Geithner Discovers Credit (Post-Davos)!

Discussion in 'Economy' started by mascale, Mar 29, 2009.

  1. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    Appearing on NBC-TV Sunday Morning interview programming, as opposed to the ABC-TV Sunday interview programming appearance: The U. S. Treasury Secretary created the assertion that "Capitalism" is reliant on "Capital," aka Credit.

    The assertion was not quite like that, but more in the context of credit being the foundation of it all. Her Majesty's PM, of course--appearing before the assembled Imperials and others alike--had created the same premise for policy at Davos Conference, early on in the year.

    The Nobel Committees are not quite up to that, so far, but the enlightened self-interested, laizzez-Faire, aboriginie-world nations so far were among the first to be coaxed along into modern economics: At Davos, and now on U. S. Television, NBC.

    Clever, How they do that.

    Governor Reagan, of California, would go-on to misuse the credit concept, using it narrowly to fund engineers and military manufacturing, "entrepreneurs." The first great bail-out was underway, in some bizarre "Trajectory," of policy. A certain aboriginie spirit, no doubt "enlightened" about "laizzez-faire," would later on latch on to some 'spirit," or "witchcraft," emulation of it all. At one point, Elder Bush I had called it, "Voodoo Economics."

    The aborigine spirit was underway.

    Minority youth unemployment, in the United States, would ultimately approach 50% heights, as a consequence. Not at all unlike the current infatuation with all things Afghani, and "poppy-crop" related: A certain tribal restortion of "Turf Wars" could commence.

    The admired, "Reagan-Revolution" was upon the United States.

    And so the replay became Bush II, Terms I and II. Taken off the federal income tax rolls, commencing with the 1986 raising and indexing of the standard deduction and personal exemptions in U. S. Federal Tax Code--the "stimulators" of the economy would even themselves be left out of any way to ammortiz national credit.

    The matter got serious when Bush II, Term I, cut taxes twice--to no stimulating avail. 19 dead Saudis were atomized on 9/11, and so clearly Afghanistan--not at that time in the poppy-crop business--was to blame.

    But among some of the Ivy League aborigine enlightened, then in the "Spirit of Entrepreneurhip" of Ronald Reagan(?), of the original Voodoo Economics: Then clearly the poppy-crop markets all needed to be freed, and the invasion was on.

    The Reagan Revolution was back on track!

    And still there was no stimulus(?), or however the Ivy League, and Nobel Committee-blessed, economists like to discuss it. In fact, in the Spirit of Lincoln Itself--the Katrina Disaster would eventually upon the ravaged land.

    It was finally concluded that Iraq was not Saudi Arabia either, and so the procurements debacle was on. Even Calabasas, Countrywide Financial--saw more money than even the Clinton Administration had provided, and so the sub-primes would prosper.

    Her Majesty's Government, finally more leftist, had made no similar case. Davos would become the reminder, when the Britons would again remind the more aborigine, enlightened self-interested, laizzez-faire families--about common reason and good sense.

    And so the message arrived at NBC, 3/29/2009--though the Secretary himself actually gave thanks on ABC: For pointing out that he himself had been part of the regulatory bureaucracy all-along. Knowing all the Wall-Street, "Revolutionaries," is apparently not to be regarded as being one of them.

    Anyone is reminded of the quaint U. S. legislative gambit, in the these matters: "House Un-American Activities Committee?!"

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
    (The former colonies do seem to so like giving credit, where credit is due!)
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2009
  2. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Actually credit and modern capitalism are fellow travelers, I think.

    In a perfect world (which this ain't obviously) credit is capital's way of finding something productive to do itself.

    The most productive elments of our society (our corporations) also happen to be the largest users of other people's money in oder to produce more goods to sell.

    That's sort of why this economic mess is ...well, getting so messy.

    Instead of excess capital being channeled into production, the nitwits who ran our financial world started playing debt-instrument casino with it.
     
  3. neurosport
    Offline

    neurosport BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    794
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +39
    credit is not capital.

    industrial robots, railways, engineers - that's capital.

    casino was being played with toilet paper, not capital. capital had long since gone to China at that point.
     
  4. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    The entire financial industry--mostly unregulated, but also the regulated parts--itself has no clue about the role, or the extent of the role: That credit plays in modern life.

    The mascalian geometry, originating of measurement, or "scaling" problems--how do humans know what they know, especially educated humans--mainly opens up the dialogue about credit.

    In other words, the doctoral teachers threw this stuff out of schools over 35 years ago. Credit is far more liberating than money, which Marshall McLuhan regarded "The Poor Man's Credit Card." That was in "Understanding Media," 1964. A "cool" medium is more participatory, and with over $40.0 tril. of it, just in the United States: Anyone would guess a lot of "participation."

    Money is subject to "number," also a "cool medium." Number is subject to computing. Therein lies the problem. If the left side of a rectange is thought of as an income scale, then the outcome of fixed percentage raises would be a diagonal from the lower left to the upper right. Little kids can draw in little lines, (intervals, with an infinite number of points on the line): And show the computing, just thinking of the left side "income scale" as being from 0 to 12. That is like another measuring device, a ruler. Little kids also know what rulers are for. Headmasters use them down the hallways of the various schools for disciplinary purposes. Even the Taliban appear to know this, and destroy the schools.

    That is a second form of showing, "scaling gone mad."

    The Pythagorean Theorem applies, in the rectangle, and so instead of the top diagonal being 12 plus twelve, it is closer to 12 plus five. The diagonal length is about 17.

    So what does any idiot do? All persons of the Reagan Administration sent money to shore up the top of the income scale, anyone would say it!

    But credit ammoritization requires a market. Even Obama made the comment in Los Angeles Times, just in the last week.

    When the Obama Administration got the Congress and Senate to sign-on to the "Refundable Tax Credit," concept: Then the lower income market, and those neighborhoods, (aka ghettos and barrios), got a chance at the loot.

    So if by "hand-in-hand" is meant something more than even just "symbiosis:" Then Credit is the foundation itself, of all market economies, of whatever type.

    Money, based on credit, is actually better regarded a medium of mass communication. The value of the money is in the scale.

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
    (Bring back, HUAC--Does have a kind of chanty lyric to it, clearly!)
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2009
  5. neurosport
    Offline

    neurosport BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    794
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +39
    yes.

    wealth is wealth. money is paper. printing money does not create wealth. what it does is create an illusion of wealth.

    this illusion invariably leads to mistakes on all levels and these mistakes are eventually paid for with REAL wealth.

    the sooner we return to reality the better. problem is we've been living an illusion for so long now we don't know what reality is or where to look for it.

    after more than a decade of bubble economics can anybody really know which businesses today are legitimate and which illusions ? which ones should get credit and which ones should go bankrupt ?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    Yes, printing money creates the illusion of wealth.....until inflation hits....

    But for now we have the illusion that government is the answer....:lol:
     
  7. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    So Screaming Eagle and Neurosport are actually mostly incorrect! The creation of money is not inflationary, but the distribution of additional created money is inflationary!

    Credit was all in the box in the Eisenhower Administration. After Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Carter--various policies and wars had created incomes and even more credit. So much financing occured, that credit in relation to personal income actually slipped outside of the box, into a fifth quadrant. Somehow that outside-of-the-box credit had to be repaid. In the Carter Administration--and later in Argentina, where the data is less clear--inflation went into double digits. Lower incomes were not beneficiaries under a fixed percentage raises kind of regime. Nixon had signed the Social Security, fixed percentage COLA, into law in 1972. Banks and corporations had long paid dividends and interest rates in fixed amounts. The unions were still viable, and computing COLAs and across-the-board (fixed percentage) raises. Governments did the same thing, and even to transfer payments.

    That describes how mascale got thrown out of the doctorate at Indiana University, a state-funded place. Full faith and Credit is of course to be accorded the laws of the one state in all the other states. Ford, Carter, and Reagan actually came later: And with a vengeance. Fixed Percentage raises are not discussed to this date.

    Math raises are not allowed to be discussed in the schools, and especially at universities.

    By now, the total credit market has slipped into the sixth quadrant, and beyond. Anyone can fit a "collapse point" into an economy when total credit is 2.5 times personal income. There is no personal income, balancing that fifth quadrant--to pay it back--and so prices rise, making goods more unaffordable in relation to incomes. Prices can't rise anymore, and credit cannot be ammortized. A collapse is under way.

    Gay Old Maynard Keynes gets applied(?), howver, in the United States, and so the government steps up procurments as its part of the credit debacle. Before Reagan, the idea was to prop up lower incomes. After Ronald Reagan, Democratic Senator and Treasury Secretary Lloyd Benson--clearly of patrician Texas, though mascale is definitely of patrician, Texas family origins--finally pointed out that basically the United States was only creating, "the illusion of prosperity." The Democratic Speaker of the House, from Texas, would at one point even suggest that the United States economy would not long endure with "everyone delivering pizzas to one another."

    Republican/Ivy League/Business School/University management principles are now completely discredited, but have always had serious flaws.

    Alan Greenspan's Federal Reserve kept warning about inflation, with the federal deficits: But the old economic models were clearly flawed. Inflation is not even a serious problem, even now. His stupid, old fart, mentor liked to call it, "too much money chasing too few goods and services."

    So where is it now?"

    Actually, too many people have no current basis to repay loans, have had the problem for several months, and now there is a financial crisis. It originates of a scaling problem.

    The real problem is the distribution of the bloated money. It all went to the top--and the top has no need of it, except maybe now.

    An inflated supply of money is actually needed worldwide: But after the distribution computing problem gets solved--which it was, 35 years ago, on paper, but left to be among the answers, "blowin' in the wind."

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
    (On the West Coast, Even Hare Krishna understands about, "Chant and Be Happy," as in, "Bring Back HUAC!?!")
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2009
  8. neurosport
    Offline

    neurosport BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    794
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +39
    i never did understand how the f*** is it that we have a "service economy" here in US ?

    how can economy be driven by delivering pizza and remodeling kitchens ?

    the finer things i own are made in Germany, Japan and Korea. the shittier stuff i own is made in China, Mexico and Taiwan. the only thing American is my Orange Juice.

    how can this be ? it's not like they're drinking Florida's Natural in China ? how can economy be based on consumption rather than production ?

    ever since i moved ( from Ukraine ) to US i knew something was wrong here. i had a Girl come to me from Germany and as we drove around New York she kept asking "where are the factories?"

    NOWHERE !
     
  9. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    It was noted above that "robotics" are a kind of capital, and so "things" can actually be made in quantity, more and more by machines.

    Employment figures are a kind of mentality, all their own. "Services" include financial, medical, educational, legal, (1 of 450, all by themselves), business--including outsourced steno and janitorial, and so on--consulting, and if Hollywood and High-Tech are included: Also the insulting services.

    The "service" economy figures are actually a celebration of the success of manufacturing technology. There is a certain, "freedom from toil," in some of the service employment.

    The Chinese themselves will notice this soon enough, and likely in the current century. So will India, and much of South America, Africa, the rest of Asia and Australia. Employment in Antarctica has pretty much always been entirely services.

    Canada may have notice this too, and in at least two languages.
     
  10. AssHatZombie
    Offline

    AssHatZombie Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6
    The illusion that capitalism requres credit is perpetuated by statists who like the power of fiat currency.
     

Share This Page