. Name one example where MMT worked? 2.I still use and like Investopedia for some things like I did before. The site seems to have a way to quickly explain things without getting into details only an expert would comprehend. As far as a government being efficient moving money around where it is needed, Yes most people would say that is a good thing and support it. If it only benefited a few people at the top like it does in some countries in the past, then no, it could be a bad idea. I am still looking for some country that used something like or parts of MMT that worked.
If Japan used MMT their economy (stock market averages) seemed to suffer for the past 10 or 20 years
Like I said, economics seems like a "it depends on the situation" and some of the answers and solutions have to be tried to see if they work or fail, so there is much risk moving forward. I am not much of a risk taker so I go on past outcomes.
Okay.... this is where blowing macroeconomics wide open can be such a problem. Mutual understanding of terms can be critical. I'm going to sharpen our focus and hit each point you raised over the next two months. (you think I'm kidding.) When are you under the assumption Japan was using MMT? When it was NOT using MMT, what were they using? NIKKEI Index
 |
|
