Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I don't have the pre-requisit skills of wittyness delivered entertainingly, unfortunately
jon snow kept fluffing his lines
a bit like murray walker's latter years.
maybe time to wind his role down. more samira ahmed in his place, though. not a fan or the guru-murthy.
one that turns to face whoever it's interviewing, then turns back in disgust.
can you tell what it is yet
do it a night I'm in, creaky
was the comment about how inflation is making it harder for /families/ to make ends meet. As if non-families aren't affected. What are families anyway? There's obviously no fixed answer. But we know what the news means when it says it.
Anyway, if that's not it, the two common links, that I can see, between this thread and your last one are 1) inflation, and 2) Libya.
Last time it was a 'Surprise fall in inflation to 4%'. This time it's a rise to 4.5%. But no solid suggestion of a rise in interest rates to mitigate it, even though (to quote the FT) "the base rate is the furthest below retail price inflation since 1978, creating a real interest rate of minus 4.7 per cent." and "Low interest rates help offset the pain of fiscal tightening. A dose of inflation also helps the government in its quest to bring down Britain’s debt pile...". Blah blah blah...
As for Libya, there seems to be an ongoing case of mission creep. Open talk about actively creating regime change etc compared to the original basic protection of civilians thing.
The ongoing Royal distractions...?
I get the feeling that you might be talking about the delivery style more than the content though.
I've been hoping someone would start a thread about it
just in general, and it gives a starting point.
Its not just the inflation, but also the circumstances surrpounding it......for instance if you are a dumb PM or BoE head then you might use some of the traditional counters to inflation, which would be a mistake as these will be contra-indicatory to the people and systems that are under pressure from inflation as it is. The effects of the counters to inflation (in these circumsstances) will add to the negative effects of inflation (either directly or through intermediary systems)
costs for food and fuel/power are going to spiral anyway (fuel prices were hugely artificially low (If you take a long term sustainable economy PoV)
The gov should be looking at an exit plan from economic growth/prosperity as a planned model for our future
i hate quoting big names but you guys dont seem to be able to pick up on the obvious elephant in th room, he puts it more understandably convincing than i do
so it's to do with oil
I have to go to bed now
said the other day that peak oil probably happened in 2006? I don't really know whether he's the guy in the know or what.
Still, we should probably be thinking about doing something about that.
I actually have to go to bed now
I've just come back into this thread after watching exactly, thinking that his comments about the devaluation of that and then reading up on who he is.
Currently watching this Channel 4 interview from March 2009, which seems to be a very similar interview:
The bit he mentioned tonight (and in that vid) about the (and I'm paraphrasing here...) devaluation of currencies in order to weedle their way out of massive debts drew me straight back to the inflation thing, and how Gideon doesn't really mind that inflation's high, as long as investors don't get spooked and the public doesn't get pissed off about not being able to pay their mortgages.
I wondered why you hadn't responded to my mention of inflation at http://drownedinsound.com/community/boards/social/4282246#r5985191
At the moment in the vid (@ 11.50) he's talking about how the UK went bankrupt in the 70s, had to be bailed out by the IMF and the gov couldn't sell government bonds. And that he reckons it'll happen again.
He tells a convincing tale. He's largely sacked off the US and the west, and bought his kids up in Asia, learning Mandarin. He advises investing in agriculture. Hmmm...
it's also a commodity thing.
On the basis that the US dollar is becoming increasingly untenable as a the world's reserve currency. And that, although China have the US by the short and curlies in terms of stockpiles of cash, the Chinese currency isn't an adequate replacement as a reserve currency. And there are no other candidates.
So whilst the world has had faith in the US dollar as a reserve currency (aka an almost literal free pass to print money), all that means is that the world has had faith in the ability of the US to steadily grow. But that growth seems to be hitting the buffers. So the faith will wobble. And currency will become less and less reliable.
he proposed a global reserve currency 75 years ago.
We don't really solve problems with solutions any more though.
I have mentioned the problem with the us dollar being the reserve currency before.......thing is if china did start to unload them, and stole a march on the other brick countries, then that would thoroughly p*** them off, and inhibit their ability (cos they would lose too much when they finally got round to selling their reserves) to say 'buy yuan' if the chinese did want to make that the new reserve..........the euro is a nono right now.
The other problem that even Jim Rogers is not considering (cos that wouldbe game over for him as well) is that although investing in agriculture is a good idea in some ways....cos it will be the one thing that could continue to increase in relative importance as food per head dwindles........is that the investment structure might collapse.....so it would be good if your investment might consist of 'protectable/defendable productive farmland ,and the processing ability needed for it' if your investment were merely shares then it is not that safe.
Its weird that the person that seems to see the big picture of the future as clearly as I think I do, is actually a rabid capitalist.
I thoroughly endorse his claims that govs of all hues have devalued their countries worth (he says currency) by their political ambitions and machinations.
Hmm Im frightened again now, cos I agree with most of what he says, regarding the future (if not the way to tackle it)
In the below post I suggest how to get that new global currency
it seems BRIC were talking about this in 2009:
but obviously nothing was done. I have zero faith in any significant international innovative decision being made on this kind of thing until things get very very bad or the US defaults or something.
The splitting the dollar idea is interesting. Has that ever been discussed?
I dont know if theyd discussed the splitting of the dollar (which would need something to be given to US), thats my idea cos it would remove one of the biggest problems (i.e. china disinvesting itself of ginourmous ammounts of dollars without hurting BRI's holdings of them.....and the other problem on deciding 'WHAT' currency, to me, splitting the dollar is the best practical solution, it also has no 'new' political controvesy (apart from the US....but then how can they really insist on continuing to have their currency propped up, without any other justification.
I know what you mean about them not being innovatively decisive......but what else, other than decisive innovation can help check the horrid awfulness we are sliding into (as confirmed if you listen to Jim Rogers...i know you guys dont believe me)
(PS I have taken (your?) advice and dropped Korea from BRIC, because they will not have as much influence on the 'new world' and its possible curency as China, India, Brazil AND Russia.......also Africa and OPEC......with nuclear western nations having some residual importance.......actually another country that should maybe be added to the BRIC is another C.......cos Canadia still has tons of natural resource cw the size of their population.....although i guess that americans that get knacked by what is coming will flood northwards cross the border?
would be for an agreed and controlled movement to a new BRIC dominated reserve currency, with OPEC and Africa in there too
although no one african nation will be able to represent at the same level as BRIC, OPEC will need to feel they own it too, as a controled and phased scale down of oil will be needed.
I would suggest that the US,UK and EURP would have some say (even if their markets are not healthy enough to dictate)
simply because of the fallout of them sinking too fast and the danger of having declining states with a lot
of military clout.
Of course there could be another, more radical, and at first unfeasible, way of doing it.
by trying to detach and delink reserve US dollars from the actual US dollars and its performance (I know its performance is also
dependant on how many are sold as reserve.....but thats the point...for it to continue to be
the reserve it needs to be healthy and boyant, and it isnt.....if they managed to split the dollar
then this would allow the bric countries to maintain what they already have invested
.....just call them 'Reserve dollars' and allow the 'US dollar' to start to diverge in value (it would do this very rapidly
so rapidly that the US will probably not agree to it, which is why they would need some guarentees and
mechanisms to protect the US (perhaps the BRIC countries could pay the US to Police the world.....but with the BRIC countries
(and Africa) telling the US how to police......ok that sounds preposturous....but something has to be found......
just because countries will not want to change how it is needed to be changed, does not remove the need to change
nor does it lessen the catastrophic effects if they resist change too much. (not that the change will not
also be sen as catastrophic....just less so)
If the west had any sense they would be putting all their efforts into alternative technologies for power n stuff, so that in effect countries would become componants supplying to a controlled world economy (maybe this is unattractive but it is now essential due to past govs of countries absolute chronic ineptitude and forsight)
but there it is.......and its far less ridiculous than saying that things will continue in much the same fashion
and it's kind of a commentary on a book by Maurice Blanchot, called "The Space of Literature". The kick is that Thurston's book takes the form of his various markings and marginalia on the Blanchot text, but with the Blanchot text actually removed, so that all you get in Thurston's book are scrawled notes along the edges of the page, whole series of hand-drawn lines beneath now absent sections of text, etc. All you get, really, is Thurston's running, spontaneous response to the Blanchot text.
Creaky's comments in this thread remind me of that book.
well i never.
Or did someone POKE YOU IN YOUR EYE.
and it aint sad cos this is not news to me.