"Freedom" thread or something - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: May 30 2015 at 23:37

rogerthat wrote:

My take on the link, if there's any, between regulation and libertarianism:

http://https://rothrocks.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/the-need-to-differentiate-cronyism-from-libertarianism/

Ah link won't work Cry

I like the title. I still do believe many libertarians are sincere in their beliefs and hopes, while I feel they are wrong/ill informed/overly ideological I think many people mean it and believe it is what's best.

My main gripe was at the political level, I think libertarian ideals, surging thanks to Ron Paul, was used and hijacked by the GOP, who has proven they will toss all the rhetoric aside. Which most "true" libertarians agree with. I can respect that.

I can't respect the ones who basically are out to just create some Ayn Rand fantasy land, and support cronyism.

I of course think even the good libertarians fail to realize their beliefs will create a crony state anyway, but the ones who outright want that, I have much disdain for. (My take: some have said they want to take apart the state so that way the very structure for abuse is lessened, but I feel they do things in reverse: giving the keys to the castle to the upper class/business sectors but arent removing gov, thus feeding the crony state. In theory,they should want to work on dismantling the gov first.)

I of course would point to the work of Steve Keen who has shown, using realistic models that actually do reflect real life, even in an economy with no gov and no central bank there can be booms, busts, depressions, debt fueled bubbles but I'm guessing they will either call it BS, or say it's impossible to make predictions using models at all and it's overly complex and etc, can't win LOL

Edited by JJLehto - May 30 2015 at 23:41

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: May 30 2015 at 23:32

rogerthat wrote:

JJLehto wrote:

Also, I don't think we needed any more proof but, here's a lot of boring sh*t, and a graph, simply plotting the relationship between austerity and growth.

As it says, one should be hesitant to make bold statements, but it seems safe to say there is absolutely no evidence austerity helps the economy...and I don't think it's insane to say this shows quite plainly it's probably a negative experience for the economy. He even excluded Greece from the chart, which the inclusion of would make the results even more negative.

http://www.economonitor.com/dolanecon/2015/04/08/did-austerity-work-in-britain-one-chart-tells-it-all/

Of course, the supporters of austerity have long dropped it's good for the economy, and switched to "It's necessary" "We have to pay off the debt" but I believe most euro nations have seen their debt ratio rise. So I am not sure what justification they use now.

Pat is busy with his PhD/life, Rob I guess has stopped caring/gotten pre occupied, Logan is busy doing his thing and MoM I think finally left for good because he couldn't stand me. I'd love to have some debate but if not, I'll keep occasionally posting mainstream and/or leftist econ stuff LOL

Austerity in macroeconomic terms means you are squeezing govt debt which would then have to be supported by an expansion in private debt. So even as the size of govt reduces, with its attendant effects on the economy, private sector is expected to take up the tab for debt in a depressed environment. Doesn't work. Fiscal consolidation becomes necessary when fiscal profligacy has been tolerated for too long with the effect of either eroding the country's currency of its value or triggering high inflation or both. It is not clear that either was a particular problem in Europe and in that case inflating their balance sheets a little to get rid of the debt quickly may have been more prudent. But the damage is done. I was just having a discussion with my dad on the way to work on weak demand everywhere you look in the economy...and govts fighting shy of doing what they have done in the past. It's almost like redistribution of 'wealth' from the poor to the rich.

Oh I of course agree/know austerity during weak economic times is bound to squeeze the economy (thus making Debt rise as it has) just I was being a snarky a****le and getting a final few jabs in that Austerity has literally no ground left to stand on.

Yeah, I hate to get into such stuff but since this is the net and we can say such things without fear: Yes, I really feel gov in recent decades has been redistributing wealth upward. There's the obvious ways, but there's those subtler ways you talk about, by neglecting demand and leaving things to stand as they are.

I also still think QE has been a major source of inequality and wish I had the data (or time! LOL

) to look into it, I'd be curious if it was possible to figure out what wealth would like if we didn't have QE, or if we let the housing market/asset prices/stocks fall to natural levels.

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: May 30 2015 at 23:27

Blacksword wrote:

I bought into the gold thing a few years back (not literally - just the arguments for investing) but I'm inclined to agree with some of the comments here. If it all goes Mad Max, gold will be as much use as a marzipan d1ldo.

The funny thing is, (since I'm sometimes accused of being some academic intellectual) I thought it was common knowledge gold or any commodity is a poor investment choice, it is indeed sold to people via Mad Max "When the collapse happens!" though even that, this is never discussed but what happens when the dollar does eventually lose its status? sh*t, if you're smart, and concerned, you will just invest in Yuan LOL

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: May 30 2015 at 09:25

My take on the link, if there's any, between regulation and libertarianism:

http://https://rothrocks.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/the-need-to-differentiate-cronyism-from-libertarianism/

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: May 30 2015 at 07:14

JJLehto wrote:

Also, I don't think we needed any more proof but, here's a lot of boring sh*t, and a graph, simply plotting the relationship between austerity and growth.

http://www.economonitor.com/dolanecon/2015/04/08/did-austerity-work-in-britain-one-chart-tells-it-all/

Blacksword View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130

Posted: May 30 2015 at 00:52

I bought into the gold thing a few years back (not literally - just the arguments for investing) but I'm inclined to agree with some of the comments here. If it all goes Mad Max, gold will be as much use as a marzipan d1ldo.

Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: May 29 2015 at 13:43

Also, I don't think we needed any more proof but, here's a lot of boring sh*t, and a graph, simply plotting the relationship between austerity and growth.

http://www.economonitor.com/dolanecon/2015/04/08/did-austerity-work-in-britain-one-chart-tells-it-all/

Edited by JJLehto - May 29 2015 at 14:34

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: May 29 2015 at 13:26

I suppose that isn't really tooo ground breaking, I think most people who've known a cop/have some common sense know the job was much more "boring" than the hyped up TV shows and movies.

Though I am glad a more critical look has been taken in recent months, given their use of black sites in Chicago (anyone hear about that?? Police holding and torturing people without rights or anything for up to 24 hours!) "overly aggressive" tactics and the not so secret world of racial profiling rearing its ugly head again.

Still I do feel a bit for them, sometimes they just can't win. I had to laugh that some of the die hard, (quite over the top and irrational) supporters of our glorious police force, instantly started flipping a sh*t on the police officer who asked someone to remove an American flag from his truck (which was blocking his view) all types of horrible things being hurled at him. Ridiculous!

I still say if we could get a robust economy, especially one where the neediest places have direct help, we could kind of rebuild this country from the bottom up, have our local police forces properly staffed and crime/social tension will naturally ease a bit as people get better off. Oh, and while it may be loathed here to say, increased tax revenues do mean better staffed police forces, no need to buy equipment from the military...

Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784

Posted: May 26 2015 at 10:41

Hey look I'm contributing to this thread:

Myth of the Hero Cop

"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: April 21 2015 at 00:39

Indeed, but sadly some, (some of which I am positive have a vested interest in doing so) push gold as the ultimate long term investment.

One doesn't even need a class, just the internet, to see its volatility (it's a commodity, Schiff of all should know how boom and bust they are!) but guess the allure is always there, or fear.

Yeah that actually was the first dislodging of my flirtation with austrian/libertarian econ thought. It just never happened, and the response was often "oh no no the Central Banks hold the price down!" One website claimed, through his magic secret info, gold is "really" at $50,000 and oz and they were certain when the spike finally happened (again, fiat collapse) "The price of gold WILL reach $100,000 an oz" And of course every month this failed "Well the markets dont get it, the CB holds the price down!" and etc...it was too much for me.

Edited by JJLehto - April 21 2015 at 00:40

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: April 19 2015 at 19:29

Gold is not so much a great investment as it is a great store of value. If you lock in money for a good 20 years or so in gold, maybe more, you are very unlikely to lose money on it and you'd probably be sitting on a 20% return for the whole period or something like that. You can't say that positively about equity or real estate. In India, passing on gold jewelry as an inheritance is a long standing tradition, esp mothers giving some or a lot of their jewelry to their daughters when they get married.

But it's not an instrument anybody should be looking at for a medium term investment and by all accounts, Schiff was terribly disappointed that Armageddon didn't materialise soon enough for that mother of gold rallies he's waiting for and he tried to blame the markets for not understanding what was going on, which is nuts.

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: April 19 2015 at 19:23

Yes, MineisThis also mocks him a lot and it could well be one and the same guy. Yeah, obnoxious tone. I am sure some of the experts whose testimonials they bank to mock Schiff have also been wrong on other things. It's virtually impossible to be right all the time in economics. LOL

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: April 19 2015 at 17:30

Is that term around over there? Wish I could say I invented it but sadly not, gold bug is thrown around alot, usually at the Austrians/Conservatives who get a little extreme in their passion of gold. We all know the negatives of a gold standard but yeah, even as an investment it's really not as good as the bugs constantly try to claim.

Again their thinking is pretty paranoid survivalist...whenever someone will say (correctly) "so yeah what about that price of gold now?" they just sit back and say "Oh just keep holding on! When it all crashes, and it will, then those holding the gold will be on top!" I am not being funny, this is more or less their mentality..waiting for the death of the dollar and economic implosion that is inevitable with fiat and then they will be the kings on their gold throne.

And I took a jab at Schiff's "waiting" but Ron Paul has been crying this rally since 1971...44 years is some true patience!

Ah yes, I have seen that channel Schitt Report, or whatever it was. I have no proof of this, but I think whoever runs that has another, there's a channel "Minethis1" on YT which while I agree with most of their videos they have such an arrogant, explosive tone and behaves like such an utter a****le I can't watch em.

I wonder if Mike Norman is behind it LOL

he's some wannabe actor turned wall street investor (and it shows) he is such a wall street/sociopath ultra agressive type and real t**t. Shockingly he got to be part of a talk hosted by Columbia University! Makes me wonder if I should even try academia or just be a total dick on youtube, that way may be more effective LOL

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: April 19 2015 at 07:30

lol @ gold bug. Indeed, Erin Ade, the host of Boom Bust, once asked Jim Rogers if a good time to buy gold would be "when Peter Schiff gives up on gold". LOL

Yeah, looks like he earned his proverbial 15 min of fame when he predicted the meltdown but he has been wrong on so many other things that there's a whole youtube channel dedicated to his gaffes called, appropriately, Peter Schitt. LOL

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: April 19 2015 at 03:38

Agreed, I've not seen tons of Russia Today but what I have was very impressive.

In fact I found it through Steve Keen indeed LOL

and a few other of the economist I like have appeared on there. They must have diverse viewpoints represented Smile

because I've seen lots of Michael Hudson on RT and he is one crazy dude. Like, talks of us becoming a neo feudal state, parasitic bankers and just burning vitriol about the failures of todays strand of market capitalism.

Schiff. Yeah, like many I was lured to the Austrian world after realizing he called the crisis years before it happened and had the nerve to say "this is a bubble" but unlike many I turned, or ran, away from him after realizing everything he said after was wrong.

Not just wrong, but as I learned more econ beyond the layman level I realized much of what he said isn't really accurate.

Ultimately, he seems to just be a goldbug and I think may just be a stopped clock (a dead clock whose hands are stuck perpetually at 5:00 PM will still be "right" every time 5 PM rolls around LOL

) and he's too biased...not real economics per se, but just typical Austrianism, catering to his anti government/fed views. Even if one gives credit to Schiff for calling our last crisis, he and his ilk have been dead wrong since (hyperinflation, death of the dollar, soaring int rates) and I wonder if he'll keep pushing "Just wait. It is coming, sometime." until the next recession hits then can claim "aha I told you!"

As I've stated here many times, the "post Keynesians" also called our crisis, some stated so as far back as 2002!! And they have a very strong argument behind it, more than "government sucks" and they also were right about their predictions of stagnation, fighting off deflation, the Eurozone, QE, austerity, the US dollar, int rates and etc

I will be fair, while I think his logic isn't quite right Schiff did indeed call the 2000s bubble, and is right this stock market boom is another bubble purely fed by QE, and I'd say he's right the economy is still not strong and "QE may never raise rates" seems hyperbolic but he is right, the pressure is immense to keep the QE going and rates near 0. We already discussed the political ramification of QE, ironically the people Schiff serves: wealthy and investors, who benefit greatly. The Fed also does have an obsession, which I can get, with keeping the stock market up. QE, I imagine, will have it tumble. Hell, even implying QE may be tapered led to swings, it's a tough situation.

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: April 18 2015 at 23:46

Not really a huge fan of Schiff, by the by. He's right on a lot of things and wrong on a lot of others, just like a lot of other people, I suppose.

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: April 18 2015 at 23:26

Not totally related to the thread, but I've been watching Russia Today lately, particularly Boom Bust, and am surprised by the quality of its programming. For a state sponsored channel, it is positively awesome and surprisingly capitalist in its economic views. I used to think it was a bit too libertarian but I've realised it's not necessarily so, and they've had Steve Keen tear apart austerity hawks on the show.

Peter Schiff gave a particularly caustic interview to the show, where he pooh poohed the notion that Fed would raise rates anytime soon, if ever! His last thoughts on HP's bizarre decision to simultaneously sack thousands of staff and also buy back its shares had me thinking about the pros and cons of ESOPs. I think that it ultimately only promotes short termism where the professional exec is only interested in trading on the share price and would rather avoid tough strategic decisions. Maybe a Goldman Sachs like arrangement where the exec takes a share in both the profit as well as the loss is better, if at all it is desired that he should 'participate in the financial performance of the company. It would appear that many American giants have lost their way these last few years, concerning themselves more with cost cutting and managing the share price. And who does that affect but ordinary people who are either on their rolls or who ultimately depend on the well being of these companies.

Posting the link here. Embedding doesn't seem to work on chrome for some reason, only on this website.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0-wQASGZMc

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: April 13 2015 at 13:25

Oh I see. And I have heard people saying the same thing, just it's not usually at the mainstream level...I figured it was just out of their thought process or too scandalous to talk about.

It can't truly be known if this was the intent or not, but I don't think the results can be denied.

Yeah it's just a crazy world these days. I do get that argument for smaller gov but I think it's just a matter of reality vs theory. Anything can work, but will it? All depends on how things are done. Like I said I remember the article about US states competing with each other, offering quite grand packages, to lure BMW and Mercedes plants to their city. Or how there's always pressure to suppress various things to lure business.

On the flip side, one could do as you said: Just deal with the cards as they fall and adjust in different ways, like simply shifting to more "green friendly" business and etc or higher wages. I know the nordic countries, as well as Switzerland and some others are very open trade, and function well and in ways better than here.

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: April 10 2015 at 04:45

Yeah, exactly, govts should occupy themselves with regulation and enforcement rather than intervention. Unfortunately calling the bluff on MNCs goes against the current dogma of 'friendly' tax regimes. In that sense I understand and support the libertarian bias for smaller govt. Not so much small by way of getting out of many areas but simply smaller sized units. Large countries broken up, large states broken into smaller states. It may at least revive grassroots politics. The present Tv driven format of elections ensures that the biggest corporate sellout wins.

As for QE, Stephen Roach was on air on Bloomberg the other day saying QE only benefits the rich. Couldn't catch his arguments though; it was at the office canteen and volume was turned off.

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: April 09 2015 at 13:37

As for globalization, I dont think anyone seriously thinks it as altruistic but it does indeed bring jobs and better lives to certain areas. Even if to better their profits as the bottom line for the owners.

I more or less agree, I think part of it all is ideological and part of it is "redistribution upward" and a purposeful attempt to do so. Really I increasingly wonder if just the textbook is either a bit archaic given todays world, or a bit incorrect in its implementation/unintended consequences. I DO think part of it is has been a purposeful move to benefit the top, to suppress wages, keep unemployment a bit higher, keep labor weak and I only think this because mainstream economics agrees all this is good, even if they dont say it directly (except Greenspan)

I also take a dark view on "being competitive" because I take that to mean: lower wages. Germany has proven the textbooks are right in some fashion: If you get wages low enough you will create employment and exports. Maybe the world will reach balance once we're at a global low level but is that ideal?

And I know comparative advantage and all that says wages wont equalize, there will always be higher wage sectors and etc but with intl competition now involving management, IT, healthcare, engineers and math and science...I think it just will drive the inequality gap more and more.

So yeah I'll agree with Roger, there could be policies to counter this all. I'm for free trade and globalization, as long as each country still has their own say and as he said "let the cards fall where they will" and counter the impacts. I think my problem is the accepting globalization while also accepting we should slash gov...because now we're taking whatever the markets give us and I don't think its been beneficial to most.

I could be wrong, Ive only done undergrad level but do the textbooks really discuss having factories in Bangladesh, moving the profits through a shell Irish company, stuffing the wealth in a Luxembourg bank while the US HQ can hire extremely well qualified people from overseas who'll work for less always? Or if not simply possess insane amounts of skill? There needs to be more gov, not less, to balance these pressures imho and the fact MNCs can basically win-win-win without taking a loss ever people and govs see little benefit from it, unless you're Ireland or Luxembourg who house the banks and shell companies LOL

Edited by JJLehto - April 09 2015 at 13:57