I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos shoed that Gunner
wrote on Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:18:15
-0800 in rec.crafts.metalworking :

Its going to require that several generations of people be forced to
revise their "Its owed to me" world view, and public executions of
corrupt politicians and their lobbyists.

That might work. OTOH, an interesting observation from a net
pundit: the Dutch legalized all drugs, then decided that was a bad
idea. So they reduced the legal area of decriminalized drug usage to
one or two parks, with the caveat that you could enter, but you
couldn't come out. Meanwhile, they started an aggressive drug
education program in the schools, essentially writing off the "drug
generation" (but being Dutch, they did make sure there was care for
the down and outers.) Eventually, people stopped entering the parks,
and they were closed, as "drug parks". In 2006, after Hurricane
Katrina, it was reported that FEMA did a lot of work in Mississippi,
but little in New Orleans. The suggestion is made that FEMA is
treating New Orleans as the Dutch treated Needle Park (a drain on the
community); while it is helping Mississippi rebuild, as Mississippi is
on the whole, an asset. "Could be", says I, but it is one approach.

And we start that by gutting the NEA and forcing the survivors to
teach basic personal economics, fiscal restraint, personal
responsiblity and the work ethic.

Time for a little Separation of State and School.

Teach the little skulls filled with mush that if they dont produce, no
one is going to ride to their rescue, (and in doing so, build their
own beuracratic empire) and they are going to starve to death in a
card board box someplace, unless they manage to find a Private charity
to care for them for life.



And then we execute all the business management teachers who preach
short term profits and leave out the teaching of long term goals and
responsiblity to the worker, the stockholder and the nation.

Naw, just ban the quarterly report.

If memory serves, it is the Bank of Sienna (Italy), which is
required by the by-laws, to take regular accounts and make charitable
donations. I believe the interval is every five years. So far, over
the last five hundred years,this has proved satisfactory. But then
"the last five hundred years may have been anomalous".

But then, I will admit, I'm a little more squeamish and deplore
the concept of dead bodies everywhere, and I am more inclined to let
people have the time necessary for "amendment of life".
On the other hand, one may take note, that the knowledge that one
is to be hanged in a fortnight, focuses the mind marvelously.


pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
"I had just been through hell and must have looked like death warmed
over walking into the saloon, because when I asked the bartender
whether they served zombies he said, ‘Sure, what'll you have?'"
from I Hear America Swinging by Peter DeVries

I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos shoed that Gunner
wrote on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:03:54
-0800 in rec.crafts.metalworking :

Ayup..further proof of what happens when some Iranian nutjob decides
to play chicken with Uncle Sam. Attack profile, multiple warnings.

So sorry. Next time, dont act like an attacking aircraft, no matter
which mad Islamic Fundi imam told you to do so.

And dont act like attacking vessels, in an age when man portable
weapons can come close to sinking a US vessel.

Im rather impressed at the restraint shown by our skippers. A quck
programming and 4 seconds max from a Phalanx battery and there would
have been nothing but an oil slick and spreading blood stain in the
water, remains of all the speed boats.

Sooner or later..when you taunt, and shoot pebbles at the tigers with
a sling shot, they are going to come over the fence and rip off your
face.

OTOH, the crafty minions of the Great Satan have denied Imanut job
of the excuse for further deprivations in Iran. That is to say, the
Great Satan did not attack his harmless patrol boats.
Confusion to our enemies, says I.

pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
"I had just been through hell and must have looked like death warmed
over walking into the saloon, because when I asked the bartender
whether they served zombies he said, ‘Sure, what'll you have?'"
from I Hear America Swinging by Peter DeVries

"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...
I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos shoed that Jim Stewart
wrote on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:50:59 -0800 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
F. George McDuffee wrote:

Oil hits 100$/bbl, gold hits 900$/oz, governmental debt at all
levels and the trade deficit continues to rapidly mount, and
California [as the first domino] is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Got a cite that California is "on the verge
of bankruptcy"?

Ummm, it is run by Democrats??

pyotr

Dick Cheney once said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Only he
didn't. They do.

The US cannot go bankrupt because its debts are denominated in its own
currency. States can go bankrupt, when they follow the contemporary
Republican, which is to say the Reagan/Cheney, economic philosophy.

While the US can't go bankrupt, its economy can wind up looking like it is.
The distinction won't matter.

--
Ed Huntress

"Why" wrote in message
...

Dick Cheney once said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Only he
didn't. They do.

The US cannot go bankrupt because its debts are denominated in its own
currency. States can go bankrupt, when they follow the contemporary
Republican, which is to say the Reagan/Cheney, economic philosophy.

Damn, ED Texas needs to start printing funny money like the Fed does.
So they will quit raising my BPP taxes to **** off money, you would be
surprised what TX says taxes my 1942 Brownies at.

I think you tried that, back when Texas was a republic. d8-)

Have you depreciated your Brownies yet? g

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:54:12 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
.. .
I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos shoed that Jim Stewart
wrote on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:50:59 -0800 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
F. George McDuffee wrote:

Oil hits 100$/bbl, gold hits 900$/oz, governmental debt at all
levels and the trade deficit continues to rapidly mount, and
California [as the first domino] is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Got a cite that California is "on the verge
of bankruptcy"?

Ummm, it is run by Democrats??

pyotr

Dick Cheney once said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Only he
didn't. They do.

The US cannot go bankrupt because its debts are denominated in its own
currency. States can go bankrupt, when they follow the contemporary
Republican, which is to say the Reagan/Cheney, economic philosophy.

While the US can't go bankrupt, its economy can wind up looking like it is.
The distinction won't matter.
==========================
In the external sense, countries can and do go broke [default]
such as Argentina.

The US federal debts *HISTORCALLY* have been denominated [with a
very few exceptions] in US dollars, as this was the world's
reserve currency, and you are correct that the Treasury, or
Federal Reserve, or whoever can print enough money to pay off
these dollar denominated instruments, and other debts such as
Social Security, Veterans pensions, etc. The value of this
"money" is another thread.

It will be yet another red flag / siren / warning shot across the
bow, when the US government begins to sell securities denominated
in Euros or commodities such as oil, either to finance new debt
or to roll-over/manage the existing debt as it becomes due.

The shift to short-term debt [with the more frequent roll-overs],
which was done during the Clinton administration because of the
marginally lower short-term rates in effect at that time (and
perhaps to boost the bond companies volume of business), will
then bite us big time. It is the classic "borrow short - lend
long" trap that killed the S&Ls, and currently is in the process
of destroying wide swaths of the existing US economy.

The "firewalls" and "sprinklers" installed between the financial
sectors as a result of the last big economic crisis [e.g.
Glass-Steagal and Glass-Owens (cash reserve requirements)] have
been repealed and/or ignored, while regulatory agencies such as
the SEC have been rendered powerless.

Even if through some quirk of fate the federal government can
avoid issuing "high yield" foreign currency denominated bonds,
possibly with a "gold clause," the enormous Current Accounts
trade debt and exploding trade deficit must still be dealt with.
For example, in addition to the governmental bonded debt, the PRC
holds about a trillion, (with a T) US dollars of "private"
current account trade debt.

It is interesting that the establishment "solution" to the
current "cold-snap" [as opposed to an actual "blue-norther") is
to print more monopoly money and give it to the people for
carefree spending through tax rebates, tax reductions, etc. More
of the same only better -- Hit'em again! -- Hit'em again!! --
harder!!! -- HARDER!!!!

It has taken 50 years to get the US into this situation.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:48:55 -0600, Why wrote:


Dick Cheney once said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Only he
didn't. They do.

The US cannot go bankrupt because its debts are denominated in its own
currency. States can go bankrupt, when they follow the contemporary
Republican, which is to say the Reagan/Cheney, economic philosophy.

Damn, ED Texas needs to start printing funny money like the Fed does.
So they will quit raising my BPP taxes to **** off money, you would be
surprised what TX says taxes my 1942 Brownies at.
===========
Do like the phone company does -- Incorporate a subsidy in
Delaware and claim that the assets, operating profits are exempt
from Texas taxes. Works for Dell (computers) also.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:15:55 -0600, F. George McDuffee
wrote:
snip
Even if through some quirk of fate the federal government can
avoid issuing "high yield" foreign currency denominated bonds,
possibly with a "gold clause," the enormous Current Accounts
trade debt and exploding trade deficit must still be dealt with.
For example, in addition to the governmental bonded debt, the PRC
holds about a trillion, (with a T) US dollars of "private"
current account trade debt.
snip
===========
As a follow-on to my own post, I just came across this tid-bit
indicating that the PRC is not buying what ever it is the US
financial firms are now selling. [Fou you such a deal...]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22648241/
Citigroup writedowns could hit $24 billion
Chinese gov’t allegedly opposes bailout by China Development Bank

snip
But opposition from the Chinese government may stop Citi's plan
to raise capital by selling a stake worth $2 billion to the
Chinese bank, the Wall Street Journal reported on its Web site
Monday.

The Journal reported that opposition from the Chinese government
seems to have surfaced over the weekend, citing an unnamed person
familiar with the situation. It is not clear whether the deal has
been abandoned, the newspaper said.
snip

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:54:12 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
. ..
I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos shoed that Jim Stewart
wrote on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:50:59 -0800 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
F. George McDuffee wrote:

Oil hits 100$/bbl, gold hits 900$/oz, governmental debt at all
levels and the trade deficit continues to rapidly mount, and
California [as the first domino] is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Got a cite that California is "on the verge
of bankruptcy"?

Ummm, it is run by Democrats??

pyotr

Dick Cheney once said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Only he
didn't. They do.

The US cannot go bankrupt because its debts are denominated in its own
currency. States can go bankrupt, when they follow the contemporary
Republican, which is to say the Reagan/Cheney, economic philosophy.

While the US can't go bankrupt, its economy can wind up looking like it
is.
The distinction won't matter.
==========================
In the external sense, countries can and do go broke [default]
such as Argentina.

The US federal debts *HISTORCALLY* have been denominated [with a
very few exceptions] in US dollars, as this was the world's
reserve currency, and you are correct that the Treasury, or
Federal Reserve, or whoever can print enough money to pay off
these dollar denominated instruments, and other debts such as
Social Security, Veterans pensions, etc. The value of this
"money" is another thread.

It will be yet another red flag / siren / warning shot across the
bow, when the US government begins to sell securities denominated
in Euros or commodities such as oil, either to finance new debt
or to roll-over/manage the existing debt as it becomes due.

You say "when." I would say "if." There's no need for that to occur, no
historical imperative and no trap that we can't get out of. A continuation
of current policies would land us in such a trap, but I don't think it will
happen.


The shift to short-term debt [with the more frequent roll-overs],
which was done during the Clinton administration because of the
marginally lower short-term rates in effect at that time (and
perhaps to boost the bond companies volume of business), will
then bite us big time. It is the classic "borrow short - lend
long" trap that killed the S&Ls, and currently is in the process
of destroying wide swaths of the existing US economy.

The "firewalls" and "sprinklers" installed between the financial
sectors as a result of the last big economic crisis [e.g.
Glass-Steagal and Glass-Owens (cash reserve requirements)] have
been repealed and/or ignored, while regulatory agencies such as
the SEC have been rendered powerless.

Yes, and the extreme example is the unfathomable interconnections
(literally, no one understands the full circle of investment security, as
the practitioners have recently admitted) of hedge funds. If margins are
called and the cards start to fall, no one knows if the house will stand,
because no one can predict which securities actually will be targeted as the
collateral for other ones. This is not some cockeyed cracker-barrel
economics. This is what the top economists are saying all over the world.

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for bestowing upon us this wonderful securities
system that's so free of regulation.


Even if through some quirk of fate the federal government can
avoid issuing "high yield" foreign currency denominated bonds,
possibly with a "gold clause," the enormous Current Accounts
trade debt and exploding trade deficit must still be dealt with.
For example, in addition to the governmental bonded debt, the PRC
holds about a trillion, (with a T) US dollars of "private"
current account trade debt.

Which is only a problem if the economy goes south. It's amazing how much
debt we can get away with if the economy is growing. I expect to be amazed
also at how fast it becomes a crisis when growth slows down.


It is interesting that the establishment "solution" to the
current "cold-snap" [as opposed to an actual "blue-norther") is
to print more monopoly money and give it to the people for
carefree spending through tax rebates, tax reductions, etc. More
of the same only better -- Hit'em again! -- Hit'em again!! --
harder!!! -- HARDER!!!!

It has taken 50 years to get the US into this situation.

It's worked pretty well, though, you have to admit. d8-) What has economists
nervous now is that there's no way to predict how this big pillow of debt
will play out when things are not so good.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:10:06 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip

You say "when." I would say "if." There's no need for that to occur, no
historical imperative and no trap that we can't get out of. A continuation
of current policies would land us in such a trap, but I don't think it will
happen.
Unfortunately when the record is examined over the last 35 or so
years there is a remarkable continuity of [apparent]
financial/monitary policy. Its not "its the economy stupid" but
rather "its the stupids' economy."

Indeed, this problem could be contained, but will require
politically impossible actions such as the restoration of taxes
to reasonable levels for everyone (including CEO "deferred
earnings," corporate "unrepatriated profits," and hedge funds
"carried interest"), restriction of entitlement programs, and
draconian application of "pay-go" to not only eliminate the
federal deficit, but generate a federal surplus to reduce the
national debt. Look for formations of pigs flying south if this
occurs.

The "firewalls" and "sprinklers" installed between the financial
sectors as a result of the last big economic crisis [e.g.
Glass-Steagal and Glass-Owens (cash reserve requirements)] have
been repealed and/or ignored, while regulatory agencies such as
the SEC have been rendered powerless.

Yes, and the extreme example is the unfathomable interconnections
(literally, no one understands the full circle of investment security, as
the practitioners have recently admitted) of hedge funds. If margins are
called and the cards start to fall, no one knows if the house will stand,
because no one can predict which securities actually will be targeted as the
collateral for other ones. This is not some cockeyed cracker-barrel
economics. This is what the top economists are saying all over the world.
Any time someone like Warren Buffet calls derivatives "financial
weapons of mass destruction," has problems "unwinding" them
[after the B-H purchase of General Re a few years back], and
admits he doesn't understand most of them, it should be shot of
cold p**s to the heart of the central bankers, regulators and
finance ministers everywhere

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for bestowing upon us this wonderful securities
system that's so free of regulation.

Bill Clinton & Bobby Dole deserve much of the credit with their
successful drive for globalization. Its tough to run the "long
con" when all the players are known, and their is no place to
hide the score.

In the movie vane, these people apparently never saw
Frankenstein, or "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," and what happens
when you create things you don't understand, can't control, and
which only get more powerful with time.

Even if through some quirk of fate the federal government can
avoid issuing "high yield" foreign currency denominated bonds,
possibly with a "gold clause," the enormous Current Accounts
trade debt and exploding trade deficit must still be dealt with.
For example, in addition to the governmental bonded debt, the PRC
holds about a trillion, (with a T) US dollars of "private"
current account trade debt.

Which is only a problem if the economy goes south. It's amazing how much
debt we can get away with if the economy is growing. I expect to be amazed
also at how fast it becomes a crisis when growth slows down.

Big problem is telling the difference between a growing economy
and an expanding bubble, ala housing, and the dot cons.


It is interesting that the establishment "solution" to the
current "cold-snap" [as opposed to an actual "blue-norther") is
to print more monopoly money and give it to the people for
carefree spending through tax rebates, tax reductions, etc. More
of the same only better -- Hit'em again! -- Hit'em again!! --
harder!!! -- HARDER!!!!

It has taken 50 years to get the US into this situation.

It's worked pretty well, though, you have to admit. d8-) What has economists
nervous now is that there's no way to predict how this big pillow of debt
will play out when things are not so good.
=============
To mangle the metaphore, much depends on what the "debt pillow"
is filled with. There is a big difference between being hit with
a sham full of eider down and a bag full of horse apples....

I don't think there has been any aggregate improvement. The
national Gini index [wealth distribution] is shooting toward 3rd
world levels, and many metro areas such as LA, Dallas and
Washington D.C. have been there for some time. The last time the
index was this high was in 1929. Our industrial base has been
hollowed out, our assets of land, building, and capital have been
dispersed by foreign ownership. and the baby-boomers are now
starting to chant "show me the money...my turn...my turn..."

"Why" wrote in message
news

"Why" wrote in message
. ..

Dick Cheney once said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Only
he
didn't. They do.

The US cannot go bankrupt because its debts are denominated in its own
currency. States can go bankrupt, when they follow the contemporary
Republican, which is to say the Reagan/Cheney, economic philosophy.

Damn, ED Texas needs to start printing funny money like the Fed does.
So they will quit raising my BPP taxes to **** off money, you would be
surprised what TX says taxes my 1942 Brownies at.

I think you tried that, back when Texas was a republic. d8-)

Have you depreciated your Brownies yet? g

The IRS yes, the City says everything older that 14 yrs is worth 11%
of cost forever!

They're probably right. I'll bet you could get $400 for your Brownies, don't
you think?

Now, taxing them is a different matter. I figure that Texas property tax was
a case of some Texas legislator saying "let's tax their asses," and somebody
thought he said "let's tax their assets."

--
Ed Huntress

"Why" wrote in message
...

Have you depreciated your Brownies yet? g

The IRS yes, the City says everything older that 14 yrs is worth 11%
of cost forever!

They're probably right. I'll bet you could get $400 for your Brownies,
don't
you think?


That's close to what the City gets every year taxes on each one, but
hey we have the finest city "workers" money can buy, I see that every
time I have to go to the DMV (which I would rather go to the
dentist).

Now, taxing them is a different matter. I figure that Texas property tax
was
a case of some Texas legislator saying "let's tax their asses," and
somebody
thought he said "let's tax their assets."

My shop land went up 124% last year but they are going to build some
fancy bridges to replace very good ones about 2 miles from my shop.
Which will cause my shop to go up more so they can **** off more
"Free" money. They say they will look cool, but I think they will look
out of place in Dallas which looks like mexico now.

Had to pick out some .40 slugs out of my office door (metal) last
month.

At least your criminals are using upscale guns. I saw some DOJ figures a
while ago that said the average age of a gun used in a crime is 3-1/2 years.
The overall average for legal guns is something like 12 years. I guess
there's a leak somewhere in the instant background check system.

I wish the City could just print money like the feds do.

You could, but who would take it?

--
Ed Huntress

"Why" wrote in message
...

month.

At least your criminals are using upscale guns. I saw some DOJ figures a
while ago that said the average age of a gun used in a crime is 3-1/2
years.
The overall average for legal guns is something like 12 years. I guess
there's a leak somewhere in the instant background check system.

I wish the City could just print money like the feds do.

You could, but who would take it?

If I printed money it would be backed by old Sulphur oil something
more valuable that what the feds print is...

Wonder ED what the FDIC is going to do when the banks all fail?

I don't think they'll fail, Dave. Some big hedge funds and other
multi-function financial firms may fail, but more likely the Arabs and the
Chinese will buy them.

--
Ed Huntress

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:10:06 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip

You say "when." I would say "if." There's no need for that to occur, no
historical imperative and no trap that we can't get out of. A continuation
of current policies would land us in such a trap, but I don't think it
will
happen.
Unfortunately when the record is examined over the last 35 or so
years there is a remarkable continuity of [apparent]
financial/monitary policy. Its not "its the economy stupid" but
rather "its the stupids' economy."

Not often, but every once in a while, I find that I see things exactly the
same way as some top expert in a field. Even more rarely, I beat him with it
into print. g:

This is Krugman's NYT column for the 18th. OK, I didn't beat him; we wrote
it the same day. And it's not like the various ideas in this column weren't
already floating around in the economics literatu

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/op... 7&ei=5087%0A

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:25:44 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:10:06 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip

You say "when." I would say "if." There's no need for that to occur, no
historical imperative and no trap that we can't get out of. A continuation
of current policies would land us in such a trap, but I don't think it
will
happen.
Unfortunately when the record is examined over the last 35 or so
years there is a remarkable continuity of [apparent]
financial/monitary policy. Its not "its the economy stupid" but
rather "its the stupids' economy."

Not often, but every once in a while, I find that I see things exactly the
same way as some top expert in a field. Even more rarely, I beat him with it
into print. g:

This is Krugman's NYT column for the 18th. OK, I didn't beat him; we wrote
it the same day. And it's not like the various ideas in this column weren't
already floating around in the economics literatu

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/op... 7&ei=5087%0A
Indeed, but it is logic chopping to create a difference between
going bankrupt, and simply losing title to everything you
possess, and the ability to take independent action in your own
interest.

see
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/bu...gewanted=print
199.239.137.200,199.239.137.245,199.239.136.200,19 9.239.136.245

Remember that Paul Krugman is a highly skilled
propagandist/writer who is deeply committed to [or at least
highly paid by] the globalization crowd.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:25:44 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip
Not often, but every once in a while, I find that I see things exactly the
same way as some top expert in a field. Even more rarely, I beat him with it
into print. g:

This is Krugman's NYT column for the 18th. OK, I didn't beat him; we wrote
it the same day. And it's not like the various ideas in this column weren't
already floating around in the economics literatu

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/op... 7&ei=5087%0A
=========
Other econ articles from a German viewpoint. Major point of
interest is the shift to oil pricing in Euros by OPEC
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...529564,00.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...9564-2,00.html
SPIEGEL: You paint a rather rosy picture. But isn't OPEC also
affected by the diverging interests of its members? Wasn't there
a substantial dispute at your last major meeting -- one that
pitted Iran and Venezuela, with their ideas about high prices and
their anti-Western agenda, against the "moderates"?

El-Badri : We leave politics up to the individual member nations.
OPEC is an economic organization. Besides, it wasn't a real
dispute. We speak with one voice. However, we did have a lively
discussion in November over whether and how we should generally
shift from the reserve currency, the dollar, to the euro for
purposes of trading. Some of our member nations have enormous
dollar reserves, while others sell in dollars and buy in euros.

SPIEGEL: And are you in favor of abandoning the practice of
trading in dollars as Venezuela and Iran have demanded?

El-Badri : The euro is currently the world's strongest currency.
A change can be made, but it will take some time. It took many
years for the dollar to become a dominant currency in the oil
business. But in the future it will not be that difficult to
change.

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:25:44 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:10:06 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip

You say "when." I would say "if." There's no need for that to occur, no
historical imperative and no trap that we can't get out of. A
continuation
of current policies would land us in such a trap, but I don't think it
will
happen.
Unfortunately when the record is examined over the last 35 or so
years there is a remarkable continuity of [apparent]
financial/monitary policy. Its not "its the economy stupid" but
rather "its the stupids' economy."

Not often, but every once in a while, I find that I see things exactly the
same way as some top expert in a field. Even more rarely, I beat him with
it
into print. g:

This is Krugman's NYT column for the 18th. OK, I didn't beat him; we wrote
it the same day. And it's not like the various ideas in this column
weren't
already floating around in the economics literatu

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/op... 7&ei=5087%0A
Indeed, but it is logic chopping to create a difference between
going bankrupt, and simply losing title to everything you
possess, and the ability to take independent action in your own
interest.

see
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/bu...gewanted=print
199.239.137.200,199.239.137.245,199.239.136.200,19 9.239.136.245

Remember that Paul Krugman is a highly skilled
propagandist/writer who is deeply committed to [or at least
highly paid by] the globalization crowd.

Actually, he was one of the academics who wrote the New Trade Theory in the
'70s, which explains why (he says) globalization is certainly desirable, if
not inevitable. The thing is, George, how may professional economists
disagree with him? Only a few, and they're mostly crackpots.

I take it that you're worried about the foreign investors who are buying
into US companies, eh? US investors have a lot more invested in them then
they have in us.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:25:44 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip
This is Krugman's NYT column for the 18th. OK, I didn't beat him; we wrote
it the same day. And it's not like the various ideas in this column weren't
already floating around in the economics literatu

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/op... 7&ei=5087%0A

--
Ed Huntress
================

The flaw in the argument [or worm in the apple] is the failure to
consider the extent of fraud and the unreliability of "the
numbers." Indeed, if the problem was "sub-prime" and everything
else was as described the problems, while serious, would be
manageable.

The difficulty is that ever increasing amounts of the "assets"
are being discovered to consist of "cobwebs and moonbeams," while
the liabilities/exposures continue to rapidly mount, as the SIVs
are consolidated [back] onto the banks' balance sheets.

A parallel, albeit separate problem, is the proliferation of
"free lance" scams, schemes, etc. which now come to light because
of the credit contraction. For a 7 billion$US example click on

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080124/... FFdlf6ASyBhIF
68.142.212.22

Societe Generale uncovers massive fraud

By EMMA VANDORE, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 33 minutes ago

PARIS - French bank Societe Generale said Thursday it has
uncovered a $7.14 billion fraud — one of history's biggest — by a
single futures trader whose scheme of fictitious transactions was
discovered as stock markets began to stumble in recent days.
snip
------------
As Warren Buffet [IMNSHO the only honest major finance person
still alive] is said to have noted, "It's only when the tide goes
out that you learn who's been swimming naked."

For a reasoned analysis on economic "crank" [aka "the stimulation
package"] click on
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080124...PFs2M73RL9wxIF
68.142.212.22