Debt: The first five thousand years

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby wintler2 » Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:32 am

compared2what? wrote:..



...and think: "Seriously and non-rhetorically, is there anything AT ALL they wouldn't do to stop baby-boomers from receiving their full (or maybe any) Social security and Medicare benefits?"

Because, you know. You can kind of feel the hate. I found it frightening.


Whoa, that is pretty full on .. and completely deceitful too, as China doesn't actually own that much US debt, and is selling not buying.

The most basic problem with debt is all interest-to-be-paid equals new/more natural capital to be commodified, consumed, and discarded. If me as lender has $10 interest from my $100 loan (@10%), thats $10 more (for e.g.) paper to be cut out of a forest somewhere. And i suspect theres already enough 'money' to 'pay' for all the trees left (~10 trillion).
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:40 am

^^Indeed.

That doesn't apply (or anyway, not precisely) to all government debt, though. A lot of it is "intra-governmental," which is yet another euphemism for SS and Medicare. About...Well. It's about fifteen percent at the moment. But that's misleadingly, anomalously, and transiently low. If/when revenues go back to their usual levels, it'll go back to the same 40-to-50-percent range it was occupying in 2007, then keep right on going. Absent hugely costly unfunded wars and so on, I mean.

....

There's more to it than that, of course.

I vaguely recall hearing that we never paid off the (huge and unprecedented) debts we racked up in WWII, they just became obsolete.But I'm not sure whether that's accurate. Or even true. I'll look into it.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:41 pm

compared2what? wrote:

...and think: "Seriously and non-rhetorically, is there anything AT ALL they wouldn't do to stop baby-boomers from receiving their full (or maybe any) Social security and Medicare benefits?"

Because, you know. You can kind of feel the hate. I found it frightening.


That's a lot of hate. So much so that it's hard to laugh despite the awesome stupidity level. (Lincoln among the icons representing those old conservative pay-as-you-go principles as one of several whoppers.)
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:35 pm

JackRiddler wrote:
That's a lot of hate. So much so that it's hard to laugh despite the awesome stupidity level. (Lincoln among the icons representing those old conservative pay-as-you-go principles as one of several whoppers.)


It makes an impression, doesn't it?

Hence the strength of my response to seeing Nomi Prins ringing changes on the same set of Pavlov's bells. (Demonization of debt; extremely showy but largely unsupported displacement/reassignment of blame for it onto a dummy arch-villain; highly contrived disappearance/rejection of revenue/regulatory issues; and us-vs.-them/do-or-die-type populist appeal to emotional violence.)

She might be too thoroughly indoctrinated herself to be fully aware of what she's doing. I couldn't say. But in the context of the political present, there's really no way that's not effectively a coded assault on SS and Medicare. So I don't really care. Inciting large numbers of people to expend their last ounce of energy and all the courage of their convictions on marching themselves into dire poverty or the grave is just plainly and simply a vile thing to do. No matter why you do it. That's my position.

...

I guess that since "Wall Street" and "health care" seem to have loosely similar (or at least non-contradictory) cardboard-iconic values to both Prins and Americans for Prosperity, they might also be signatures. I mean....I sure wouldn't vote to convict on that basis alone. But it's possible that they're red flags.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby Elihu » Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:19 pm



...and think: "Seriously and non-rhetorically, is there anything AT ALL they wouldn't do to stop baby-boomers from receiving their full (or maybe any) Social security and Medicare benefits?"

Because, you know. You can kind of feel the hate. I found it frightening.


social security and programs like it have been discussed in this and other threads. some points:

the taxes are regressive
the taxes are going up
the quantity of payouts are decreasing
the the payouts are depreciating
the trust funds have been spent
the future of the program is real-time tax, borrow, payout.

and the solution in the minds of the clients seems to be more social security.

the ability of such a crude propaganda piece to offend keeps the line of inquiry squarely on the launching pad. right where the oligarchs want it to remain...
But take heart, because I have overcome the world.” John 16:33
Elihu
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:11 pm

Elihu wrote:
social security and programs like it have been discussed in this and other threads. some points:

the taxes are regressive


True beyond dispute.

the taxes are going up


Well...They're regressive. Are they also going up? That's not intended as, like, a challenge or anything. I'm just confused.

the quantity of payouts are decreasing


Again, simple, value-free confusion: Meaning "wrt Social Security benefits, the size of the average pay-out is decreasing"?

Because I wouldn't be surprised. But they're pro-rated. So it wouldn't be a simple cause-and-effect thing, if so.

the payouts are depreciating


Not on their own or for inherent reasons, surely.

the trust funds have been spent


Borrowed. But yes.

the future of the program is real-time tax, borrow, payout.


The future of the program is uncertain. But it won't stay solvent forever without an influx of revenues, even if benefits were to be cut. Directly or indirectly. Which I don't think they should be.

That means someone's taxes do have to go up, pretty much. But the tax burden presently borne by the well-to-do isn't exactly dragging them ever downward. So there is a fair and just approach to that inevitability possible, in theory.

and the solution in the minds of the clients seems to be more social security.


I have to admit that I think that would be great. But right at the moment, I'd happily settle for "as much social security as people assume they're entitled to because they are."

the ability of such a crude propaganda piece to offend keeps the line of inquiry squarely on the launching pad. right where the oligarchs want it to remain...


Sad, but true.

But I really think you and I just have a legitimate disagreement about what is and isn't the policy that's in the best political and economic interests of the country, from a common-good/general-welfare perspective. As happens, in countries with large, diverse populations. So fwiw: No ill will at all on this end, as I hope there isn't on yours.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:22 pm

.

Social Security taxes have not been going up. This is false. Federal taxes have not been going up. This is false.

The last two years, payroll tax has been subject to a 2-point temporary cut. This is the only reason it appears currently that SS is close (but not over) the line to paying out more than it takes in.

I do have ill-will toward misinformed blah-blah from someone who has focused on this issue repeatedly, and yet still makes factually false statements, when these evince a pattern lifted straight from the kill-the-old-people propaganda of the Peterson Institute, catfood commission, et al.

No federal taxes have gone up in a long time. None whatsoever.

All that is in sight in terms of policy demands from either ruling party is that income taxes on the 1% may be restored to Clinton-era levels, if the Bush tax cuts are finally canceled. Nothing more.

If the "fiscal cliff" happens -- and I certainly hope it does, and that any deals are delayed until the new Congress -- then income taxes on all will be restored to Clinton-era levels. But this will be the case only until a deal gets done. Which it will be, at least for middle-class taxes. The Republicans will not be able to afford obstructing that. This is why the "fiscal cliff" is the best option until the new Congress.

The Social Security trust fund is in T-bills. These strangely are still considered safe by private investors, who flee to them every time the SHTF. (Not strangely; I'm being ironic.) The revenue raised from those T-bills was not spent on "entitlements" (which actually are earned benefits, paid through payroll tax). Earned benefits are not the cause of deficits or debt. The money from the SS T-bills was spent on wars and expanding the military-torture-intelligence-terror-deep state complex in a series of historic crimes.

Social Security is easily sustainable with cuts to the murder budget and increases in taxes on the rich above the current levels, which represent the all-time postwar low. The "Social Security crisis" is an invention.

The real crisis is for capitalism, and its ability to draw sustainable profits from non-cannibalistic activity. This is why they want to make the working class pay through austerity. The other real crisis is that of ecology. When this civilization as a whole fails to reform its methods of getting energy and of over-consumption in general, it will end up wrecking its own ecological basis. The disasters that follow will make even the worst of the "Social Security crisis" scenarios look like a fucking joke.

Money may not always talk, but bullshit walks.

.

PS - After 2008 China put through a stimulus plan that was three times larger, proportionate to GDP, than the one implemented here.
Last edited by JackRiddler on Tue Nov 20, 2012 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:02 am

JackRiddler wrote:.



Social Security is easily sustainable with cuts to the murder budget and increases in taxes on the rich above the current levels, which represent the all-time postwar low. The "Social Security crisis" is an invention.


You're right. And I was therefore in error when I said it wouldn't be solvent forever without someone paying more taxes. But I believe that wasn't for no reason, I'm sorry to say. Because even though maybe I'm wrong again, I at least think that something like that is the case for Medicare. With "something like that" meaning "if nothing's done to address it, funding it's on track to be a very big problem, maybe but not necessarily of crisis-like proportions."

Anyway. I think that health care is what all the fiscal-cliff fuss and bother that darest not speak its name on social-insurance issues is really about. But I was confused earlier. So maybe I am again.

I kind of hope so.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Tue Nov 20, 2012 5:00 pm

compared2what? wrote:
I vaguely recall hearing that we never paid off the (huge and unprecedented) debts we racked up in WWII, they just became obsolete.But I'm not sure whether that's accurate. Or even true. I'll look into it.


^^Basically true, it turns out. The details are here, as are others.

I always forget how much debt Reagan incurred, for some reason. Probably the lack of reminders.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby Elihu » Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:01 am

http://mises.org/media/7671/Repudiating ... xsrc=audio

the numbers from the time period are quaint now.


___________________
(bad old embed code originally meant for old windows media player embeds of some sort. now removed from main posting screen.)
here's what was enclosed in old wonky embed tags:
http://library.mises.org/media/Audio%20Essays/Repudiating%20the%20National%20Debt%20Murray%20N%20Rothbard.mp3
___________________


in case you make it to the end of the half hour:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/20 ... 12-results

Image
But take heart, because I have overcome the world.” John 16:33
Elihu
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:54 am

Elihu?

I'm going to listen to the whole thing, impartially, with an open mind. I swear. But I'm only two minutes and forty-two seconds in at the moment, and there have already been two major flat-out bald-faced lies. So, you know. That's not promising.

However, I did restrain my impulse to finish one of the sentences about the weeping GOP that began "They cried because..." by saying to the screen "...they're a bunch of big, fat cry-babies." FWIW.

^^That's meant to be understood as good-humored joking around, in the funny-cause-it's-true vein, btw. Meanng: I did think it, and was amused by it, but did also realize that it was, in context, totally unfair.

More later.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:56 am

Okay.

Elihu, in all sincerity, how can you not notice that there wasn't one single ACTUAL bad thing to which that audio essay could point, while saying: "And there's the problem."? To the point that it has to do stuff like (a) go looking for analogies in the 1800s when, in fact, nothing was going on that's the least little bit analogous to the present; or (b) play fantasy games about what might happen if the entire debt had to be paid off next year, which it doesn't and won't, that being -- literally -- a pure, 100 percent fantasy and not an imminent threat.

Also. The entire characterization of social security is just ludicrous. Completely. The fund is invested in treasury bonds, which are the safest, most reliable and generally solid investments on planet earth. That's not a ponzi scheme. It's fiscal good-stewardship.

I really don't get why this is so persuasive to you. Taxes are a drag, no doubt. But you/we/society does get something in return for them. Due to the collective nature of you/we/society, some parts of that something are only beneficial for some, and some parts are only beneficial for others. But that's life. Assuming that you're not actually being robbed blind at exorbitant rates for no return at all in the form of, as they say, "the general welfare and common good of the community," at a minimum, you're getting the benefit of living in a society that doesn't have the old, weak, and afflicted actually dying in the streets. That's not an inconsiderable benefit. And American tax rates are not, at present, exorbitant. In fact, they're very, very low.

Government waste is another story. But it's not actually a major factor wrt either debt or taxes. And it's not something that there's any reason to think would be meaningfully addressed by reducing either. So it's irrelevant.

Oh! I almost forgot. That thing about how increased public investment means a corresponding decrease in private investment is categorically false. A myth. Untrue.

___________

Seriously. Apart from its appeal to the desire to stop paying taxes, what recommends this line of argument to you? As in: "You believe it would be good because taxes would be reduced and [....], even though that benefit would come at the cost of providing retirement payments and medical benefits to people over 65/free public education to all through the 12th grade/VA benefits to those who have served/the preservation of national parks and wilderness/etc., etc."

Because, you know, shutting down the CIA is not going to save four trillion dollars. Even if you throw in another five or six federal agencies. Not nearly. You'd have to scrap all of the above and more to achieve that kind of reduction in spending. And it would really be more than a little shady to be decrying Chapter 11 bankruptcy as a sanctioned form of creditor-robbery with one breath while advocating for the dissolution of the Social Security trust for no better reason than your wish for a personal tax break with the other. As I'm sure you'll agree.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby compared2what? » Tue Dec 04, 2012 4:53 am

Additionally, it's sometimes kind of hard to believe in the bona fides of all these people who are so very dedicated to reducing the debt and/or deficit, when there are so many uncontroversially and universally successful cost-cutting measures available and in-use in countries all over the world that they absolutely refuse to consider or even mention.

For example. You know what would really reduce debt and deficit spending over the long haul? If we could have single-payer healthcare like everybody else. That's what. But you know what happens when you suggest it to the enemies of debt? They' start crying.

It's problematic. There's really no relatively prosperous country on earth that's as mean-spirited and stingy with its social insurance programs as the United States. None. And not many that have lower taxes, not coincidentally. Yet, for some reason, at this juncture in time, we must admit that Americans simply can't put up with the already low tax burden well enough to fund the already mean-and-stingy social insurance any longer? Why?
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:08 am

Our Collapsing Economy and Currency
The Coming Crash of America
by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Is the “fiscal cliff” real or just another hoax? The answer is that the fiscal cliff is real, but it is a result, not a cause. The hoax is the way the fiscal cliff is being used.

The fiscal cliff is the result of the inability to close the federal budget deficit. The budget deficit cannot be closed because large numbers of US middle class jobs and the GDP and tax base associated with them have been moved offshore, thus reducing federal revenues. The fiscal cliff cannot be closed because of the unfunded liabilities of eleven years of US-initiated wars against a half dozen Muslim countries–wars that have benefitted only the profits of the military/security complex and the territorial ambitions of Israel. The budget deficit cannot be closed, because economic policy is focused only on saving banks that wrongful financial deregulation allowed to speculate, to merge, and to become too big to fail, thus requiring public subsidies that vastly dwarf the totality of US welfare spending.

The hoax is the propaganda that the fiscal cliff can be avoided by reneging on promised Social Security and Medicare benefits that people have paid for with the payroll tax and by cutting back all aspects of the social safety net from food stamps to unemployment benefits to Medicaid, to housing subsidies. The right-wing has been trying to get rid of the social safety net ever since Franklin D. Roosevelt constructed it, out of fear or compassion or both, during the Great Depression.

Washington’s response to the fiscal cliff is austerity: spending cuts and tax increases.

The Republicans say they will vote for the Democrats’ tax increases if the Democrats vote for the Republican’s assault on the social safety net. What bipartisan compromise means is a double-barreled dose of austerity.

Ever since John Maynard Keynes, economists have understood that tax increases and spending cuts suppress, not stimulate, economic activity. This is especially the case in an economy such as the American one, which is driven by consumer spending. When spending declines, so does the economy. When the economy declines, the budget deficit rises.

This is especially the case when an economy is weak and already in decline. A declining economy means less sales, less employment, less tax revenues. This works

against the effort to close the federal budget deficit with austerity measures. Instead of strengthening the economy, the austerity measures weaken it further. To cut unemployment benefits and food stamps when unemployment is high or rising would be to provoke social and political instability.

Some economists, such as Robert Barro at Harvard University, claim that stimulative measures, the opposite of austerity, don’t work, because consumers anticipate the higher taxes that will be needed to cover the budget deficit and, therefore, reduce their spending and increase their saving in order to be able to pay the anticipated higher taxes.

In other words, the Keynesian effort to stimulate spending causes consumers to reduce their spending. I don’t know of any empirical evidence for this claim.

Regardless, the situation on the ground at the present time is that for the majority of people, incomes are stretched to the limit and beyond. Many cannot pay their bills, their mortgages, their car payments, their student loans. They are drowning in debt, and there is nothing that they can cut back in order to save money with which to pay higher taxes.

Many commentators are complaining that Congress will refuse to face the difficult issues and kick the can down the road, leaving the fiscal cliff looming. This would probably be the best outcome. As the fiscal cliff is a result, not a cause, to focus on the fiscal cliff is to focus on the symptoms rather than the disease.

The US economy has two serious diseases, and neither one is too much welfare spending.

One disease is the offshoring of US middle class jobs, both manufacturing jobs and professional service jobs such as engineering, research, design, and information technology, jobs that formerly were filled by US university graduates, but which today are sent abroad or are filled by foreigners brought in on H-1B work visas at two-thirds of the salary.

The other disease is the deregulation, especially the financial deregulation, that caused the ongoing financial crisis and created banks too big to fail, which has prevented capitalism from working and closing down insolvent corporations.

The Federal Reserve’s policy is focused on saving the banks, not on saving the economy. The Federal Reserve is purchasing not only new Treasury bonds issued to finance the more than one trillion dollar annual federal deficit but also the banks’ underwater financial instruments, taking them off the banks’ books and putting them on the Federal Reserve’s books.

Normally, debt monetization of this amount results in rising inflation, but the money that the Federal Reserve is creating in its attempt to manage the public debt and the banks’ private debt is hung up in the banking system as excess reserves and is not finding its way into the economy. The banks are too busted to lend, and consumers are too indebted to borrow.

However, the debt monetization poses a second threat that is capable of biting the US economy and consumer living standards very hard. Foreign central banks, foreign investors in US stocks and financial instruments, and Americans themselves observing the Federal Reserve’s continuous monetization of US debt cannot avoid concern about the dollar’s value as the supply of ever more dollars continues to pour out of the Federal Reserve.

Already there is evidence of central banks and individuals moving out of dollars into gold and silver bullion and into other currencies of countries that are not hemorrrhaging debt and money. According to John Williams of Shadowstats.com, the US dollar as a percentage of global holdings of reserve assets has declined from 36.6% in 2006 to 28.7% in 2012. Gold has increased from 10.5% to 12.8% and other foreign currencies except the euro increased from 38.4% to 44.4%.

Russia, China, Brazil, India, and South Africa intend to conduct trade among themselves in their own currencies without use of the dollar as reserve currency.

The EU countries conduct their trade with one another in euros, and although not reported in the US media, Asian countries are discussing a new common currency for trade among themselves.

The world is abandoning the use of the dollar to settle international accounts, and the demand for dollars is falling as the Federal Reserve increases the supply of dollars.

This means that the price of the dollar is threatened.

Concern over the dollar means concern over dollar-denominated financial instruments such as stocks and bonds. The Chinese hold some $2 trillion in US financial instruments. The Japanese hold about $1 trillion in US Treasuries. The Saudis and the oil emirates also hold large quantities of US dollar financial instruments. At some point the move away from the dollar also means a move away from US financial instruments. The dumping of US stocks and bonds would destabilize US financial markets and wipe out the remainder of US wealth.

As I have previously written, the Federal Reserve can create new money with which to purchase the dumped financial instruments, thus maintaining their prices. But the Federal Reserve cannot print gold or foreign currencies with which to buy up the dollars that foreigners are paid for their US stocks and bonds. When the dollars in turn are dumped, the exchange value of the dollar will collapse, and US inflation will explode.

The onset of hyperinflation can be as sudden as the collapse of a currency’s exchange value.

The real crisis facing the US is the impending collapse of the US dollar’s foreign exchange value. The US dollar’s value in relation to silver and gold has already collapsed. In the past ten years, gold’s price in US dollars has increased from $250 per ounce to $1,750 per ounce, an increase of $1,500. Silver’s price as risen from $4 per ounce to $34 per ounce. These price rises are not due to a sudden scarcity of gold and silver, but to a flight from the dollar into the two forms of historical money that cannot be created with the printing press.

The price of oil has risen from $20 a barrel ten years ago to as high as $120 per barrel earlier this year and currently $90 a barrel. This price rise has come about despite a

weak world economy and without any supply restrictions other than those caused by the attempted US occupation of Iraq, the Western assault on Libya, and the self-harming Western sanctions on Iran, impacts most likely offset by the Saudis, still Washington’s faithful puppet, a country that pumps out its precious life fluid in order to save the West from its own mistakes. The moronic neoconservatives wish to overthrow the Saudi Arabian government, but what more faithful servant has Washington ever had than the Saudi royal house?

What can be done? For a number of years I have pointed out that the problem is the loss of US employment, consumer income, GDP, and tax base to offshoring. The solution is to reverse the outward flow of jobs and to bring them back to the US. This can be done, as Ralph Gomory has made clear, by taxing corporations according to where they add value to their product. If the value is added abroad, corporations would have a high tax rate. If they add value domestically with US labor, they would face a low tax rate. The difference in tax rates can be calculated to offset the benefit of the lower cost of foreign labor.

As all offshored production that is brought to the US to be marketed to Americans counts as imports, relocating the production in the US would decrease the trade deficit, thus strengthening belief in the dollar. The increase in US consumer incomes would raise tax revenues, thus lowering the budget deficit. It is a win-win solution.

The second part to the solution is to end the expensive unfunded wars that have ruined the federal budget for the past 11 years as well as future budgets due to the cost of veterans’ hospital care and benefits. According to ABC World News, “In the decade since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, 2,333,972 American military personnel have been deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan or both, as of Aug. 30, 2011 [more than a year ago].” These 2.3 million veterans have rights to various unfunded benefits including life-long health care. Already, according to ABC, 711,986 have used Veterans Administration health care between fiscal year 2002 and the third-quarter of fiscal year 2011.

The Republicans are determined to continue the gratuitous wars and to make the 99 percent pay for the neoconservatives’ Wars of Hegemony while protecting the 1 percent from tax increases.

The Democrats are little different.

No one in the White House and no more than one dozen members of the 535 member US Congress represents the American people. This is the reason that despite obvious remedies nothing can be done. America is going to crash big time.

And the rest of the world will be thankful. America along with Israel is the world’s most hated country. Don’t expect any foreign bailouts of the failed “superpower.”
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Debt: The first five thousand years

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:32 am

John Law's 'Mississippi Bubble'
By Kerry Rodgers, Bank Note Reporter
November 27, 2012

In the last two years four nice examples of bank notes connected with French North America, aka La Louisiane, have been offered in the United States by Archives International, Heritage Auction Galleries and Stacks Bowers. These unremarkable notes and their siblings contributed to the bankruptcy of 18th-century France. They were a product of the economic theories of Scotsman John Law.

Financial commentators such as William Bonner and Addison Wiggin have drawn parallels between events surrounding Law’s note issue and the Global Financial Melt Down of 2007-08. There are also strong similarities between the financial crisis of 18th-century France and those happening in Europe today.


Wine, Women and…

John Law came from 17th-century family of Scottish goldsmiths/bankers. He joined the family firm at age 14. When father died in 1688 Law took off for London determined to spend the family fortune on wine, women and song, with song being optional.

In this he proved singularly successful, winning and losing large sums at gambling.

On April 9, 1694 Law killed Edward Wilson in a duel. He was arrested, charged with murder, found guilty and sentenced to death. His sentence was subsequently commuted when his offence was adjudged manslaughter. Wilson’s brother appealed and Law was re-imprisoned. He escaped and fled to Europe.

For the next nine years Law spent his time making a fortune at gambling. He had a superb mathematical brain and found he could calculate the odds very quickly at faro. He won enormous sums—without cheating—before being politely but firmly asked to leave a succession of European cities. Louis XIV personally signed his expulsion order from Paris.



Returns of the Prodigal

In the early 1700s he returned to Scotland to take part in the debate over the Treaty of Union. He found the country in a financial crisis with the savings of many Scots wiped out.

Law proposed getting the Scottish economy moving again through creation of central bank that would issue paper money backed by land, gold, and silver. The canny Scottish parliament rejected his ideas and Law returned to Europe to increase his personal fortune at the faro tables. When Louis XIV died in 1715 the way was clear for him to return to France.

The new monarch, Louis XV, was just five and the regent was one of Law’s old gambling buddies, the Duc d’Orleans. France was close to bankruptcy through the excesses of the Sun King such as building Versailles and fighting—and losing—endless wars with the likes of William of Orange and the Duke of Marlborough.

The accumulated debt totaled some 3 billion livres. Given the country’s annual tax take was just 145 million livres and the annual interest payments on the debt were 120 million livres, France’s financial situation was only marginally better than Greece today.



Banque Générale

The French wars had been financed by the issue of billets d’état. These had become tantamount to junk bonds with their holders pressing for payment. The Duc was desperate to avoid default and collapse. This “anything” led to hiring Law as France’s Contrôleur Général des Finances enabling Law to put his notion of a central bank into practice.

Law argued that money generates wealth by changing hands. For example, a faro player wins 100 livres. He uses it to replenish his wine cellar. The vintner buys a ring for his mistress and the jeweler has a night on the tiles. The 100 livres have circulated with everyone benefitting.

This notion was the opposite what the French upper class did. They sat on their capital and lived off the interest. Law proposed getting these savings circulating. This, he told the Duc, would renew France’s wealth.

Law also instituted many reforms including abolishing tolls on roads and canals and reviving overseas commerce. To finance these plans he founded a government-chartered private bank on May 5, 1716: Banque Générale Privée. It had a capital of 6 million livres. He issued stock in the bank and initially exchanged shares for junk billets d’état. This retired some debt.

He now printed new paper money to compensate for a shortage of gold and silver. These notes were in part backed by bank deposits but largely underwritten by the monarch. The bank accepted deposits in coin but issued all loans and withdrawals solely in the newly printed paper. The success of the bank was assured when the Duc declared all taxes must henceforth be paid using Law’s notes, i.e., these private bank issues had become French legal tender.

Law issued his notes at their full par value in gold. He also insisted they be redeemed in specie at face value. The French bought into the scheme to the extent that within a year the notes were trading at a premium of 15 percent over face.



Les Crédules

As Law had anticipated, the sudden upturn in money supply kick-started the French economy. If Law had stopped at this point and begun to pay off the nation’s debts, France might have prospered. But he now believed he could eliminate the entire Crown debt in one fell swoop.

He approached the Duc and obtained a monopoly over trading rights on France’s La Louisiane in general the Mississippi in particular. Today this scheme is known in economic lore as the Mississippi Land Scheme or Mississippi Bubble. Charles Ponzi and Bernie Madoff would have admired the way it played out.

With the Duc’s blessing Law set up a joint stock trading company named Compagnie d’Occident. It was granted a trade monopoly not only in North America but also the West Indies.

Initially Law offered shares solely in exchange for the Crown’s remaining junk bonds but he then went public. He hyped the wealth of La Louisiane which, at the time, consisted of far too many alligator and mosquito infested swamps that had returned little of value to previous French companies.

So successful was Law’s sale pitch that everyone with any money—and many without—fought to get in on the act. This sparked a need for more paper notes. With the Duc’s approval the printing presses rolled. Suddenly 16 times the previous number of notes inflated the market. These new notes were not backed by gold but by those swamps in La Louisiane.

To sweeten the pot, in 1718 the Duc nationalized the Banque Générale and renamed it Banque Royale. It was now the world’s first central bank with its notes now fully guaranteed by the monarch. And, of course, when the company appeared to generate profits, investors were paid out in Banque Royal notes.



The Emperor's New Clothes

Law’s seeming Midas touch led to his venture being renamed Compagnie Perpetuelle des Indes with exclusive French trading rights not just in North America but China, East India, and South America.

Further the company now received the right to mint royal coins for nine years and was made royal tax collector for the same period. This was quickly followed by the granting a monopoly on all tobacco trade in countries under French rule.

The demand for a piece of the action led to wild speculation in company shares throughout 1719. The Paris mob underwent frequent feeding frenzies. Aristocrats, merchants, shopkeepers and farmers jostled cheek by jowl outside the company’s headquarters in tiny Rue Quincampoix, waiting for hours to see if their subscription applications had been granted.

The company’s directors soon realized they had a tiger by the tail. The share issue was oversubscribed six-fold. In just months the value of Compagnie des Indes shares soared from an initial 500 to 20,000 livres. For the first time the term “millionaire” entered the lexicon, spelt ‘le millionnaire,” of course.

The profits of the company were now manipulated by registering profits, not from non-existent trade, but from the issuing of new shares. Sound familiar?

In an ideal stock market an issue of new shares would dilute the value of those already existing. However the manic state of the 1720 French equities market led people to turn a blind eye. They mortgaged property and sold jewelry to buy shares.

At some point Banque Royale and Compagnie des Indes merged. This meant that there was now essentially no difference between the bank’s notes, Louisiane/Mississippi shares, and old government bonds. This was singularly apt. For some time Banque Royale had been extending credit to people so they could buy shares in Compagnie des Indes which the bank now owned. This entire situation has been succinctly described by market analyst Charles Sizemore as a self-contained Ponzi scheme.



Dies Irae Dies Illa

The day of reckoning was not far off. Questions were being raised about the real value of Law’s bank notes. As the presses continued to roll at Banque Royale, Law had constantly to manipulate the value of gold and silver to support the notes’ market value. Note holders were becoming suspicious.

And Law had enemies. In late 1720 they moved en masse to ask for their money back—immediately and in specie. Within days the French Government confessed that the number of notes issued by Banque Royale far exceeded the amount of gold and silver on hand. The bank was forced to stop payment on its notes.

In Law’s favor it must be said that for some time he had been trying to deflate the massive hyperinflation bubble his scheme had created. So dire were the inflationary pressures that they were crippling the born-again French economy as well as those of neighboring countries and even affecting England across the Channel.

Law attempted to stop the rot by devaluing the company’s shares. Unfortunately this enabled his enemies to buy them up wholesale and take over the company. The new owners now confiscated the shares of all those who had purchased their holdings with credit, thereby eliminating two thirds of the company’s shareholders at the stroke of a pen.

By September 1721 share prices had slumped back to where they had been at the beginning. Law was summarily dismissed from all his posts and fled France disguised as a woman to die in Venice eight years later in impoverished circumstances.

The inevitable deflation that always follows hyperinflation now wracked France. Over 1 million French families had purchased Law’s now worthless shares. His paper money was valueless. The country’s upper and middle classes were ruined. The monarchy was discredited. France was a basket case, its development set back decades. The scene was ripe for revolution.

Afterthought: John Law has been described as “The Father of Inflation.” That is quite unfair. Kublai Khan beat him by four and a half centuries and Johan Palmstruch had been there and done that in Sweden 50 years earlier.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests