Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

IGNORED

Credit deflation and the reflation cycle to come.


DurhamBorn

Recommended Posts

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46872929

Signals a lack of demand for the goods produced and that the money being pumped into the economy isnt flowing into consumption like they want.  But China has been pumping cash for the last 10 years, there are diminishing returns even with trillions of Yuan being introduced to the system.

Why not give them a 4 day weekend, think of how much they could consume!

Its all getting very minsky like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 11.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, MrXxx said:

Agree, but can I add most Labour (most self-serving politicians in fact) MPs are the same...and whilst the populus allow themselves to get drawn in to the Red vs Blue team both parties together are laughing at our naivety and personally profiteering from it!...Ask yourself how competent/`fit for purpose` is our current parliament?...the sooner we do this as an electorate the sooner things will change for the better!

Sorry off topic I know, lets get back to making money...or at least preserving it.

How about this, the DM have combined both topics for us:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/experts/article-6610789/How-guard-wealth-Comrade-Corbyn.html

Revealed: How to guard your wealth from Comrade Corbyn!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Majorpain said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46872929

Signals a lack of demand for the goods produced and that the money being pumped into the economy isnt flowing into consumption like they want.  But China has been pumping cash for the last 10 years, there are diminishing returns even with trillions of Yuan being introduced to the system.

Why not give them a 4 day weekend, think of how much they could consume!

Its all getting very minsky like.

Not sure what to make of that at an economic level, but bringing in such measures to increase consumption seems very wrong in terms of the survival of the human race.

What next, a law that any consumer item more than 12 months old must be destroyed and replaced with new?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A_P said:

So the attraction is his voting record? Interesting. 

No my point was look what they do not what they say! 

Conservatives make loads of speeches about helping the poor and stopping corruption.. but then you see how they voted on things like, wars, housing fit for human inhabitation.. You realise they are lying.. 

I’m no Corbyn fanatic but the more the rich spend time, effort and money attacking him for absolute nonsense, the more I think they are scared of his equality anti banking racket stance. 

They never publicise his speeches..

”you can’t make peace by bombing people”

Hence he is always talking to leaders of terrorist groups.. Not selling them weapons like Tories do.. 

"For a generation, instead of finance serving industry, politicians have served finance. We've seen where that ends: the productive economy, our public services and people's lives being held hostage by a small number of too-big-to-fail banks and casino financial institutions," he said.

He has said more I agree with than any other politician.. Hence I would rather vote for him than the CON’s who are totally corrupt and destroying our country for profit to private companies..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, null; said:

How about this, the DM have combined both topics for us:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/experts/article-6610789/How-guard-wealth-Comrade-Corbyn.html

Revealed: How to guard your wealth from Comrade Corbyn!

Ah nice to see such a balanced, unbias piece of journalism that presents all of the facts...if only the DM provided perforations down the middle of each page to make it easier to use! :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, macca said:

No my point was look what they do not what they say! 

Conservatives make loads of speeches about helping the poor and stopping corruption.. but then you see how they voted on things like, wars, housing fit for human inhabitation.. You realise they are lying.. 

I’m no Corbyn fanatic but the more the rich spend time, effort and money attacking him for absolute nonsense, the more I think they are scared of his equality anti banking racket stance. 

They never publicise his speeches..

”you can’t make peace by bombing people”

Hence he is always talking to leaders of terrorist groups.. Not selling them weapons like Tories do.. 

"For a generation, instead of finance serving industry, politicians have served finance. We've seen where that ends: the productive economy, our public services and people's lives being held hostage by a small number of too-big-to-fail banks and casino financial institutions," he said.

He has said more I agree with than any other politician.. Hence I would rather vote for him than the CON’s who are totally corrupt and destroying our country for profit to private companies..

 

Twice someone has said that to me in two days and Im not the one that needs to be told that 😂

Seemsto me you're happy to accept what he says because it aligns with your own views. Perhaps even holding belief in the possibility that one man can change the system. I'm just interested why people seem to like him or even in some cases shed a tear. Yet it mainly boils down to "think of children" type rubbish he says rather than what he does. Funny that. Or it goes back to the red Vs blue etc 

So besides a few votes, saying the right stuff what has the man actually achieved in business, public service or leadership that would lead you to believe he will do as he says. Consider that all before him say one thing and do another, which leads us back to your quote 

"look what they do not what they say"

Really my whole point for this is should he find himself in the hot seat can we expect the scare stories to come to fruition? Personally I'm of the opinion no, but to expect a short and sweet buy opportunity that we continually see throughout the years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sleepwello'nights
9 hours ago, macca said:

You need to look at his voting record.. voted against all wars, including Blair’s war

He stands for improved living standards for all, not exploitation of the middle and lower classes for profit. 

 

I agree with a lot of what you say about Corbyn. He does make a stand for the rights of an individual and there is one particular issue I agree with his stance on. It is regarding the right of an individual to act according to their own moral compass. He stood his ground even though he faced strong opposition on it from both the moral indignation of public opinion, biased by the media, and from within his own party.

But, and its an enormous but, the ideology of socialism is the Marxist principle "from each according to their ability and to each according to their needs". We've seen what happens to society when this principle is adopted. The example of the USSR should be enough to show how destructive it is because it goes against human nature.

That to me is the main reason why I am against socialism; its main aim is for everyone to be given what they need without a mechanism to make them contribute. It redistributes wealth but hinders its creation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Thorn said:

Re gold here’s a piece on how it all gets dug up for anyone who has an interest in the yellow stuff.

https://www.gold.org/about-gold/gold-supply/how-gold-is-mined

 

Meanwhile...

Thanks for that link, I will have a read later. This website contains a good knowledge base around the fundamentals of PM investment...

https://www.geologyforinvestors.com/articles/kb/

Ok some of the articles definitely are more geology than investment but that’s interesting too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sleepwello'nights said:

I agree with a lot of what you say about Corbyn. He does make a stand for the rights of an individual and there is one particular issue I agree with his stance on. It is regarding the right of an individual to act according to their own moral compass. He stood his ground even though he faced strong opposition on it from both the moral indignation of public opinion, biased by the media, and from within his own party.

But, and its an enormous but, the ideology of socialism is the Marxist principle "from each according to their ability and to each according to their needs". We've seen what happens to society when this principle is adopted. The example of the USSR should be enough to show how destructive it is because it goes against human nature.

That to me is the main reason why I am against socialism; its main aim is for everyone to be given what they need without a mechanism to make them contribute. It redistributes wealth but hinders its creation.  

But is capitalism any more successful?, and there have been many more capitalism opportunities to demonstrate the `superiority` of that system!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MrXxx said:

But is capitalism any more successful?, and there have been many more capitalism opportunities to demonstrate the `superiority` of that system!

Exactly.

Capitalism would have allowed banks to fail in the GFC instead of what happened with QE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lavalas said:

 

Meanwhile...

Thanks for that link, I will have a read later. This website contains a good knowledge base around the fundamentals of PM investment...

https://www.geologyforinvestors.com/articles/kb/

Ok some of the articles definitely are more geology than investment but that’s interesting too.

Very good this, thank you Lavalas. So a drone flying over some land to be prospected actually does work because of these ground-facing sensors.

That means some of the junior miners who talk this up when they have done it might be on to something.

 

The other article points out the time delay of 10 yrs or more from discovery to viability and thats for only 10% of those mines found to contain stuff though so even with the right gear and info from a drone the company still has a mountain to climb to get it out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MrXxx said:

But is capitalism any more successful?, and there have been many more capitalism opportunities to demonstrate the `superiority` of that system!

And I'd say those opportunities have been well and truly taken. People have been escaping in millions to capitalist countries decade after decade, with hardly anyone going the other way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sleepwello'nights
10 minutes ago, MrXxx said:

But is capitalism any more successful?, and there have been many more capitalism opportunities to demonstrate the `superiority` of that system!

I would say yes. As it’s evolved in the developed west it allows an individual to realise the benefits from his efforts. Sure there are checks that stop naked capitalism allowing all the benefits to be captured by a few who have the most strengthen and authority.

T he response I like best, can’t remember who said, is capitalism may not be perfect but is there a better system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sleepwello'nights said:

That to me is the main reason why I am against socialism; its main aim is for everyone to be given what they need without a mechanism to make them contribute. It redistributes wealth but hinders its creation.  

Are Norway, Sweden, Denmark,  Finland socialist?

Every year win the award of the best places in the world to live! 

NHS socialist experiment, social housing, a safe affordable place to live.. 

Again I’m not a fan of everything they do, poor Sweden has massive amounts of rape now from all the immigration they have had, but the socialist government don’t like talking about it as it’s against their woolly views.. 

CONservatives privatised water firms, 10 of them now have billions in debt and pay no UK tax as they are registered in tax havens.. water has gone up 40% above inflation since privatisation mainly to pay shareholders and ceo salaries.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, macca said:

Are Norway, Sweden, Denmark,  Finland socialist?

Every year win the award of the best places in the world to live! 

NHS socialist experiment, social housing, a safe affordable place to live.. 

There's a difference between socialism and social democracy. Social benefits as you describe can be overlaid on top of a free-market capitalist economy, and indeed have to be implemented as such as they are massively expensive and the funding needs to come from somewhere. If you want to run a welfare state with an inefficient central-planned economy to support it then you'll go broke in a flash. If you go full retard with social benefits and disincentivize economic activity and productivity then you're fucked regardless of your economic backbone.

If you swing the pendulum too far in the direction of cut-throat capitalism, you can always try to push it back - at least you have money to try and do so. If you go too far down the other end you'll find it's much harder to reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sleepwello'nights
37 minutes ago, macca said:

Are Norway, Sweden, Denmark,  Finland socialist?

Every year win the award of the best places in the world to live! 

 

But they're so fucking cold!.

Actually it struck me several years ago that in really cold places socialism could work. Because the climactic conditions were so harsh an individual would find it difficult to survive on their own so they would have to work in conjunction with others to overcome the harsh conditions. Slackers wouldn't be tolerated for long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sleepwello'nights said:

I would say yes. As it’s evolved in the developed west it allows an individual to realise the benefits from his efforts. Sure there are checks that stop naked capitalism allowing all the benefits to be captured by a few who have the most strengthen and authority.

T he response I like best, can’t remember who said, is capitalism may not be perfect but is there a better system. 

But can we trust those who have the authority to administer the checks...see Thorns comment about not letting the banks fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sleepwello'nights said:

I would say yes. As it’s evolved in the developed west it allows an individual to realise the benefits from his efforts. Sure there are checks that stop naked capitalism allowing all the benefits to be captured by a few who have the most strengthen and authority.

T he response I like best, can’t remember who said, is capitalism may not be perfect but is there a better system. 

Have you been living in a cave for the last ten years? Capitalism failed catastrophically in 2008 because the system of checks and balances on the financial services industries established in the aftermath of the Great Recession were systematically diluted or repealed by right-wing neoliberal ideologues in the three decades after 1979, allowing debt leveraging to proceed without constraint in the shadow banking system. It's taken an extraordinary (and ongoing) intervention by the world's treasuries and central banks to keep the lights on. Industrial civilisation would have effectively ended the day that Lehman Brothers closed its doors otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sleepwello'nights
9 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Have you been living in a cave for the last ten years? Capitalism failed catastrophically in 2008 because the system of checks and balances on the financial services industries established in the aftermath of the Great Recession were systematically diluted or repealed by right-wing neoliberal ideologues in the three decades after 1979, allowing debt leveraging to proceed without constraint in the shadow banking system. It's taken an extraordinary (and ongoing) intervention by the world's treasuries and central banks to keep the lights on. Industrial civilisation would have effectively ended the day that Lehman Brothers closed its doors otherwise.

Capitalism didn't fail. Government/Central bank intervention was used to stop capitalism operating. Industrial civilisation wouldn't have ceased. There would have been a shock, scorched earth but then society and the economy would have recovered. Probably from a sounder base than we currently have. 

The overleveraged banks would have been liquidated. Bondholders and shareholders would have seen their investments in the banks plummet. The assets, staff  and systems would have been acquired by other organisations and they would have restarted under new ownership. The new owners freed from the legacies of bad investment decisions in the past would have become more profitable. The world would not have ended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Capitalism didn't fail. Government/Central bank intervention was used to stop capitalism operating. Industrial civilisation wouldn't have ceased. There would have been a shock, scorched earth but then society and the economy would have recovered. Probably from a sounder base than we currently have. 

The overleveraged banks would have been liquidated. Bondholders and shareholders would have seen their investments in the banks plummet. The assets, staff  and systems would have been acquired by other organisations and they would have restarted under new ownership. The new owners freed from the legacies of bad investment decisions in the past would have become more profitable. The world would not have ended.

But they were bailed out by the taxpayer. Us.

...so they did fail and the government protected them from failure.

Isn’t capitalism supposed to let failures fail so only winners win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sleepwello'nights
7 minutes ago, Thorn said:

 

Isn’t capitalism supposed to let failures fail so only winners win?

Yes that's the theory. The Central Banks at the request of Governments wouldn't let capitalism take its course. We have a hybrid system in the developed west currently where capitalism has been corrupted, in the interests of the majority. TBH I don't know enough about political or economic theory to be able to give more in depth explanation of how what we have now is not pure capitalism and whether the changes are preferable to pure capitalism. I think they are.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Yes that's the theory. The Central Banks at the request of Governments wouldn't let capitalism take its course. We have a hybrid system in the developed west currently where capitalism has been corrupted, in the interests of the majority. TBH I don't know enough about political or economic theory to be able to give more in depth explanation of how what we have now is not pure capitalism and whether the changes are preferable to pure capitalism. I think they are.  

Not sure any more. Low wage workers’ taxes going to pay for the failed bankers mistakes doesn’t feel like winners winning and losers losing. 

Feels like well-connected failures winning I think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Thorn said:

But they were bailed out by the taxpayer. Us.

...so they did fail and the government protected them from failure.

Isn’t capitalism supposed to let failures fail so only winners win?

This seems a bit of a confused response.

Capitalism recognises the need for failire of poorly run businesses. So a failure of business isn't a failure of capitalism. It's the balance of the equation that capitalism and other systems within our universe need.

Hence, government intervention circumvented the inherent capitalist fail-safe waaaaaay prior to 2008 because they had already previously intervened by assisting the financial sector in becoming the largest industry in the West. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Noallegiance said:

This seems a bit of a confused response.

Capitalism recognises the need for failire of poorly run businesses. So a failure of business isn't a failure of capitalism. It's the balance of the equation that capitalism and other systems within our universe need.

Hence, government intervention circumvented the inherent capitalist fail-safe waaaaaay prior to 2008 because they had already previously intervened by assisting the financial sector in becoming the largest industry in the West. 

I don’t think it’s confused at all.

Winners win. Losers fail.

isn’t that capitalism?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...