"Daddy Warbucks" aka "Bazooka" Paulson has identified the root
cause of the current economic problems.

It is all the fault of the Chinese and Arabs.

These people would not embrace the spend-spend-spend culture that
has proven so successful in the west, and insisted on saving much
of their incomes, even though these are, on a per capita basis,
only a small fraction of those in the west. This was compounded
when they forced the people and governments of the western
countries to borrow these savings at excessively low interest
rates.

==========
snip
The US Treasury Secretary said that in the years leading up to
the crisis, super-abundant savings from fast-growing emerging
nations such as China and oil exporters – at a time of low
inflation and booming trade and capital flows – put downward
pressure on yields and risk spreads everywhere.

This, he said, laid the seeds of a global credit bubble that
extended far beyond the US sub-prime mortgage market and has now
burst with devastating consequences worldwide.
snip
==========
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ff671f66-d...077b07658.html

I am so glad "Bazooka" cleared this up. We can stop blaming our
bankers, brokers, bond raters, and legislators/regulators.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
"Daddy Warbucks" aka "Bazooka" Paulson has identified the root
cause of the current economic problems.

It is all the fault of the Chinese and Arabs.

These people would not embrace the spend-spend-spend culture that
has proven so successful in the west, and insisted on saving much
of their incomes, even though these are, on a per capita basis,
only a small fraction of those in the west. This was compounded
when they forced the people and governments of the western
countries to borrow these savings at excessively low interest
rates.

==========
snip
The US Treasury Secretary said that in the years leading up to
the crisis, super-abundant savings from fast-growing emerging
nations such as China and oil exporters - at a time of low
inflation and booming trade and capital flows - put downward
pressure on yields and risk spreads everywhere.

This, he said, laid the seeds of a global credit bubble that
extended far beyond the US sub-prime mortgage market and has now
burst with devastating consequences worldwide.
snip
==========
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ff671f66-d...077b07658.html

I am so glad "Bazooka" cleared this up. We can stop blaming our
bankers, brokers, bond raters, and legislators/regulators.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]

I don't want to start an argument here, but, although I wouldn't couch it as
"blame," there's an underlying truth in what he says. It's actually the
result of something the Chinese government did to start it all, rather than
the Chinese people, who were just acting rationally in response to
circumstances.

China has built its economy on an all-out mercantilist policy, something
like 17th-century England, or early 19th-century US. They pushed exports and
manipulated their currency and economy to keep it going. By keeping their
currency undervalued they discouraged consumer spending. So they're awash in
cash.

Countries that jump-start their economies with mercantilism (Japan in the
'60s - '80s; the Asian Tigers; etc.) usually can't stop once they've
started, until something crashes. One hopes that they're crashing now -- it
will be good for them as well as for the rest of us.

You can't (or I can't) blame China for acting like this. It would have been
nice if they had smoothly transitioned to a consumer economy and balanced
trade, but there aren't any examples in history that I know of in which a
government has been able to do that. It's no surprise they dumped their cash
into our securities, because there's hardly any other place they could put
it, given that they had to keep us well-supplied with cash in order to buy
their junk and they were hardly buying anything from us -- because they
couldn't, because their economic policy kept their currency undervalued, and
so on around an endless circle. Economists would have preferred they sink it
into their own economy, but economists don't run the show.

Good conservative doctrine (a la Milton Friedman) says this all would have
worked out in the end, because running a negative trade balance should have
caused the dollar to tank, in which case we'd join them at Third-World wage
rates and we'd pay off our debt in devalued dollars, which would **** them
off but which would be good for all our souls. g Unfortunately, Milton
Friedman misjudged the time frames for this all happening. Current estimates
are that it will be sometime between the time we're all dead, and the time
the sun is extinguished.

That's what happens when you just roll with it.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:54:55 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
.. .
"Daddy Warbucks" aka "Bazooka" Paulson has identified the root
cause of the current economic problems.

It is all the fault of the Chinese and Arabs.

These people would not embrace the spend-spend-spend culture that
has proven so successful in the west, and insisted on saving much
of their incomes, even though these are, on a per capita basis,
only a small fraction of those in the west. This was compounded
when they forced the people and governments of the western
countries to borrow these savings at excessively low interest
rates.

==========
snip
The US Treasury Secretary said that in the years leading up to
the crisis, super-abundant savings from fast-growing emerging
nations such as China and oil exporters - at a time of low
inflation and booming trade and capital flows - put downward
pressure on yields and risk spreads everywhere.

This, he said, laid the seeds of a global credit bubble that
extended far beyond the US sub-prime mortgage market and has now
burst with devastating consequences worldwide.
snip
==========
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ff671f66-d...077b07658.html

I am so glad "Bazooka" cleared this up. We can stop blaming our
bankers, brokers, bond raters, and legislators/regulators.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]

I don't want to start an argument here, but, although I wouldn't couch it as
"blame," there's an underlying truth in what he says. It's actually the
result of something the Chinese government did to start it all, rather than
the Chinese people, who were just acting rationally in response to
circumstances.

China has built its economy on an all-out mercantilist policy, something
like 17th-century England, or early 19th-century US. They pushed exports and
manipulated their currency and economy to keep it going. By keeping their
currency undervalued they discouraged consumer spending. So they're awash in
cash.

Countries that jump-start their economies with mercantilism (Japan in the
'60s - '80s; the Asian Tigers; etc.) usually can't stop once they've
started, until something crashes. One hopes that they're crashing now -- it
will be good for them as well as for the rest of us.

You can't (or I can't) blame China for acting like this. It would have been
nice if they had smoothly transitioned to a consumer economy and balanced
trade, but there aren't any examples in history that I know of in which a
government has been able to do that. It's no surprise they dumped their cash
into our securities, because there's hardly any other place they could put
it, given that they had to keep us well-supplied with cash in order to buy
their junk and they were hardly buying anything from us -- because they
couldn't, because their economic policy kept their currency undervalued, and
so on around an endless circle. Economists would have preferred they sink it
into their own economy, but economists don't run the show.

Good conservative doctrine (a la Milton Friedman) says this all would have
worked out in the end, because running a negative trade balance should have
caused the dollar to tank, in which case we'd join them at Third-World wage
rates and we'd pay off our debt in devalued dollars, which would **** them
off but which would be good for all our souls. g Unfortunately, Milton
Friedman misjudged the time frames for this all happening. Current estimates
are that it will be sometime between the time we're all dead, and the time
the sun is extinguished.

That's what happens when you just roll with it.
==========
Who would have thought that the Chinese leadership would do what
is best for China --- and after all we have done for them... What
a bunch of ingrates...

And just where were/is the American leadership that were/is doing
what was/is best for America and Americans, while all this was
going on? What a bunch of "maroons." :-(

No matter how thin you slice the baloney, we 100% brought this on
ourselves.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:54:55 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
. ..
"Daddy Warbucks" aka "Bazooka" Paulson has identified the root
cause of the current economic problems.

It is all the fault of the Chinese and Arabs.

These people would not embrace the spend-spend-spend culture that
has proven so successful in the west, and insisted on saving much
of their incomes, even though these are, on a per capita basis,
only a small fraction of those in the west. This was compounded
when they forced the people and governments of the western
countries to borrow these savings at excessively low interest
rates.

==========
snip
The US Treasury Secretary said that in the years leading up to
the crisis, super-abundant savings from fast-growing emerging
nations such as China and oil exporters - at a time of low
inflation and booming trade and capital flows - put downward
pressure on yields and risk spreads everywhere.

This, he said, laid the seeds of a global credit bubble that
extended far beyond the US sub-prime mortgage market and has now
burst with devastating consequences worldwide.
snip
==========
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ff671f66-d...077b07658.html

I am so glad "Bazooka" cleared this up. We can stop blaming our
bankers, brokers, bond raters, and legislators/regulators.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]

I don't want to start an argument here, but, although I wouldn't couch it
as
"blame," there's an underlying truth in what he says. It's actually the
result of something the Chinese government did to start it all, rather
than
the Chinese people, who were just acting rationally in response to
circumstances.

China has built its economy on an all-out mercantilist policy, something
like 17th-century England, or early 19th-century US. They pushed exports
and
manipulated their currency and economy to keep it going. By keeping their
currency undervalued they discouraged consumer spending. So they're awash
in
cash.

Countries that jump-start their economies with mercantilism (Japan in the
'60s - '80s; the Asian Tigers; etc.) usually can't stop once they've
started, until something crashes. One hopes that they're crashing now --
it
will be good for them as well as for the rest of us.

You can't (or I can't) blame China for acting like this. It would have
been
nice if they had smoothly transitioned to a consumer economy and balanced
trade, but there aren't any examples in history that I know of in which a
government has been able to do that. It's no surprise they dumped their
cash
into our securities, because there's hardly any other place they could put
it, given that they had to keep us well-supplied with cash in order to buy
their junk and they were hardly buying anything from us -- because they
couldn't, because their economic policy kept their currency undervalued,
and
so on around an endless circle. Economists would have preferred they sink
it
into their own economy, but economists don't run the show.

Good conservative doctrine (a la Milton Friedman) says this all would have
worked out in the end, because running a negative trade balance should
have
caused the dollar to tank, in which case we'd join them at Third-World
wage
rates and we'd pay off our debt in devalued dollars, which would **** them
off but which would be good for all our souls. g Unfortunately, Milton
Friedman misjudged the time frames for this all happening. Current
estimates
are that it will be sometime between the time we're all dead, and the time
the sun is extinguished.

That's what happens when you just roll with it.
==========
Who would have thought that the Chinese leadership would do what
is best for China --- and after all we have done for them... What
a bunch of ingrates...

And just where were/is the American leadership that were/is doing
what was/is best for America and Americans, while all this was
going on? What a bunch of "maroons." :-(

No matter how thin you slice the baloney, we 100% brought this on
ourselves.

Well, we could have done what was best for us, such as demanding
countertrade to keep from devestating some segments of our economy.
Virtually every other country in the world does that. We don't, because
we're supposedly the ones pushing for "unfettered free trade."

It's stupid and self-destructive. Everyone who knows any economics knows
that a wealthy China will be good for everyone, and I have no objection to
encouraging that. But not at our expense. The conservative economic
philisophy that gave us the derivative fiasco has done a lot more damage
than most people realize, or than those economic conservatives would ever
admit. They'd show us tables and graphs to prove how our GDP is doing just
fine. Then they'd tell us it will all trickle down, and that we should pull
ourselves up by our bootstraps in the meantime.

It's easiest to convince oneself that it's the proper posture from 30,000
feet, from the inside of a Gulfstream jet.

--
Ed Huntress

"Daddy Warbucks" aka "Bazooka" Paulson has identified the root
cause of the current economic problems.

It is all the fault of the Chinese and Arabs.

These people would not embrace the spend-spend-spend culture that
has proven so successful in the west, and insisted on saving much
of their incomes, even though these are, on a per capita basis,
only a small fraction of those in the west. This was compounded
when they forced the people and governments of the western
countries to borrow these savings at excessively low interest
rates.

==========
snip
The US Treasury Secretary said that in the years leading up to
the crisis, super-abundant savings from fast-growing emerging
nations such as China and oil exporters - at a time of low
inflation and booming trade and capital flows - put downward
pressure on yields and risk spreads everywhere.

This, he said, laid the seeds of a global credit bubble that
extended far beyond the US sub-prime mortgage market and has now
burst with devastating consequences worldwide.
snip
==========
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ff671f66-d...077b07658.html

I am so glad "Bazooka" cleared this up. We can stop blaming our
bankers, brokers, bond raters, and legislators/regulators.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]

I don't want to start an argument here, but, although I wouldn't couch it
as
"blame," there's an underlying truth in what he says. It's actually the
result of something the Chinese government did to start it all, rather
than
the Chinese people, who were just acting rationally in response to
circumstances.

China has built its economy on an all-out mercantilist policy, something
like 17th-century England, or early 19th-century US. They pushed exports
and
manipulated their currency and economy to keep it going. By keeping their
currency undervalued they discouraged consumer spending. So they're awash
in
cash.

Countries that jump-start their economies with mercantilism (Japan in the
'60s - '80s; the Asian Tigers; etc.) usually can't stop once they've
started, until something crashes. One hopes that they're crashing now --
it
will be good for them as well as for the rest of us.

You can't (or I can't) blame China for acting like this. It would have
been
nice if they had smoothly transitioned to a consumer economy and balanced
trade, but there aren't any examples in history that I know of in which a
government has been able to do that. It's no surprise they dumped their
cash
into our securities, because there's hardly any other place they could
put
it, given that they had to keep us well-supplied with cash in order to
buy
their junk and they were hardly buying anything from us -- because they
couldn't, because their economic policy kept their currency undervalued,
and
so on around an endless circle. Economists would have preferred they sink
it
into their own economy, but economists don't run the show.

Good conservative doctrine (a la Milton Friedman) says this all would
have
worked out in the end, because running a negative trade balance should
have
caused the dollar to tank, in which case we'd join them at Third-World
wage
rates and we'd pay off our debt in devalued dollars, which would ****
them
off but which would be good for all our souls. g Unfortunately, Milton
Friedman misjudged the time frames for this all happening. Current
estimates
are that it will be sometime between the time we're all dead, and the
time
the sun is extinguished.

That's what happens when you just roll with it.
==========
Who would have thought that the Chinese leadership would do what
is best for China --- and after all we have done for them... What
a bunch of ingrates...

And just where were/is the American leadership that were/is doing
what was/is best for America and Americans, while all this was
going on? What a bunch of "maroons." :-(

No matter how thin you slice the baloney, we 100% brought this on
ourselves.


Like Tonto said to the Lone Ranger when they were surrounded by Indians,
"what do you mean we?" The fact is "we" didn't bring this on ourselves; it
was done to us by our leaders. From 1980 on most of those leaders have been
conservatives and it's the conservative agenda of deregulation, globalism,
militarism, low taxes on the wealthy, and free and unregulated trade, that
have brought us to this point. It's true that many Democrats joined in with
this idiocy but the driving force in this country for the last 28 years has
been conservatism. If you don't believe me just ask Rush Limbaugh. One of
the hallmarks of that philosophy is to deny any responsibility when things
don't go right. Blaming everyone but business, money, and the republican
party, is standard procedure for them. Unfortunately for them it's not
working this time because everybody knows who has been in control.

None of the problems we are now having were inevitable either except for the
fact that conservative philosophy has ruled the country for decades. Had we
pursued different policies both in foreign affairs and economic ones they
would have brought a different outcome entirely. For example, had Al Gone
been president it's extremely unlikely that there would have been an Iraq
War at all. Had not Bush been elected twice we would not have allowed the
unfettered free market to run amok. So I have to take offense to be included
in the "we" that is responsible for our problems. Especially when I was four
square against virtually all republican policies since Reagan got in office.
As much as we wish we could lay the blame on others like the Chinese and the
Arabs the truth is it was those in positions of power who made the decisions
that are to blame. For 28 years those people were republicans (in their
Gulfstreams). So blame them not us. They're policies are what got us here.
Oh, yeah, you can also blame all the idiots who kept those incompetent and
corrupt republicans in office for so many years too. The republican party
never could have done it without them.

Hawke