If We Are Using Every Stimulus Tool in the Book at the Top of the Cycle, What Are We Going To Do In The Next Downturn?
The world will be unable to fight the next global financial crash as central banks have used up their ammunition trying to tackle the last crises, the Bank for International Settlements has warned.
The so-called central bank of central banks launched a scatching critique of global monetary policy in its annual report. The BIS claimed that central banks have backed themselves into a corner after repeatedly cutting interest rates to shore up their economies.
These low interest rates have in turn fuelled economic booms, encouraging excessive risk taking. Booms have then turned to busts, which policymakers have responded to with even lower rates....
“Rather than just reflecting the current weakness, [lower rates] may in part have contributed to it by fuelling costly financial booms and busts and delaying adjustment. The result is too much debt, too little growth and too low interest rates.
"In short, low rates beget lower rates."
The BIS warned that interest rates have now been so low for so long that central banks are unequipped to fight the next crises.
NO regulations gave us the bad meat that killed more American soldiers during the Spanish-American War than died in combat during WW1.
So what you are saying is that the army needs to be regulated during war by Congress because it cannot look after soldiers. No disagreement here.
Odd. You attack the very part of the book that is known to be absolutely true. It was acted upon by the Roosevelt administration and Congress.
We do have to regulate KFC. We have seen thousands of times the shortcuts endangering human health that your profit mongers do. Denial is what you do, but proof is always a work of fiction with you.
As far as Sinclair's work being fiction, that statement is made by one of the most fictional posters to ever troll a group. Do you need basic logic help in figuring out who that is.
Here is my point, that you inadvertently proved. There is a total
difference between the stated words on the Gold Certificate, and what
they were finally redeemed for when forced to do so by law.
In this case, the facts are the principles. Which you refuse to grasp because lying is your preferred modus operandi.
You provided irrelevant references. As always, you made claims known to be false. Like the U.S. going off the gold standard to fight your fictional version of WW1. You still have not addressed the half-dozen or more questions that I have asked more than a half-dozen times. So, you have ZERO credibility. You do exactly what I am saying you are doing. LYING!
Idiot. Socialists are nothing except purely logical. What you claim to be logic is just a bully's emotional knee-jerk reaction to force others to bend to his all too profitable will.
Socialism is indeed doomed, as long as we allow rich bullies to refuse to participate. They take the money they have stolen from the 85-98%, and starve us out until we take sides against each other. BUT, MY FRIEND, that can be easily solved if a people have the intelligence, and the will.
Voluntary contractual agreements are fair, IF both sides have a fair and equal choice. Most don't, so you lose.
Actually, the state capital-ISTS chose Adolf Hitler, because they thought he would be easy to control. How did that turn out. In Italy, the capital-ISTS wanted Mussolini because he would shut down labor and let them do what they would. Just like you want. Franco, Pinochet, Batista, and a fabulous host of others were the same.
As for Der Spiegel, I could not care less. You concede the point by trying to ignore my counter-point that showed the irrelevancy of your entire exercise in nonsense. Why would anyone want to bother further? For instance, but only one facet of my point, you could find bombed out areas in WEST Germany 30 years after the war. The biggest problem with East Germany was the Soviets stole everything. Seems they had similar ideas to you.
Like I said, you told three whoppers all in the space of twelve
words. And then you continue telling lies based on your fantasy world.
You just lied again. That is not what I said. Sure, you can claim to be sarcastic, except you don't have a sense of humour.
The fact is, YOUR brand of so-called free market killed near a quarter of a million people, just during the Spanish-American War. YOUR scum wanted to make as much money as they could, on already inflated Army contracts. Condemned and spoiled meat, just like in The Jungle, was rushed half processed out to the troops.
So again:
Vangel style links are generally cherry-picked nonsense and lies. I will not write a book describing the errors in every link you use as a lie. I have done that literally hundreds of times. I no longer see any reason to even read your LIES, er, eh, links.
And, my condescending lying arrogant ignorant friend of absolutely not one person on this Earth, I don't need to do anything at all. All I have to do is resist. THAT ruins your game.
I know exactly what the "argument" is. You just don't think you are bound by the same rules you expect others to play by.
By the way, just for the record, . . . just so you will have to look, . . . what is the subject. And no, don't bother to tell me, I actually know.
It was a direct question, my lying, sociopathic, no morals, no ethics, friend of nary a soul.
Your arrogance is incredible, and only your laughable ignorance exceeds it. I only point out the obvious, because you can't figure out how to do any better. And it just drives you nuts.
Read his book.
What about "true summary" do you not understand?
AT&T was not given a monopoly by the government. They used your bullying tactics to gain a monopoly.
The only reason SOME few phone companies are better off, is they do not need all the expensive infrastructure that was formerly needed. AND that, my dear ignorant friend of no one, is how they can compete with AT&T today.
Any reasonable study would find less actual phone companies today than when AT&T ran its monopoly. Besides the biggest, everyone else is merely a lessor!
1. It was NOT awork of fiction.
2. It did NOT contain false allegations.
3. It certainly did advance the progressive agenda. Which is wonderful. WHY do you think it is called progressive?
4. The legislation it inspired helped the American consumer.
5. Sinclair did not oppose the legislation, bur he would have rather had a workers Bill of Rights.
Yes, ". . . he was interested in portraying conditions as he saw them . . ."
Everything that the eVangeliar writes is a work of fiction.
After reading The Jungle, Roosevelt agreed with some of
Sinclair's conclusions. The president wrote "radical action must be
taken to do away with the efforts of arrogant and selfish greed on the
part of the capitalist."
AMEN Teddy!
Public pressure led to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906; the latter established the Bureau of Chemistry (in 1930 renamed as the Food and Drug Administration).
If the USDA, and the EU, both allow "dangerous chemicals" to be used, then what would happen if there were no regulation at all?
If consumers are concerned and need information and protection the markets will provide it. Go pick up an appliance and look at the back. You will see a UAL or CSA type of sticker showing that it has been tested using accepted safety standards. Neither is a government agency like the USDA and cannot afford to approve dangerous products.
When government gets out of the way manufacturers and retailers will find ways of reassuring consumers that their products are safe. Large, well-known producers will be able to use the credibility of their brand. When we buy Coke or Apple products we are quite certain that their quality is sufficient. For smaller producers third party certification like UAL or CSA may be a necessity. If the certifiers fail they will quickly go out of business as rivals jump on any problems so that they can drive more business to themselves rather than the failed rival. Under such a system, failure would quickly lead to bankruptcy as incompetent certifiers or producers who cut corners wind up being punished by consumers of their products or services.
As Henry Hazlitt pointe out, the consumer has one great protection against bad products, his own intelligence and his own choices in the marketplace. The individual consumer is constantly casting a vote for a particular product over another. In the aggregate the producers that get more votes than their competitors thrive and remain in business. And a few are voted out. In a free market system the consumer is the boss and producers must please him or go out of business. In a government regulated system bad producers, whose products have been rejected by consumers, can be protected by the regulators. Chrysler and GM prove that.
I guess that my response is somewhere in the ether so let me give it again. The scandal was created by government procurement procedures, not the free market. The military buys substandard products all the time because it is in bed with the suppliers. The procurement scandals did not end with the Spanish-American War and are still with us.
Thanks. You are not only a willful liar, you are a stooopid liar. I guess you are some kind of accidental comedian.
GM did nothing about the dangerous Corvair.
Chrysler recently declined to recall vehicles due to the enormous economic cost. They figure the lawsuits will cost less.
Ford did nothing about their dangerous Pinto because their lawyers told them that the lawsuits due from the ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE BURNING DEATHS would be less than the $39 repair per unit.
GM did the same thing with their saddle tank pickups, until they lost a ONE BILLION dollar lawsuit.
Food companies often do not recall dangerous food. Those that do are scared of the massive potential of lawsuits. They are not in the least afraid of the regulators as it is. What would happen if there were no one to blow the whistle at all.
How many more do you want? Their are thousands, many thousands, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths. I realize that you can continue to lie, but rest assured that I will be here to point out your perfidy.
ROTFLMAO at a completely immoral, amoral, sociopathic moo-ron. Your first paragraph would be hilarious if it were not so sad. The military would never buy one defective item, IF YOUR G.D. heroes did not sell it to them.
With your reasoning, a newborn killed in a drive by shooting would be the one at fault. The murderer would walk with your nonsense. So, let't just say that whole sack of malarkey was totally bonkers. Bollocks, eVangeliar, bollocks.
As I asked before, where is the link to the supposed lie? You make many charges yet offer nothing in the way of facts to support your opinions. When you have facts and references I will be happy to deal with them and point out your reading comprehension problems to you.
How about an example of your lack of good sense that seems to be chronic with you. If the USDA, and the EU, both allow "dangerous chemicals" to be used, then what would happen if there were no regulation at all?
Let me point out the answer again. Most people are not fools. If Pepsi uses dangerous chemicals in their pop they will stop buying its products and the company will go out of business. Costco's consumers who buy its ground beef and pork are not protected from harm by government inspectors. They are protected by the company's desire to maintain its reputation so that it can continue to stay in business in what is a very competitive segment.
Most people are not like you. They have common sense and can think for themselves.
I think that you need to stop and think for once. I am a regular reader of this blog because its proprietor writes against the AGW myth that you support and believes in free market capitalism, which you oppose. I posted an answer here and you followed me on the site to pick yet another fight. If you don't like what I am saying stop following me around the net.
"Quoting Mr. Crumpacker . . ."
You are one weird moo-ron! Like Cosby, you quote an individual that has every reason not to tell the truth, as if it is gospel.
We know that what he said, and what you have been writing here, is totally untrue. Especially YOURS.
The forerunner of the FDA was created precisely because the American President, American politicians, and the American people knew what Sinclair said exactly true. So, go ahead and lie some more. I will keep calling your BS what it really is.
So, you are saying that a corrupt "owner" that is responsible for this tragedy MUST be believed, even though he is proven to be evil and has every reason to lie?
Well buck-o, you need to use what little brain you have for more than just sound deadener!
Read your own B.S. I have debunked you hundreds of times. Give everyone something on topic, and that makes coherent sense. Not just a large quantity of names and irrelevant lies.
THAT is nothing but pure whine! You wanted a confrontation. The fact is, you restarted quite a number of dead threads just so you could stir up sh*t. Once, after three months. And when I complained, you claimed you had missed the email. No other explanation, except that you want to be a bullying d*ck. You are not proving anything. Why are you so emotionally disturbed.
You were warned six times that I post to you everyday, forever, if you did not cease your trolling. You actually challenged me to do so. When I tried to make peace, you redoubled your efforts to . . . well do what besides just bullying? You know very well that I will never agree with you. Now, I will not agree with even one word you say. Of course, that is usually very easy, as everything you say is a lie.
The problem with you posting here, you are still trolling. You almost entirely disagree even with a blog you claim you fit into. YES, eventually, they will ban me here, and then they will be stuck with you. THEN, this owner will see just how big a d*ck he is left with. You will eventually get the heave-ho too.
In any case, I will reacquire you somewhere. You are an abusive troll. And, I will not repeat the facts of the matter, that I will get a notification of exactly where you are at. Just because you can't read, is not my fault.
How about an example of your lack of good sense that seems to be
chronic with you. If the USDA, and the EU, both allow "dangerous
chemicals" to be used, then what would happen if there were no
regulation at all?
Truth is, almost no one is like you. . . .
You missed the point in order to construct another lie. Companies decide everyday how far they will go in selling sub-standard product. If your ground beef that is "73% lean," and a company thinks that batch of 64% is just fine, who is there to police them. Don't bother with totally asinine lies. They have no chance of being accepted.
You owe me direct responses to the dozens of examples I have made that are easy to check as factual. In truth, everything I have said is absolute common knowledge. I don't need some obscure high dollar funded lie (think) tank to spew nonsense. Like you do.
"I have never picked a fight with you." Which is quite true. This lengthy exchange lasting most of a year was brought on by your incompetence and your insanity. I did not restart a three month dead thread just to bully someone. I did promise you that I would eventually grow tired of your non-discussion and out post you forever.
Periodically, you whine about the fact that you caused this to happen. It is entirely your fault. I am not a mental patient who's entire life is centered around brow-beating people with lies.
This was answered hundreds of times in the past. Your continued asking is pointless. I am not here to serve you hand and foot.
You do not answer questions.
You do not stay on topic.
You do not even attempt to post anything that is true.
So, I do not have to play your game.
If you don't like this, you can quit at any time. Yes, they will soon ban me, as any wacky right-wacko site would do. BUT, you will start abusing other good people in another blog, and I will "reacquire" you again. You have shown too much insanity and evil for me to just let you have your way.
If you did not want to be followed, then you could have taken up on any of my three offers of peace, or avoided my six threats of treating you as you treat me, or you could have been honest enough and competent enough not to stir this garbage up again, and again.
Like I said, you can quit anytime you like. I have allowed these discussions to lapse dozens of times, you always restart them days, weeks, or months later. AS WELL, when I tell you to have that precious last word, you bombard that particular blog until I get sick of listening to you.
I attack you, because you have attacked me and many other posters. You seem to see peace as weakness and an open invitation to assault the sensibilities of others.
Just like your Onkel Adolf taught you!
Pepsi products are known to contain excessive amounts of confirmed cancer causing agents. Thus far, there lobbyists, lawyers, corporate power, and corruptly controlled politicians have protected them. Go ahead and slurp all of that Pepsi you want.
A compelling theory of why Rome fell was a discovery that a favoured beverage was "flowers of lead." I understand from my own research years ago that drink must have been very sweet due to the lead metal.
Would you approve such a drink for your family? For the people of Canada?
Don't think I care about the lies I already know you will tell. My trump is the Romans drank the drink anyway, because they did not know better. BUT, if they had known, should they have allowed the promotion of such a drink knowing the damage it was doing to its people?
YOUR answer is obviously YES. Which of course is idiocy. Now, spin me another false yarn.
Don't you see an incongruity when you expound the wonders of bully capitalism, and then talk about the evils of those same entities.
Silly really, as you are revisioning the truth in order draw an opposite conclusion than the widely agreed on facts. If you used mathematical logic, then you would have a solution that has the meat packers poisoning people so they could get regulated, and the progressives would be supporting that poisoning while being against that regulation.
Point is, do you ever consider anything with an eye to truth, or do you just automatically disagree regardless of what is said, and set to work formulating your next lie?
You blew it. Thanks for proving my point. The Gold Certificate guaranteed the bearer $20 worth of gold. That is what it says.
$20.67? That was the settlement price. And it has nothing to do with anything I said. That is your distraction, not mine.
BUT, BUT, BUT, the discussion begun by you was a moo-ron's adventure into untruth with your opinion that WW1 caused the U.S. to go away from the gold standard.
Like I said, U.S. involvement in WW1: 1917-1918.
End of gold standard: Hmm? ROTFLMAO at a liar that will not face the truth nor even answer one pertinent question.
You know, there are a number of differences between us, but another one is glaring. I need to be factual, in order to not be wrong. While, you must always be right, regardless of how insane your ideas.
The West went off the Gold Standard to fight World War I. The US did not have to because it did not fight until late and did not commit many resources.
Voluntary contractual agreements are fair, IF both sides have a fair and equal choice. Most don't, so you lose.
You are confused again my ignorant friend. All voluntary exchanges are fair because people chose to take part in them.
Actually, the state capital-ISTS chose Adolf Hitler, because they thought he would be easy to control.
Hitler was a national socialist. He wanted state capitalism just like Lenin but was more concerned about control, not ownership.
How did that turn out.
All socialist schemes end up badly. You should know that.
In Italy, the capital-ISTS wanted Mussolini because he would shut down labor and let them do what they would. Just like you want. Franco, Pinochet, Batista, and a fabulous host of others were the same.
You are confused again. Mussolini a member of the Italian Socialist Party but rejected the revolutionary fervour of the Socialist International and chose National Socialism instead. As for his labour policies they were no different than Stalin's or Hitler. Agitators were jailed or killed in Germany and Italy just as they were in the Soviet Union.
As for Der Spiegel, I could not care less.
Or course not. The evidence contradicts your delusions of socialist paradise.
There is a total difference between the stated words on the Gold Certificate, and what they were finally redeemed for when forced to do so by law.
The certificates denoted a given weight of gold because that is what the term DOLLAR means. You are confusing the Dollar as a unit of weight with a Federal Reserve Note, which is backed by nothing but government debt. Under a gold standard gold has no price. It is just money.
Odd. You attack the very part of the book that is known to be absolutely true. It was acted upon by the Roosevelt administration and Congress.
It was not true. And Roosevelt and Congress did act and granted protection to the big meat packers by increasing the costs to the small producers that were not engaging in exports. Upton Sinclair opposed the legislation because it helped the big businesses that he wanted nationalized.
That is what gets to me. You are a useful tool for the very people that you claim to oppose. Not only do you want the big banks bailed out by savers and taxpayers you want the big businesses bailed out each time they get in trouble and are rejected by consumers.
As far as Sinclair's work being fiction, that statement is made by one of the most fictional posters to ever troll a group. Do you need basic logic help in figuring out who that is.
But it is a novel. Amazon has it classified as Literature & Fiction > Genre Fiction > Political. Here is the description.
Idiot. Socialists are nothing except purely logical.
Actually, that is not true. Socialists appeal to emotion, not logic.
Socialism is indeed doomed, as long as we allow rich bullies to refuse to participate.
How ironic; you want forced participation where one group in power gets to force others to go along. That is exactly what you have today.
OH, so you mean capitalism. Where the few coerce the proles with a portion of the money they stole from them. If the proles don't fall in line after that, then they want the government to shoot them. Teddy Roosevelt's experience with the capitalist thieves is a case in point.
Of course, Socialism is indeed doomed, as long as we allow rich bullies to refuse to participate.
Idiot. Socialists are nothing except purely logical.
Actually, the true facts are, Socialists only appeal to logic. Capitalists appeal to the fears and emotions. "Do unto others before they do it unto you." A divided bunch of weakling proles is what they desire. When people are afraid of each other, and keep a close eye out for those persons, capitalists can have a field day of crime.
No, they did not say one word about weight. Sorry, but once again you cannot, and do not have the right or ability to re-write a black letter statement.
Mussolini = right-wing nationalist fascist. There is no argument from any credible source. When you say otherwise, you will just be telling another useless lie.
Have you ever looked forward to see how this is going to end? You will spend years and will have wasted all your lies on someone that cannot conceivably be bought. Much less bullied into agreeing.
AS I always say, I can say this and not only clear my conscience, but also have a big laugh, because you are just stoopid to do exactly what I predict anyway.
You told a lie that not even the stoopid will agree with nor can they justify. What you just said is not even worth debunking. You are a laughable idiot.
Make an actual true citation that supports your silliness. Any of it.
Like Amazon? I claimed that it was a novel, BUT, it is based on known facts. Like I could write a novel about an idiot troll, but call his name Vangel. Er, eh, . . . oops. I wasn't supposed to use your real name.
As far as anything you said in this post, we both know is is as much lies as the U.S. going off the gold standard to fight WW1. No such decision was ever made, and no such need ever existed.