On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
....

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

OTOH, others like grandfather were exceedingly cautious but didn't let
it scar them permanently to the point of being overly so. He continued
to grow the farm and keep up with changes in production practices and
conservation, etc., and came through in the end, quite successful. As
noted, when I was a little tyke in the 50s things were again in a tough
spell but it wasn't as long a duration and the overall economy wasn't in
a depression so it was a little easier. Mom had a teaching certificate
so she began substitute-teaching in those years to bring in some
off-farm income. In the 30s when she graduated with that degree there
was _no_ teaching position open in the entire state; she ended up here
because the only job she could find was as a secretary in the HS office.

My Depression-era relatives were hard-boiled New Englanders. I never
knew if it was the Depression that boiled them so hard, or if it was
just three centuries of plowing rocks.

I think the far NE'eners are just different, too...there's certainly a
background there of a tough place to make a living that definitely has
an affect and that is/becomes cultural. The Depression undoubtedly
honed it and again as above, everybody reacted differently.

If hadn't had that stretch of 12-15 yrs before that showed what this
ground _can_ produce and was good overall economic time prior to the
30s, we'd not be here now; no way would they have had sufficient
resources to be able to hang on. As it was, I've been told probably
another year or two would've been about the limit of hanging on then
although you can never know how it would've worked out.

--

If some in California had not cancelled or re-manufactured
the nuke power stations - they could for years drive desalination
stations into water.

They need to start filling the lakes. Even the lake in death valley.

LA for years dumped water into the ocean because they got a sweet heart
deal on water. Get it if they didn't need it. Don't give it to the
farmers let them dry out and drop the large lakes in Northern Ca.

Sometimes I think CA deserves itself. Short sighted.....

Martin

On 3/22/2015 10:34 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 17:20:51 +1100, Jon Anderson
wrote:

On 3/21/2015 8:19 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Kiss your lawn goodbye.

I read an article a while back about California fining residents of some
towns for watering their lawns, while one of the cities in the affected
area, says it will fine those that don't water their lawns.
Only in California....
About time for the guys that spray paint dead lawns green to make a
comeback.

But another article predicts if the drought holds a few more years, a
huge portion of California residents will move elsewhere, devastating
the economy.

Jon

We really need to find ways to deal with this. It's going to affect
the whole country in negative ways if we don't.

There's a lot of development work going on with desalination, and I
don't doubt they can solve the drinking-water problem, and take care
of residential and even indistrial use. But agriculture is going to be
tougher, and we depend heavily on California produce.

I suspect that other parts of the country, ones that are now producing
mostly grain crops, could take up the slack. But that would mean huge
displacements of people and production.

I don't know the numbers, and numbers are the big story here, but my
feeling is that we're not taking this issue seriously enough. Even if
it is a natural cycle, and that it will solve itself in the long run,
as Keynes said, in the long run, we're all dead.

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 22:35:50 -0500, Mr. Ed said to Wilbur:
I don't know the numbers, and numbers are the big story here, but my
feeling is that we're not taking this issue seriously enough. Even if
it is a natural cycle, and that it will solve itself in the long run,
as Keynes said, in the long run, we're all dead.

Life is a sexually-transmitted, 100% fatal disease.

--
The Road to Success...is always under construction.
--anon

On 3/24/2015 4:33 AM, dpb wrote:

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover.

Had an aunt that, while not scarred by the depression, it did leave a
lasting impression. When I was about 12 or so my dad won a company
contest, earning a trip for two to Vegas. So Aunt Nita came to take care
of us 4 kids. First morning, she prepped our breakfast, bowls of
oatmeal. The usual glass of milk was missing and we pointed this out to
her. I fondly remember her sharp look and commenting "What, milk in a
glass? You have milk on your cereal!" We assured her we always had a
glass of milk too. She finally relented, but sternly warned she would
check with our parents...


Jon

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:33:49 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

OTOH, others like grandfather were exceedingly cautious but didn't let
it scar them permanently to the point of being overly so. He continued
to grow the farm and keep up with changes in production practices and
conservation, etc., and came through in the end, quite successful. As
noted, when I was a little tyke in the 50s things were again in a tough
spell but it wasn't as long a duration and the overall economy wasn't in
a depression so it was a little easier. Mom had a teaching certificate
so she began substitute-teaching in those years to bring in some
off-farm income. In the 30s when she graduated with that degree there
was _no_ teaching position open in the entire state; she ended up here
because the only job she could find was as a secretary in the HS office.

My Depression-era relatives were hard-boiled New Englanders. I never
knew if it was the Depression that boiled them so hard, or if it was
just three centuries of plowing rocks.

I think the far NE'eners are just different, too...there's certainly a
background there of a tough place to make a living that definitely has
an affect and that is/becomes cultural. The Depression undoubtedly
honed it and again as above, everybody reacted differently.

My family was still farming lands they had settled from around 1670 to
the 1750s, so they were adept at getting through tough times. By
around 1940 they had all switched over to dairy farming. Cows don't
care about the rocks. g

My immediate family moved from NH to NJ in 1921. They'd had enough of
farming in such a cold climate. They survived the Depression fairly
well.


If hadn't had that stretch of 12-15 yrs before that showed what this
ground _can_ produce and was good overall economic time prior to the
30s, we'd not be here now; no way would they have had sufficient
resources to be able to hang on. As it was, I've been told probably
another year or two would've been about the limit of hanging on then
although you can never know how it would've worked out.

From what the history books say, it's amazing that any of them were
able to hold out. It took an enormous amount of determination and
faith.

--
Ed Huntress

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.


--

Your first duty is to th' country...is to th' flag, and then...and then
th' army,
and then to...and then to god. Flag, Army, God - F.A.G.

Mark Wieber
75th Rangers, 1971-1973

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

--
Ed Huntress

On 3/24/2015 8:46 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets.

The German central bank?

The point remains: the depression was not the universal horror that has
been portrayed. It was not the Waltons and the dust bowl for everyone.

--

Your first duty is to th' country...is to th' flag, and then...and then
th' army,
and then to...and then to god. Flag, Army, God - F.A.G.

Mark Wieber
75th Rangers, 1971-1973

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 11:35:56 PM UTC-4, Martin Eastburn wrote:
If some in California had not cancelled or re-manufactured
the nuke power stations - they could for years drive desalination
stations into water.

They need to start filling the lakes. Even the lake in death valley.

LA for years dumped water into the ocean because they got a sweet
heart deal on water. Get it if they didn't need it. Don't give
it to the farmers let them dry out and drop the large lakes
in Northern Ca.

Sometimes I think CA deserves itself. Short sighted.....

But now, the number of conservative republican elected officials in California has been on the serious decline since the mid-2000's.

The chances that solutions to all of this will be found sooner.

On 03/24/2015 1:57 AM, Jon Anderson wrote:
....

Had an aunt that, while not scarred by the depression, it did leave a
lasting impression. When I was about 12 or so my dad won a company
contest, earning a trip for two to Vegas. So Aunt Nita came to take care
of us 4 kids. First morning, she prepped our breakfast, bowls of
oatmeal. The usual glass of milk was missing and we pointed this out to
her. I fondly remember her sharp look and commenting "What, milk in a
glass? You have milk on your cereal!" We assured her we always had a
glass of milk too. She finally relented, but sternly warned she would
check with our parents...

Chuckles...yeah, that's certainly a very typical response and she was
certainly not alone in the feeling of rationing was the order of the day
whether really needed or not.

--

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Data point: something like one half of employed people in Greece work
for the government. How can this work? (I read it in the WSJ, but
don't recall where. When I asked a Greek coworker, he would not answer
the question, always changed the subject.)

Another data point: Probably fifteen years ago, I did a lot of
2nd-shift integration work, and got to know the owner of the local
pizza joint well. He was Greek, and had emigrated to the US with his
new wife and 2yo son ten or fifteen years before, speaking no English,
and started out washing dishes in a local pizzeria. Long story short,
he now owned the pizzeria, and his BMW was proudly parked out front.
His English was still very rough, but with effort workable.

Eventually, I asked the obvious question: Why didn't you do all this
back in Greece? He answered "Impossible!", because one could not get a
business loan unless one were very well connected, and because it took
forever (and many bribes) to get all the many necessary licenses.
Here, the licenses took about a month in total, and he was easily able
to get the needed loans. He now owned a string of pizzerias, and over
time had brought his entire village over one-by-one to man the
pizzerias. And there they were, standing behind him and listening to
the story - these were mostly adults, not the usual collection of
pimply-faced surly teenagers. And the pizza was good.

The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

So far as that pizzeria chain owner is concerned, the streets of the US
*are* paved with gold.

Joe Gwinn

On Wednesday, March 25, 2015 at 10:20:42 AM UTC-4, Joe Gwinn wrote:
In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Who knows? They may not have a choice:

"Does Germany Really Owe Greece A EURO trillion In War Reparations?"

-- http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworst...obably-not-no/

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

I agree. Ball's comparison is not a good one.


Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Greece didn't belong in the Euro zone to begin with. It's a different
culture. Trying to shoehorn them into a northern European business and
financial culture was never a good idea.


Data point: something like one half of employed people in Greece work
for the government. How can this work? (I read it in the WSJ, but
don't recall where. When I asked a Greek coworker, he would not answer
the question, always changed the subject.)

This is not correct. The percentage who work for the government itself
is very low (7.9%). But add in those employed by public corporations,
and Greece (GRC in the chart) is still lower, at 20.7%, than many
other countries:

http://tinyurl.com/p6bxrb6

Countries with higher percentages include Norway, Denmark, France, and
the Netherlands.

And many others are in the same neighborhood:

Canada is 18.8%
The UK is 18.6%
The US is 14.6%
Switzerland is 14.5%

So percentages in that range can work. It's partly a matter of
culture, and largely a matter of how well they're run. It's difficult
to make a country with 20% or more competitive in global terms, but it
can produce a very nice life.


Another data point: Probably fifteen years ago, I did a lot of
2nd-shift integration work, and got to know the owner of the local
pizza joint well. He was Greek, and had emigrated to the US with his
new wife and 2yo son ten or fifteen years before, speaking no English,
and started out washing dishes in a local pizzeria. Long story short,
he now owned the pizzeria, and his BMW was proudly parked out front.
His English was still very rough, but with effort workable.

Eventually, I asked the obvious question: Why didn't you do all this
back in Greece? He answered "Impossible!", because one could not get a
business loan unless one were very well connected, and because it took
forever (and many bribes) to get all the many necessary licenses.
Here, the licenses took about a month in total, and he was easily able
to get the needed loans. He now owned a string of pizzerias, and over
time had brought his entire village over one-by-one to man the
pizzerias. And there they were, standing behind him and listening to
the story - these were mostly adults, not the usual collection of
pimply-faced surly teenagers. And the pizza was good.

If you ask the righties here, that is, of course, impossible. g They
say that the red tape and regulations in the US make it so.

However, we know that they're full of crap, as they demonstrate every
week. They can't be bothered to check their facts.


The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

As we can see from the figures above, that's obviously not the issue.
You should have stopped with "Greece's problems are caused by gross
mismanagement." g


So far as that pizzeria chain owner is concerned, the streets of the US
*are* paved with gold.

Between opportunities and markets, it's a great place for people like
your Greek friend.

--
Ed Huntress


Joe Gwinn

On 03/25/2015 1:29 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe
wrote:
....

The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

As we can see from the figures above, that's obviously not the issue.
You should have stopped with "Greece's problems are caused by gross
mismanagement."g
....

Well, it _is_ the problem; it's just that those aren't the full story...

The four of the five PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain) are the the
2nd-thru sixth ranking for the highest percentage of central government
debt as %GDP trailing only Japan as #1 and Cyprus #3. Greece is #2 at
165% (yr end 2012, last data year in World Bank summary).

It's that overwhelming debt service that is crippling them
internationally as they're on the brink of default about every six
months or so. Besides the rampant corruption and all, the uncertainty
is the bane of any investment; entrepreneurial folks don't put money
where they perceive high risk/little reward.

Unfortunately, in the direction the US is headed, we're currently in the
top "dirty dozen" and risin'...

--

On 03/25/2015 2:13 PM, dpb wrote:
....

Well, it _is_ the problem; it's just that those aren't the full story...
....

That was intended to read as "_is_ a major part of" the problem; not
that it is the only one...

--

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:13:34 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 03/25/2015 1:29 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe
wrote:
...

The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

As we can see from the figures above, that's obviously not the issue.
You should have stopped with "Greece's problems are caused by gross
mismanagement."g
...

Well, it _is_ the problem; it's just that those aren't the full story...

I don't see how anyone could conclude that it's a problem. Here are
the countries with the highest GDP per capita (IMF figures), and their
percentage of government employees (federal, state, local, and public
corp. employees). I didn't include Qatar because they're just
oil-suckers:

Luxembourg - 17.6%
Norway - 34.5
Switzerland - 14.5
Australia - 15.6
Denmark - 31.5

That's an average of 22.7% of their labor forces working in government
jobs. That's higher than Greece.

Just going on the success rate, it looks like an advanced economy
needs a pretty substantial percentage of its workforce in government.
Those are mostly service jobs, a lot of them infrastructure-related,
and there appears to be little or no advantage to letting them go
where they may in the private sector. That is, in terms of economic
success.

Of course, this doesn't fit with conservative economic theory, but
conservative economic theory is mostly crap, anyway. Stick with the
facts instead of the ideologies, and things look a little different.


The four of the five PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain) are the the
2nd-thru sixth ranking for the highest percentage of central government
debt as %GDP trailing only Japan as #1 and Cyprus #3. Greece is #2 at
165% (yr end 2012, last data year in World Bank summary).

Debt is a different question. Comparing the US to Greece, the US debt
is deignated in our own currency. That makes the situation so
different that there is no comparison at all.


It's that overwhelming debt service that is crippling them
internationally as they're on the brink of default about every six
months or so.

Really? Japan, the leader in debt? Germany, where national debt is 40%
higher than the US on GDP, and 20% higher per capita? The UK, where it
is 400% of the per-capita debt of the US? Switzerland, where their
per-capita debt is 2.2 TIMES that of the US?

Greece's per-capita debt is lower than that of the Netherlands,
France, the UK, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark...

....and it's only slightly higher than that of Germany.

It appears that there's no relationship.


Besides the rampant corruption and all, the uncertainty
is the bane of any investment; entrepreneurial folks don't put money
where they perceive high risk/little reward.

The high risk doesn't appear to be related to perceived corruption.
Greece ranks 94 on the Corruption Perceptions Index, tied with India,
and there isn't any shortage of investment in India going on.

http://www.transparency.org/cpi2012/results#myAnchor1



Unfortunately, in the direction the US is headed, we're currently in the
top "dirty dozen" and risin'...

I don't think so. When it comes to international finance, and even to
macroeconomics in general, "common sense" is about as useful as tits
on a bull.

It's more complicated than that.

--
Ed Huntress

On 03/25/2015 3:26 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
....

Greece's per-capita debt is lower than that of the Netherlands,
France, the UK, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark...

....

It appears that there's no relationship.

The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

There's a reason the PIGS are the one dragging down the world system
every time they near default.

That four of the five are in the top six and the fifth (Spain) is only a
few places outside is a pretty telling statistic and Japan has been in
the doldrums for 20-odd year now.


Besides the rampant corruption and all, the uncertainty
is the bane of any investment; entrepreneurial folks don't put money
where they perceive high risk/little reward.

The high risk doesn't appear to be related to perceived corruption.
Greece ranks 94 on the Corruption Perceptions Index, tied with India,
and there isn't any shortage of investment in India going on.
....

Not what I said; the bane of investment is the uncertainty in the
financial markets...corruption just makes it tougher to be competitive
and to fix the problems internally.

--

On 03/25/2015 3:26 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:13:34 -0500, wrote:

....

....

It's that overwhelming debt service that is crippling them
internationally as they're on the brink of default about every six
months or so.

Really? Japan, the leader in debt? Germany, where national debt is 40%
higher than the US on GDP, and 20% higher per capita? The UK, where it
is 400% of the per-capita debt of the US? Switzerland, where their
per-capita debt is 2.2 TIMES that of the US?

Greece's per-capita debt is lower than that of the Netherlands,
France, the UK, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark...

...and it's only slightly higher than that of Germany.

It appears that there's no relationship.


Besides the rampant corruption and all, the uncertainty
is the bane of any investment; entrepreneurial folks don't put money
where they perceive high risk/little reward.

The high risk doesn't appear to be related to perceived corruption.
Greece ranks 94 on the Corruption Perceptions Index, tied with India,
and there isn't any shortage of investment in India going on.
....

The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

There's a reason the PIGS are the one dragging down the world system
every time they near default.

That four of the five are in the top six and the fifth (Spain) is only a
few places outside is a pretty telling statistic and Japan has been in
the doldrums for 20-odd year now.

Besides the rampant corruption and all, the uncertainty
is the bane of any investment; entrepreneurial folks don't put money
where they perceive high risk/little reward.

The high risk doesn't appear to be related to perceived corruption.
Greece ranks 94 on the Corruption Perceptions Index, tied with India,
and there isn't any shortage of investment in India going on.
....

Not what I said; the bane of investment is the uncertainty in the
financial markets...corruption just makes it tougher to be competitive
and to fix the internal problems.

--

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:20:55 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 03/25/2015 3:26 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
...

Greece's per-capita debt is lower than that of the Netherlands,
France, the UK, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark...

...

It appears that there's no relationship.

The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

It works out the same either way: GDP/debt, or
GDP-per-capita/debt-per-capita. It's the same ratio.

That is, if you're looking at the *size* of the debt, and making
judgments about whether that is hampering an economy. I thought that's
what you were doing.


There's a reason the PIGS are the one dragging down the world system
every time they near default.

I don't think they're dragging anything down but themselves.


That four of the five are in the top six and the fifth (Spain) is only a
few places outside is a pretty telling statistic and Japan has been in
the doldrums for 20-odd year now.

Japan's government securities rate is near zero, but they're having no
trouble selling their securities:

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred.../INTGSTJPM193N

Obviously, they're not dragging anyone down. As for the rest of them,
national debt is not a simple issue.

Greece could pay its debt -- if it wanted to, in the opinion of many
experts. That's what has the Germans so hopping mad:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/greece-c...ont-1424384652



Besides the rampant corruption and all, the uncertainty
is the bane of any investment; entrepreneurial folks don't put money
where they perceive high risk/little reward.

The high risk doesn't appear to be related to perceived corruption.
Greece ranks 94 on the Corruption Perceptions Index, tied with India,
and there isn't any shortage of investment in India going on.
...

Not what I said; the bane of investment is the uncertainty in the
financial markets...corruption just makes it tougher to be competitive
and to fix the problems internally.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
Greece could pay its debt -- if it wanted to, in the opinion of many
experts. That's what has the Germans so hopping mad:

Why should Greece want to?

They're not stupid. They know the Germans
greater debt makes Germans richer. Why should
the Greeks impoverish themselves by doing what
Germans won't do because Germans also don't want to.
Neither the Greeks or the Germans want to
become poorer by paying down their national debt.

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 06:50:26 -0500, jim "
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
Greece could pay its debt -- if it wanted to, in the opinion of many
experts. That's what has the Germans so hopping mad:

Why should Greece want to?

They're not stupid. They know the Germans
greater debt makes Germans richer. Why should
the Greeks impoverish themselves by doing what
Germans won't do because Germans also don't want to.
Neither the Greeks or the Germans want to
become poorer by paying down their national debt.

I hesitate to get into these debt discussions, because they usually
hit a brick wall sooner or later, but Germany vs. Greece is a
relatively simple issue.

Germany, like the US, the UK, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries,
and every other developed economy, keeps paying off its government
securities and then selling new ones. In other words, it keeps rolling
its debt over, generally with no problems.

Greece, on the other hand, got a bailout, and now they want to
re-negotiate the terms under which they'll pay it off. That isn't the
same thing. Their economy is pretty weak to begin with, and the
austerity that would be imposed by paying off the debt would, they
say, be onerous and would prevent their economy from recovering,
because there would be a shortage of capital and a big shortage of
consumer spending.

Beyond that simplistic set of facts, there are other, more complicated
ones. The euro zone economies are not something I follow closely, so
this is as far as I can go with it.

To give you an idea of how much all of this upends common sense, note
that Luxembourg, a tiny country with a very successful economy, has a
per-capita external, national debt that is THIRTY-FOUR TIMES that of
the United states. How do they manage that? By holding comparably
large amounts of the debt of OTHER countries.

Why would they do a thing like that? Largely as a hedge. And that's an
important part of the whole international debt-swapping scheme, which
makes good business sense but no "common" sense at all.

--
Ed Huntress

On 03/26/2015 7:32 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
....

To give you an idea of how much all of this upends common sense, note
that Luxembourg, a tiny country with a very successful economy, has a
per-capita external, national debt that is THIRTY-FOUR TIMES that of
the United states. How do they manage that? By holding comparably
large amounts of the debt of OTHER countries.

....

To show how it _does_ make sense, on a per GDP basis, Luxemborug ranks
down at 50+ on the above list where the PIGS are almost consonant to the
top tier.

They (Loux) have plenty of national economic engine comparatively to be
able to service what they've got and hence they _can_ refinance it
because the markets aren't concerned they will default.

While these events aren't necessarily the end of the world market-wise,
these "crises" at best add volatility to world markets and potential
large retractions at worst; how much is dependent upon all kinds of
things including just what the overall state of the global economy is at
the time as well as other unstabilizing events which may/may not occur
at or near the same time. The key thing they do, however, is continue
to keep confidence in the particular economy from growing which is, as
noted before, the bane of solving the problem for the longer term by
growing investment and venture; folks just tend to find more stable
places to try to do that.

Is this a total explanation? Of course not; it is, as you say an
extremely complicated system. OTOH, that these particular countries
have a specific common characteristic isn't chance; it's indicative of
endemic problems in their basic economies/social structures.

--

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:23:52 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 03/26/2015 7:32 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
...

To give you an idea of how much all of this upends common sense, note
that Luxembourg, a tiny country with a very successful economy, has a
per-capita external, national debt that is THIRTY-FOUR TIMES that of
the United states. How do they manage that? By holding comparably
large amounts of the debt of OTHER countries.

...

To show how it _does_ make sense, on a per GDP basis, Luxemborug ranks
down at 50+ on the above list where the PIGS are almost consonant to the
top tier.

Which "above list" are we talking about here?


They (Loux) have plenty of national economic engine comparatively to be
able to service what they've got and hence they _can_ refinance it
because the markets aren't concerned they will default.

While these events aren't necessarily the end of the world market-wise,
these "crises" at best add volatility to world markets and potential
large retractions at worst; how much is dependent upon all kinds of
things including just what the overall state of the global economy is at
the time as well as other unstabilizing events which may/may not occur
at or near the same time. The key thing they do, however, is continue
to keep confidence in the particular economy from growing which is, as
noted before, the bane of solving the problem for the longer term by
growing investment and venture; folks just tend to find more stable
places to try to do that.

Is this a total explanation? Of course not; it is, as you say an
extremely complicated system. OTOH, that these particular countries
have a specific common characteristic isn't chance; it's indicative of
endemic problems in their basic economies/social structures.

Well, yeah. I thought that our disagreement here, though, was, first,
over government employment:.

The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

This, as we saw from actual figures, is hardly the cause of Greece's
problems, and Greece's percentage of government employees is not
especially high.

Regarding government debt, there are several ways to measure it, but
the *amount* of debt, relative to GDP or per-capita, has only a slim
relationship to a country's growth or per-capita income.

What does have a lot to do with it is the culture of a country and the
management capability of its government. That that "management
capability," in this sense, is measured in "Washington consensus"
economic terms.

Apart from that, the rest of the debt issue is, as I said, not
something that I think we can resolve here in any way. The
interactions in large economies are enormously complex and they don't
succumb to any simplistic interpretation.

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:20:55 -0500, dpb
wrote:

snip
The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

There's a reason the PIGS are the one dragging down the world system
every time they near default.
/snip

IMNSHO the problem goes far deeper than a few unfortunate
and/or venal countries, but rather is a systemic problem of
the new integrated *DEBT BASED* global socioeconomy.

There are two sides to this immediate SYMPTOM of imminent
default. The borrowers who are overextended, and the
lenders (many of whom are also overextended, e. g. carry
trade http://tinyurl.com/q522zan ) who enabled them to
become overextended.

AFAIK none of the sovereign loans were made at the
figurative point of a gun from the lenders perspective, but
much of the sovereign debt, from the borrowers perspective
were contracted as the result of “an offer they can not
refuse.” For example “rolling over” a maturing bond at
higher interest rates and worse terms, or to finance a
development which “will pay for itself.”

It is also well to remember that only in rare cases have the
western nations lent to other nations. Rather this involved
non-governmental companies and individuals lending to
nominally sovereign governments. In many cases this was the
large international banks such as Citi, who syndicated or
underwrote the loan for a very significant fee, and then
“retailed” the resulting bonds to individuals, pension
funds, etc. In the case of Argentina details are available
in a C-SPAN video about an hour long, which details how this
worked. It is well worth watching if you are interested in
the possibility of default.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?185857-...y-kept-rolling

In scanning the available information, it appears much of
the sovereign debt in risk of default was borrowed by
illegitimate governments (e. g. Argentina and Iraq), and/or
was borrowed without following the constitutional
requirements of the borrowing country such as legislative
ratification or plebiscite, e. g. Ecuador. Additional much
of the money received seems to have been diverted to
individual profit and not used for the “common good,”
resulting in “odious debt,” which is not collectable from
the nation. http://tinyurl.com/y59eet Many of the
developmental projects seem to have involved very
substantial “hidden commissions” or bribes to the officials
overseeing the developmental project, e. g. the Greek
subway, or to the military to purchase unneeded weapons, e.
g. 6 German submarines and numbers of advanced fighters for
Greece.

FWIW: The “Default Problem” did not occur overnight, but
has been a long-term development, which can be plausibly
dated from the Vietnam war, the cost of which introduced
the international debt based economy by the flood of
American dollars generated [this continues via QE and ZIRP].
This debt-based global economy continues to expand, but has
now reached its limits in that it is global and can expand
no more because there are no more *PLAUSIBLE* [Tinkerbell?]
borrowers. To be sure there are many nations such as
Somalia, Haiti, and Liberia that would like to participate,
but a “fig leaf” of debt repayment must exist for the game
to continue.

The task now is not to whine and complain, but rather to
limit the damage, clean up the mess, and make (and
implement) rational, data driven, plans to replace the
current system with something more sustainable, stable, and
equitable.


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

On 03/26/2015 10:05 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:23:52 -0500, wrote:

On 03/26/2015 7:32 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
...

To give you an idea of how much all of this upends common sense, note
that Luxembourg, a tiny country with a very successful economy, has a
per-capita external, national debt that is THIRTY-FOUR TIMES that of
the United states. How do they manage that? By holding comparably
large amounts of the debt of OTHER countries.

...

To show how it _does_ make sense, on a per GDP basis, Luxemborug ranks
down at 50+ on the above list where the PIGS are almost consonant to the
top tier.

Which "above list" are we talking about here?

The previously quoted list of the top national debt percentages relative
to GDP wherein the PIGS almost make the top of the list exclusively.

They (Loux) have plenty of national economic engine comparatively to be
able to service what they've got and hence they _can_ refinance it
because the markets aren't concerned they will default.
....

Is this a total explanation? Of course not; it is, as you say an
extremely complicated system. OTOH, that these particular countries
have a specific common characteristic isn't chance; it's indicative of
endemic problems in their basic economies/social structures.

Well, yeah. I thought that our disagreement here, though, was, first,
over government employment:.


No, not really, I didn't/don't refute that purely numbers aren't
particularly tell, no...I just did agree that the size of government
spending _is_ a problem in these governments with real issues, of which
Greece is simply on example...

The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

This, as we saw from actual figures, is hardly the cause of Greece's
problems, and Greece's percentage of government employees is not
especially high.

Regarding government debt, there are several ways to measure it, but
the *amount* of debt, relative to GDP or per-capita, has only a slim
relationship to a country's growth or per-capita income.

What does have a lot to do with it is the culture of a country and the
management capability of its government. That that "management
capability," in this sense, is measured in "Washington consensus"
economic terms.

Apart from that, the rest of the debt issue is, as I said, not
something that I think we can resolve here in any way. The
interactions in large economies are enormously complex and they don't
succumb to any simplistic interpretation.

What I disagree with in the above is that debt on a per GDP basis _IS_
significant as it measures the magnitude of the problem on a scale that
is a measure of the amount of economic activity there is as potential
with which to service said debt.

It is, as stated, apparent it is a good indicator of trouble when your
example on a per capita basis puts a company in very bad light that you
(and I agree) isn't in particular trouble whereas on the per GDP basis
it's clear wny they can handle it.

Now, that they're there on that second scale is a result of much of what
you go on to account for in the subsequent paragraph which essentially
rephrases what I had said just above.

The point I was making is that while the previous poster's one claim of
employment isn't alone the actual root cause I think he's correct in
there being a "government is the cause" underlying problem in all those
countries; it's the collective inability to control what their deficit
financing is in terms of what their ability to pay is.

I can run $X/mo on my AmEx and be able to pay it of routinely and can
push that up to quit a bit more for a short term and still be ok. I
can't put it to $5X or so times what routinely do indefinitely and not
have serious problems down the road. Greece has been at equivalent of
the latter on steroids for 100 yr and keeps on repeating the same
pattern over and over and over...

As for "simplistic interpertation", we're not trying to build a model,
we're looking for a measure by which to gauge whether "Houston, there's
a problem!" or not and it's pretty clear to me that using the debt/GDP
ratio is a strong indicator of "issues" either now or in the short term
unless either the numerator is lowered or the denominator raised. The
statistic isn't the cause, it is, after all simply a statistic. But,
it's pretty highly correlated with countries with serious problems.

--

On 03/26/2015 1:12 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:20:55 -0500,
wrote:

snip
The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

There's a reason the PIGS are the one dragging down the world system
every time they near default.
/snip

IMNSHO the problem goes far deeper than a few unfortunate
and/or venal countries, but rather is a systemic problem of
the new integrated *DEBT BASED* global socioeconomy.

....

I disagree with much but am not going to prolong this further...and
interesting read the illustrates that the problem has been around much
longer than the Viet Nam war era...

http://www.historytoday.com/matthew-lynn/greek-economics-drachmas-debt-and-dionysius

But it gives background on why Greece, in particular, is such a mess...

--

On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 2:12:42 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:20:55 -0500, dpb
wrote:

snip
The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

There's a reason the PIGS are the one dragging down the world system
every time they near default.
/snip

IMNSHO the problem goes far deeper than a few
unfortunate and/or venal countries, but rather is a systemic
problem of the new integrated *DEBT BASED* global socioeconomy....
...
The task now is not to whine and complain, but
rather to limit the damage ...

Yes, and there is the cruxpoint! Limit the damage, ie... when a bank(s) is going under in mass. You stop that by conducting more or less "yearly" stress tests.

Here is a recent simplification of modern prevention of great depression scenarios:

"The subsidiaries of both Deutsche Bank and Banco Santander failed the stress tests for "qualitative" reasons among which were their inability to accurately identify risk and to respond realistically to losses.

The annual Fed 'stress tests' aim to ensure banks are capable of functioning during periods of "financial stress".

-- http://www.goldcore.com/us/gold-blog...k-of-bail-ins/

Ed Huntress wrote:
Germany, like the US, the UK, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries,
and every other developed economy, keeps paying off its government
securities and then selling new ones. In other words, it keeps rolling
its debt over, generally with no problems.

Greece was not allowed to do that.
Had Greece not joined the EU there would
have been nothing preventing it from doing
the same as the other countries you mention.

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:03:10 -0500, jim "
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
Germany, like the US, the UK, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries,
and every other developed economy, keeps paying off its government
securities and then selling new ones. In other words, it keeps rolling
its debt over, generally with no problems.

Greece was not allowed to do that.
Had Greece not joined the EU there would
have been nothing preventing it from doing
the same as the other countries you mention.

Well, as I understand it, the big issue is the bailout. Without the
euro, they probably wouldn't have gotten a bailout. But it had
specific terms for payout.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:03:10 -0500, jim "
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
Germany, like the US, the UK, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries,
and every other developed economy, keeps paying off its government
securities and then selling new ones. In other words, it keeps rolling
its debt over, generally with no problems.

Greece was not allowed to do that.
Had Greece not joined the EU there would
have been nothing preventing it from doing
the same as the other countries you mention.

Well, as I understand it, the big issue is the bailout. Without the
euro, they probably wouldn't have gotten a bailout. But it had
specific terms for payout.


Without the Euro Goldman Sachs wouldn't
have been able to draw Greece into the fraudulent
accounting scheme that started the mess.

dpb wrote:
The problem isn't per capita, it's whether there's sufficient GDP to be
able to service it or not.

What you are arguing is that the EU is not democratic.

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:27:44 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

snip
Without the
euro, they probably wouldn't have gotten a bailout.
/snip

While it is impossible to tell, in all likelihood if Greece
had not joined the EU and replaced the Drachma with the Euro
they would not have been able to dig themselves into such a
deep hole because of the "easy" money [which is the hardest
kind] this made available, and would not have needed a
bail-out, at least on the current scale, as Drachma
denominated debt could be "inflated away."

A quick examination of the historical record indicates far
too much big power meddling in internal Greek affairs, with
the republican form of government overturned several times
by the installation of a foreigner as monarch, or invasion.
The result seems to have been the layering upon layering of
regulations and regulators like barnacles on a ship.
http://tinyurl.com/nr3az9s

1st republic 1822-1832 ended when the great powers declared
Greece to be a monarchy and installed a German King. [to
insure debt repayment?]

2nd republic 1924-1935 ended when the republic was de
stabilized and the monarchy restored. [to insure debt
repayment?]

A provisional 3rd republic was destroyed in a vicious civil
war 1946-1949 backed by the UK when the monarchy was
reimposed after the German defeat in WW2, when the majority
of Greeks decided they wanted the rule of neither a King or
the Germans. http://tinyurl.com/6xqgz6 [to insure debt
repayment?]

The monarchy was again abolished in 1967 by a field grade
officer level revolt, which ruled until 1974 when the
current Republic was implemented. This has functioned
poorly, and the interests of the majority do not appear to
have been well represented.

The more populist Syriza (Coalition of the Radical Left)
party currently in power *MAY* be able to start the
reconstitution of the Greek government into something that
prioritizes the long-term well-being of the majority.
http://tinyurl.com/nmatn38
http://tinyurl.com/pmdoltg


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

I agree. Ball's comparison is not a good one.


Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Greece didn't belong in the Euro zone to begin with. It's a different
culture. Trying to shoehorn them into a northern European business and
financial culture was never a good idea.


Data point: something like one half of employed people in Greece work
for the government. How can this work? (I read it in the WSJ, but
don't recall where. When I asked a Greek coworker, he would not answer
the question, always changed the subject.)

This is not correct. The percentage who work for the government itself
is very low (7.9%). But add in those employed by public corporations,
and Greece (GRC in the chart) is still lower, at 20.7%, than many
other countries:

http://tinyurl.com/p6bxrb6

Countries with higher percentages include Norway, Denmark, France, and
the Netherlands.

And many others are in the same neighborhood:

Canada is 18.8%
The UK is 18.6%
The US is 14.6%
Switzerland is 14.5%

So percentages in that range can work. It's partly a matter of
culture, and largely a matter of how well they're run. It's difficult
to make a country with 20% or more competitive in global terms, but it
can produce a very nice life.

I'm not sure I buy this, no matter what the published statistics claim.
The Greeks clearly lied to gain admission to the Euro.

The big money is most likely in pensions.

If (when, probably) Germany declines to subsidize the Greek govt, it
will go bankrupt. This is actually a good thing, as it will force
housecleaning in Greece.

Nor do Greeks pay taxes. The Italians are the same in this, but with a
better economy. But they may be the next to go blooie.


Another data point: Probably fifteen years ago, I did a lot of
2nd-shift integration work, and got to know the owner of the local
pizza joint well. He was Greek, and had emigrated to the US with his
new wife and 2yo son ten or fifteen years before, speaking no English,
and started out washing dishes in a local pizzeria. Long story short,
he now owned the pizzeria, and his BMW was proudly parked out front.
His English was still very rough, but with effort workable.

Eventually, I asked the obvious question: Why didn't you do all this
back in Greece? He answered "Impossible!", because one could not get a
business loan unless one were very well connected, and because it took
forever (and many bribes) to get all the many necessary licenses.
Here, the licenses took about a month in total, and he was easily able
to get the needed loans. He now owned a string of pizzerias, and over
time had brought his entire village over one-by-one to man the
pizzerias. And there they were, standing behind him and listening to
the story - these were mostly adults, not the usual collection of
pimply-faced surly teenagers. And the pizza was good.

If you ask the righties here, that is, of course, impossible. g They
say that the red tape and regulations in the US make it so.

However, we know that they're full of crap, as they demonstrate every
week. They can't be bothered to check their facts.

Well, depends on the righty in question.


The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

As we can see from the figures above, that's obviously not the issue.
You should have stopped with "Greece's problems are caused by gross
mismanagement." g

So why does the Greek government need to be propped up?


So far as that pizzeria chain owner is concerned, the streets of the US
*are* paved with gold.

Between opportunities and markets, it's a great place for people like
your Greek friend.

He would certainly agree. I've met other immigrants over the years
with different stories but the same conclusion.

The key was always the lack of impediment and friction in the US,
compared to their home country: same person, different environment, get
different result - it's the environment that made the difference. And
these are the people who voted with their feet.

Joe Gwinn

On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:53:26 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

I agree. Ball's comparison is not a good one.


Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Greece didn't belong in the Euro zone to begin with. It's a different
culture. Trying to shoehorn them into a northern European business and
financial culture was never a good idea.


Data point: something like one half of employed people in Greece work
for the government. How can this work? (I read it in the WSJ, but
don't recall where. When I asked a Greek coworker, he would not answer
the question, always changed the subject.)

This is not correct. The percentage who work for the government itself
is very low (7.9%). But add in those employed by public corporations,
and Greece (GRC in the chart) is still lower, at 20.7%, than many
other countries:

http://tinyurl.com/p6bxrb6

Countries with higher percentages include Norway, Denmark, France, and
the Netherlands.

And many others are in the same neighborhood:

Canada is 18.8%
The UK is 18.6%
The US is 14.6%
Switzerland is 14.5%

So percentages in that range can work. It's partly a matter of
culture, and largely a matter of how well they're run. It's difficult
to make a country with 20% or more competitive in global terms, but it
can produce a very nice life.

I'm not sure I buy this, no matter what the published statistics claim.
The Greeks clearly lied to gain admission to the Euro.

Those are OECD figures, based on the System of National Accounts. If
there are biases, the same biases apply to every country in the
system.


The big money is most likely in pensions.

Very likely.


If (when, probably) Germany declines to subsidize the Greek govt, it
will go bankrupt. This is actually a good thing, as it will force
housecleaning in Greece.

When you say "housecleaning," you're assuming that the desired result
is something like the northern European countries. The Greeks may not
agree. They may prefer to leave the euro and to have more flexibility.

But that's international finance on a level that's 'way over my head.


Nor do Greeks pay taxes. The Italians are the same in this, but with a
better economy. But they may be the next to go blooie.

They're both marginally functional under the present world economic
order.



Another data point: Probably fifteen years ago, I did a lot of
2nd-shift integration work, and got to know the owner of the local
pizza joint well. He was Greek, and had emigrated to the US with his
new wife and 2yo son ten or fifteen years before, speaking no English,
and started out washing dishes in a local pizzeria. Long story short,
he now owned the pizzeria, and his BMW was proudly parked out front.
His English was still very rough, but with effort workable.

Eventually, I asked the obvious question: Why didn't you do all this
back in Greece? He answered "Impossible!", because one could not get a
business loan unless one were very well connected, and because it took
forever (and many bribes) to get all the many necessary licenses.
Here, the licenses took about a month in total, and he was easily able
to get the needed loans. He now owned a string of pizzerias, and over
time had brought his entire village over one-by-one to man the
pizzerias. And there they were, standing behind him and listening to
the story - these were mostly adults, not the usual collection of
pimply-faced surly teenagers. And the pizza was good.

If you ask the righties here, that is, of course, impossible. g They
say that the red tape and regulations in the US make it so.

However, we know that they're full of crap, as they demonstrate every
week. They can't be bothered to check their facts.

Well, depends on the righty in question.


The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

As we can see from the figures above, that's obviously not the issue.
You should have stopped with "Greece's problems are caused by gross
mismanagement." g

So why does the Greek government need to be propped up?

Again -- mismanagement. That is, in terms of the euro zone.



So far as that pizzeria chain owner is concerned, the streets of the US
*are* paved with gold.

Between opportunities and markets, it's a great place for people like
your Greek friend.

He would certainly agree. I've met other immigrants over the years
with different stories but the same conclusion.

The key was always the lack of impediment and friction in the US,
compared to their home country: same person, different environment, get
different result - it's the environment that made the difference. And
these are the people who voted with their feet.

Joe Gwinn

On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 10:53:28 AM UTC-4, Joe Gwinn wrote:
In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about 40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS -
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

I agree. Ball's comparison is not a good one.


Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Greece didn't belong in the Euro zone to begin with. It's a different
culture. Trying to shoehorn them into a northern European business and
financial culture was never a good idea.


Data point: something like one half of employed people in Greece work
for the government. How can this work? (I read it in the WSJ, but
don't recall where. When I asked a Greek coworker, he would not answer
the question, always changed the subject.)

This is not correct. The percentage who work for the government itself
is very low (7.9%). But add in those employed by public corporations,
and Greece (GRC in the chart) is still lower, at 20.7%, than many
other countries:

http://tinyurl.com/p6bxrb6

Countries with higher percentages include Norway, Denmark, France, and
the Netherlands.

And many others are in the same neighborhood:

Canada is 18.8%
The UK is 18.6%
The US is 14.6%
Switzerland is 14.5%

So percentages in that range can work. It's partly a matter of
culture, and largely a matter of how well they're run. It's difficult
to make a country with 20% or more competitive in global terms, but it
can produce a very nice life.

I'm not sure I buy this, no matter what the published statistics claim.
The Greeks clearly lied to gain admission to the Euro.

The big money is most likely in pensions.

If (when, probably) Germany declines to subsidize the Greek govt, it
will go bankrupt. This is actually a good thing, as it will force
housecleaning in Greece.

Nor do Greeks pay taxes.

"Many Greeks do pay taxes and by law should. The Greek government has been lax in collecting them."

-- http://www.economist.com/blogs/graph.../daily-chart-0

The Italians are the same in this,

"Time to prepare and pay taxes (hours) in Italy was last measured at 269 in 2013, according to the World Bank."

-- http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ital...s-wb-data.html

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:53:26 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:20:39 -0400, Joe Gwinn
wrote:

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:55:39 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 3/23/2015 10:33 AM, dpb wrote:
On 03/23/2015 10:25 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:22:37 -0500, wrote:
...

Them was tough folks...

I'll say they were tough. We have plenty of Depression-era stories
in
my family, but combining it with the Dust Bowl must have made them
epic.

It hardened people in different ways, some became so concerned even
after the era was over they never did recover. I know of an old
fellow
only slightly older than grandfather down in the OK panhandle about
40
mi on W from us who never got over the feeling of needing to miser
everything--he never bought any newer or larger equipment nor other
improvements so when there were better years he couldn't take
advantage
of them owing to simply being so outdated couldn't do more than just
get
by.

The idea that it was a universally searing, wrenching experience is BS
-
a political myth. At its depth, 25% of the workforce was unemployed.
That's terrible, but it means 75% of the workforce was still working,
and life for them and their families went on more or less normally.

Greece has had unemployment in excess of 25% for over three years.
Their definition approximates ours: not working but seeking work. I
doubt if their depression is portrayed as ours was.

Greece's situation is not portrayed as ours was for good reason.
Greece has safety nets. In the early years of the Depression, the US
did not.

No Social Security or other safety nets. By 1932 alone, 273,000
American families were evicted from their homes. There were roughly 2
million homeless people in the US during the Depression.

And then there were the bank failures. No FDIC. By 1933, depositors
lost $140 billion through bank failures. 11,000 of the country's
25,000 banks collapsed. Lending almost stopped.

These things had cascading effects that disrupted life 'way beyond the
mere unemployment numbers.

There is a lot more to it than that, Ed. Greece is not a good parallel.

I agree. Ball's comparison is not a good one.


Greece's problems are caused by gross mismanagement, and Germany is not
willing to subsidize this.

Greece didn't belong in the Euro zone to begin with. It's a different
culture. Trying to shoehorn them into a northern European business and
financial culture was never a good idea.


Data point: something like one half of employed people in Greece work
for the government. How can this work? (I read it in the WSJ, but
don't recall where. When I asked a Greek coworker, he would not answer
the question, always changed the subject.)

This is not correct. The percentage who work for the government itself
is very low (7.9%). But add in those employed by public corporations,
and Greece (GRC in the chart) is still lower, at 20.7%, than many
other countries:

http://tinyurl.com/p6bxrb6

Countries with higher percentages include Norway, Denmark, France, and
the Netherlands.

And many others are in the same neighborhood:

Canada is 18.8%
The UK is 18.6%
The US is 14.6%
Switzerland is 14.5%

So percentages in that range can work. It's partly a matter of
culture, and largely a matter of how well they're run. It's difficult
to make a country with 20% or more competitive in global terms, but it
can produce a very nice life.

I'm not sure I buy this, no matter what the published statistics claim.
The Greeks clearly lied to gain admission to the Euro.

Those are OECD figures, based on the System of National Accounts. If
there are biases, the same biases apply to every country in the
system.

Given the reliability of Greek statistics, how would OECD really know?


The big money is most likely in pensions.

Very likely.


If (when, probably) Germany declines to subsidize the Greek govt, it
will go bankrupt. This is actually a good thing, as it will force
housecleaning in Greece.

When you say "housecleaning," you're assuming that the desired result
is something like the northern European countries. The Greeks may not
agree. They may prefer to leave the euro and to have more flexibility.

Well, I don't expect the Greeks to become German anytime soon. Or vice
versa, for that matter.

But without the easy loans that were possible in the Eurozone, the
Greek govt would have been forced to get a good bit closer to economic
reality many years ago and would not have been able to dig themselves
in so deep.

I think the Greeks want to stay in if they can get more "loans", but I
don't think that the decision is really theirs to make.

The Germans seem unimpressed with Greek claims that if they leave, the
Euro will collapse. Quite the contrary, ejection of Greece would make
a good example for Italy and Spain to ponder.


But that's international finance on a level that's 'way over my head.

This part isn't all that complex - the Greeks are spendthrifts. The
rest are details.

I wonder if there is a form of spendthrift trust one can use on a
sovereign. Other than simply cutting the money off and waiting for the
noise to stop.


Nor do Greeks pay taxes. The Italians are the same in this, but with a
better economy. But they may be the next to go blooie.

They're both marginally functional under the present world economic
order.

I'd hazard that the Italian people may not really care if their
national govt goes bankrupt - nobody except for some unfortunate
foreign bankers would notice. Well, people might miss the latest
Berlusconi dramas.


Another data point: Probably fifteen years ago, I did a lot of
2nd-shift integration work, and got to know the owner of the local
pizza joint well. He was Greek, and had emigrated to the US with his
new wife and 2yo son ten or fifteen years before, speaking no English,
and started out washing dishes in a local pizzeria. Long story short,
he now owned the pizzeria, and his BMW was proudly parked out front.
His English was still very rough, but with effort workable.

Eventually, I asked the obvious question: Why didn't you do all this
back in Greece? He answered "Impossible!", because one could not get a
business loan unless one were very well connected, and because it took
forever (and many bribes) to get all the many necessary licenses.
Here, the licenses took about a month in total, and he was easily able
to get the needed loans. He now owned a string of pizzerias, and over
time had brought his entire village over one-by-one to man the
pizzerias. And there they were, standing behind him and listening to
the story - these were mostly adults, not the usual collection of
pimply-faced surly teenagers. And the pizza was good.

If you ask the righties here, that is, of course, impossible. g They
say that the red tape and regulations in the US make it so.

However, we know that they're full of crap, as they demonstrate every
week. They can't be bothered to check their facts.

Well, depends on the righty in question.

And, while it's true that the US is relatively free of such nonsense,
this isn't automatic - governments and legal systems tend to become
encrusted and blindingly complex over time, and this tendency needs to
fought every step of the way, forever.

Often in history, it took a shooting revolution to fix the problem.

The main US example of encrustation and blindingly complex is the US
Tax Code.


Europe also has very restrictive labor laws, to the point that it's far
easier to divorce a spouse than to fire an incompetent worker. This
has the obvious effect of making companies *very* reluctant to hire,
leading directly to Europe's "structural unemployment". Germany
somewhat relaxed these laws, to good effect, and France is talking
about it. Sarkozy was going to do it, but lost the election. But he
may be back, and Hollande has been making noises.


The two data points are connected - Greece has far more government than
is healthy or affordable.

As we can see from the figures above, that's obviously not the issue.
You should have stopped with "Greece's problems are caused by gross
mismanagement." g

So why does the Greek government need to be propped up?

Again -- mismanagement. That is, in terms of the euro zone.

I certainly agree, so now we need to list the top five areas of
mismanagement that led to the present crises.

Overly generous pensions seem to be a large item, but there has to be
more to it than that. One assumes that there are many more
entitlements than Greece can afford.


Joe Gwinn

On Tue, 7 Apr 2015 23:55:23 +0000 (UTC), (Edward A.
Falk) wrote:

In article ,
Martin Eastburn wrote:

Sometimes I think CA deserves itself. Short sighted.....

Yabbut, as goes CA, so goes the USA... Got "spare change" signs?


From the Onion:

California Officials Assure Residents There Still Plenty Of Other Natural
Resources To Waste

http://www.theonion.com/articles/cal...e-still,38379/

I (heart) the Onion.

--
When a quiet man is moved to passion, it seems the very earth will shake.
-- Stephanie Barron
(Something for the Powers That Be to remember, eh?)

On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 3:21:09 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:38:33 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:35:11 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

I took some photos yesterday of Lake Castaic, which is a man made
lake at the foot of the Grapevine ..(mountain range I travel weekly
between Los Angeles and the Central Valley.)

https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...02/Castaic2015

Gunner

Man, that's dry. You're going to have to switch to drinking booze if
that keeps up.

Ed
===========================
I know there is a lot of hand wringing going on, but what
*REAL* steps have been taken? This appears to be the start
of another 1,000 year drought cycle that finished off
several indian civilizations from Central America
http://tinyurl.com/m8wnyzu up into the American southwest
http://tinyurl.com/mtfwusg .

Are there any steps being taken to implement drip irrigation
for the orchards, or replace open field agriculture with
hydroponics? These can cut the water needed by 90 to 95%
and increase yield per acre up to 10X. Israel seems to be
the leader in this technology. Extensive desalinization is
another pallative, but will require massive energy input,
and this can't be done overnight.

Anyone projected the effects of massive internal
migration/displacement if the American southwest (and much
of Mexico) returns to desert conditions? Will camels
replace SUVs? Inquiring minds want to know! :-)


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

(delurking) Always enjoy your posts, Mr. McDuffee. But this is the first time in many years I've seen you misspell a word. Palliative. No offense meant. (relurking)

More global drought/water shortage info

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ater-shortages

Two take-aways:

(1) The PRC takes action and does not just talk - talk -
talk.

(2) Given the energy required for desalinization, even by
reverse osmosis, it appears the PRC has made a breakthrough
on LF/MSTR [Liquid Fluoride/Molten Salt Thorium Reactor]
design and deployment. The brine produced by reverse
osmosis can also be a useful industrial input/resource.



--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 13:01:04 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

More global drought/water shortage info

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ater-shortages

Two take-aways:

(1) The PRC takes action and does not just talk - talk -
talk.

(2) Given the energy required for desalinization, even by
reverse osmosis, it appears the PRC has made a breakthrough
on LF/MSTR [Liquid Fluoride/Molten Salt Thorium Reactor]
design and deployment. The brine produced by reverse
osmosis can also be a useful industrial input/resource.

According to the Poseidon desal project in San Diego, it's only a 33%
boost in salt. Not that briny.

--
It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails,
admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt