Archiv der Kategorie: Allgemein

Mal wieder Zahltag….

Schreibe eine Antwort

Ausgeführt mit den Geldern an Portugal. Das war aber gestern und ist damit schon zu lange her, als das man das nicht vergessen könnte. Bisher griffen uns meistens staatliche „Autoritäten“ ins Portemonnaie, nun will Mercedes auch was haben.

Sie hatten ja Ihre Abwrackprämie die schon damals „eigenlich“ Umweltprämie hies und nun einen Zuschuss für den Kauf von Elektroautos.

Wirt betrachten mal grob die Preisentwicklung bei Autos, dazu dient uns folgender Link:
http://www.spiegel.de/auto/aktuell/0,1518,629272,00.html

Also sind die Autopreise mehr gestiegen als die „normalen“ Steigerungen. Somit darf man wohl sagen die Autohersteller haben gut verdienen können.

Das sei Ihnen gegönnt, nun aber reicht Ihnen gut verdienen nicht mehr aus, jetzt soll es risikolos mehr Geld geben. Und wieder sollen es Subventionen „retten“.

Das ganze System stinkt wirklich vom „Kopf“ her.  Oder  vielleicht wird auch nur noch mit den Ausscheidungsorganen gedacht…

Warum ich froh bin nicht mehr bei der Commerzbank Kunde zu sein

Schreibe eine Antwort

Ich war lange Zeit Kunde bei der Commerzbank. Weil mir a) die deutsche Bank zu groß und zu arrogant war (was vielleicht einfach nur eine falsche Meinung von dieser Bank war/ist) und b) weil Sie nicht ausge(f)bailt wurde. Also die Commerzbank war eine „normale“ Bank. Dann kamen die Failout Pläne. Ich schrieb damals:
http://fdominicus.blogspot.com/2009/01/wieviel-ahnung-hat-der-finanzminister.html

Ich bin auch bei der Bank vorstellig geworden und bevor Sie da Geld nahmen sagt ich Ihnen klipp-und-klar. Ich bin schneller weg als Sie a sagen können wennn Sie in diesem „Rettungsschirm“ mitmachen. Es wäre immer möglich gewesen eine marktwirtschaftliche Lösung anzugehen. Aber dazu müsste man sich ja um seine Kunden bemühen (ich weiß genau von was ich spreche, denn weil ich „geschlampt“ habe, habe ich einen Kunden „verloren“). http://fdominicus.blogspot.com/2008/10/vorschlag-ist-drauen.html

Nennen Sie es ruhig naiv. Nur die Commerzbank hat mich als Steuerzahler völlig ausgenommen. Für gerade mal 25% der Aktien wurden 18 MRD EUR vom Staat „eingeschossen“ der damalige Börsenwert der Commerzbank betrug so um die 3 MRD. Man stelle sich das vor bei dem Preis den der Staat zahlte wäre die CB ca 72 MRD wert gewesen. Betrachtet man das Verhältnis wo waren es der 24 fache Wert den wir (alle Deutschen Steuerzahler) hinblätterten.

Also kam es wie ich es meiner Bank ankündigte. Bis auf ein Konto sind alle Konten bei der CB geschlossen. Und das ist gut so ™

Und was muß man erfahren? http://fdominicus.blogspot.com/2011/05/heute-aus-zettels-kleinem-zimmer.html

Und dann auch noch eine Kapitalerhöhung bei denen die Altaktionäre ultraalt aussehen:
http://de.finance.yahoo.com/nachrichten/Commerzbank-Aktie-freien-Fall-hblatt-3307136356.html?x=0

Diese Commerzbank ist eine reine Verbrecherbande und Entschuldigung alle die dort noch arbeiten sind Schmarotzer. Die muß man nicht pflegen ….

What signals does the EU safety chute emit?

Schreibe eine Antwort

I’m currently reading about the report of the IMF about Greece. You can find it under:http://www.imf.org/external/country/index.htm

I’m very skeptical over any of these just be states controlled supranational institutions. I feel we think there money for doubtful outcomes. And in a way I think this are parrallel universes cycling around themselves.
So the biggest problems with this organizations is that they „can not fail“ whatever they do. It does not matter how much money they thing while contributing to keeping corrupt regimes running. You know there is not „market“ for their offers.
Theres is but one IMF. So whatever they decide to do or not is conclusive.

This is near inerrable. Yes there may be critique voices. And still one has to concede there are also clever (and surely well paid) specialists there. So we probably can learn from their findings. Unfortunately we do not have any influence on how to react on those findings. So overall I see the IMF as part of the problem not the solution.

For normal banks the „lenders of the last resort“ are in that order. The own central bank, the own government, (in the EU) the EU commission, and then comes the IMF) . So quite a lot of those „taking“ away the responsibility on standing on one’s own feet. And still the IMF is plagued with one terrible problem. The just decide bureaucratically. They ask for papers over papers (which someone has to gather), then the follow procedures (which no the sure way a market tells whether you did right or wrong) . But if the procedures are followed, nothing can happen. They still will get their payments, and gain influence over time just because if somethings going wrong they will be the „saviors“.

But back to the report. I suggest really reading it there you can find a lot of information (unfortunately in diplomatic speech) which really makes it a plagued reading. However you can see that at least something happens.

As I can see this actions still have no calming impacts. If they actions would be honored or would have a good influence on the debt situation, it should be no problem to get new credits. But still the required interests are beyond anything one really can bear. If I do have to trust supranational organizations or markets I know what side to take. But the deledefs just see their side. They never really bother thinking about markets. It’s always the markets are evil (and we have to fight the markets) and they loose every time. But they do not learn anything from it.

Au contraire, they do the same mistakes over and over and over and over again. Just see „This time is different“ and you can see, their fallings. Instead of not „having“ some extra last lender of last resort“ a new last lender is invented, every time. Now imagine a world in which this things were not their and money sound. Nobody could get that large to threaten the system and even then, there would be no one „saving“ them. Would you expect the same hazardous behavior?

The realy problem we all have is that money is a monopoly of states, and they enforce it with any means. And that’s where we call get caught. So let’s work for freeing our money for any government influence and we’ll be much finer.

So what signals can you see in the EU „safety“ chute. It’s the signal that wrong-doers are saved from their responsibility. And that’s what sticks. Everything in EUR land just tells. Don’t bother to live within your bounds. You can have party and after that you may have some hang-over but don’t be afraid, you can have the next party the day after tomorrow.

This signal is understood by the markets but not by governments. The interest rate of up to 15% and higher tell exactly what one can expect a default within the next three years….

How does QE come into „life“

Schreibe eine Antwort

I’m wondering. I could not find the first mention of this „anti-word“

Can anyone give me a hint?

Wikipedia suggests:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing So it was „born“ in Japan. And well AFAIKT it does not have worked that well, or am I mistaken?

For me QE is just printing money under different words.

Another question in this regards. Does anyone know of a country which does not have Fiat-money? It seems that at least in the US the pendulum swings back to „better “ money. Currently the defenders of the worthless fiat-money
are supressing other solutions. But know: „First they laugh at you, then they they fight you, then you win“ or the like. I do not know when this card-house of bad money willl crumble, but it’s not a question if any more it’s just how long will we have to suffer…..

Danke FDP

Schreibe eine Antwort

für diesen „Parteitag“. Wir haben uns gut amüsiert und nette running gags gehört. Wirklich gelungen Ihre Einwürfe wegen Freiheit und Verantwortung.

Ich danke für diese klaren Worte und freue mich, daß sich die FDP weiter nach Kräften bemüht aus der deutschen Politik aus zusteigen.

Der Einstieg dazu war voll gelungen, somit in Erwartung „noch“ bessere Entscheidungen verbleibe ich mit den unfreundlichsten Grüssen ein Ex-FDPler…

PS: Gilt ebenso für 2013. Wir haben uns gut „unterhalten“ gefunden. Offenbar hat Rössler eine neue Taktik entwickelt. Schwatzen bis die Anwesenden (un)selig wegdämmern. Somit danke liebe FDP, Du bemühst Dich wirklich redlich aus der Geschichte zu verschwinden, nur weiter so.

Intermediate status

Schreibe eine Antwort

Of Inflation up to 3.1 % in the US and 2.4% in EURo land

Does not need much more to get over 4%. If that is reached you money will half it’s value in just 18 years. And still the Fed is printing money as mad. So maybe 5% is not that far away.

And again „this time isn’t different“. The deledefs are making debts as much as they can. And the only question is not IF debt must be just. How much do I have to pay for the debts.
And the stealing goes on. They get the money first and profit from non risen prices and then people realize that they got poorer day-by-day. They’ll try to get higher wages and the spiral steepens.

I’ve my opinion of what to do against this gangsters. I suggest you check raw materials, precious metals and land. Maybe the prices are coming down and you can make a deal. But be aware.
If you will have something after this ponzi scheme tumbles down. You will have to pay for the new start. So you do not just pay one buy twice, thrice….

Heute aus Zettels kleinem Zimmer

Schreibe eine Antwort

Ein wirklich interessanter Link:
http://www.ftd.de/finanzen/maerkte/anleihen-devisen/:infografik-der-grosse-staatsschulden-atlas/50196411.html

Wer hält die meisten Schulden, die Landesbanken, Commerzbank, und die Hypo Real.

Es ist bezeichnend, daß da der Euro alternativlos ist. Es erwischt nämlich als erstes die Banken wo der Staat beteiligt ist.

Was this the beginning of the end?

Schreibe eine Antwort

I’m puzzling, was the buying of Skype the beginning of the end of Microsoft? What does have driven MS to spend as much money as 8 500 000 000 for that.

I don’t know where I’ve read it but there it was discussed that leaving one’s main area hardly is successfull very long. So what could MS have reached with their Cash cows for
8.5 billions? The MS-OSes are the „market“ leader and office means nearly alway the MS Office suite. It is the tool for literally billons of people. This alone is „breath“ taking.
And it runs on „your“ machine.

For what will MS use Skype if not for „leaving“ ones machine? So isn’t it the case that Skype is against the MS business model?

I really do not know if it was clever to take this step. I’m under the impression that MS just is „afraid“. Or maybe overconfident to „solve“ the problems of the future. But if they leave their business behind
what else do they offer? MS is IMHO bound to „personal computers“ and now they want to leave the „personal“ behind….

What have we won

Schreibe eine Antwort

or didn’t we have won?

Now that the „top“ terrorist is dead, will we be safer?

According to this http://thebonnieblueblog.blogspot.com/ at least not on the railroad. So Al Kaida wanted to attacke the railway infrastructure.

So at least they are weakened a bit. They were able to use plans for the prior attacks. Now they „just can go by train“? But still we need to „react“ on threats of them?
So what did we have won then?

It seems whatever there is there can just be one answer. More control, more buereacracy and more unproduktivity. Just imagine how much money did Al Kaida spend to bring down the
twin tower? We can assume a few millions.

How much did it cost to hunt down Osama? Well the US and Nato are now more or less at war for at least tens years. If the US . The „official“ costs for the military is somewhat around 600 Billion (I just do not believe this figure for a second) and so 10 * 600 billions are 6000 billions or 6 trillions. Let’s be generous and say half of the money was spend because of Osama. Then we are talking about 3 trillions.

So let’s come to efficiency. Osama let’s say 100 million, USA 3 trillions Faktor is 100 000 000/3 000 000 000 000 = 0,0000333 as effective. Well we can say we just need 5-10 Osamas and the USA is finished. They would have spend all there money on „fighting“ the terrorists. all the GDP would be burned. So in fact one just needs a Billion to bring the US down. Now tell me anything about the best equipped military complex of the world…. In fact Ghadaffi should have enough to handle that. … he#s a bit unfortunate nevertheless, because he has probably not so „fine fanatics“ among his followers. So it seems Ghadaffi would be well advised to finance Al Kaida. They have enough fanatics, and he has the money. …. Would be deadly for this kind of US….

Reading suggestion

Schreibe eine Antwort

Well if I’m have one special weakness, then it’s reading. And because of this weakness I stumbled upon quite few books which one just can
name „eye-opener“

It has happened with the following books: Human Action, the road to serfdom. Geldsozializmus, End the Fed, and stuff from Friedman. Now it has „happened“ again. This
time I strongly propose reading „This Time is different“. In a few words. „The state of affairs is devastating“. I never could imagine men so stupid over and over again but
here we go.

I know this books will not be read by those responsible for the mess. For them another books is the guide line. „Expert Political Judgement“ and here especially the hedgehoogs. And those
are mostly getting it wrong but it does not matter, the main reason for them is „They are heard“. And so you can easily identify them in the form of Bernanke, Krugman and all those. They „know“ what the future will bring
and they „no for sure“ the cure. Unfortunately most of the time they do not get it right. And you have one suggestion free on whom they harm…..

Poverty the deledefs way

Schreibe eine Antwort

Just see the following there is a construct called relative poverty. And it’s „definition“ is that those are poor which earn less than half of the average income.

So let’s see an example. Our world is simple we have 1/3 earning 1000 GE, 1/3 earning 2000 and GE 1/3 earning 3000 GE. So our average is 2000 GE and we do not have one „poor“ soul.

Now the middle earners get 10 GE more so our average is now: 2003,33. And now we suddenly have 1/3 poor people. Nothing has really changed for the „less much earning parts“ but still now they are considered poor. So if the average climbs for whatever reason especially if those above average earn just a cent or whatever more the poor parts raise.

Even more absurd. Imagine just one person with an earning of 6000 GE enters the scene. Suddenly there are „more“ poor souls. In Germany we have absurd laws for people considered especially true. If they live divorced and the partner does not live in Germany they even get the right for a flight tickt to the other country. If you are a little above this poors and you can not afford to buy this ticket you have to stay home. The idea that this is this way does not feel „right“ for most of the Germany but a few say it’s unfair to those regarded poor that they are not „unwilling“ to work but just unlucky or whatever.

However the deledefs of course ride on thiis definition and take that as a permission to steal more from the not „poors“. If you can read german just type in „Armut in Deutschland“ and then read the entries.

Having to think about an absolute limit on where poverty strikes, is of course a difficult undertaking. And So why bother? Just use the relative definiton and thinks turn out „brutally“. If the average income raises much more poors have to be „fed“. ….. That’s deledefs logic….

The reason vor poverty are mentioned on:
http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/182080/umfrage/meinung-zu-gesellschaftlichen-gruenden-fuer-armut/

The main reason found for 54% of the asked people is that the wages are too low.

Now this suggests an immediate answer from the deledefs the minimum wage. This means we open a new chapter in the never ending story of „How deledefs raise the poorness. Minimum wages suggest a demand for work that can not be fullfilled by the markets. And so people do start learning a certain job, just to recognise there is not „work“ to be done any more. The jobs simply vanish and instead of raising wealth. We have more people unemployed, so either the tax or debt have to be increased and it all lend to a death spriral of even more unemployment. I do not know where the level is of a rate of unemployment which can be sustainable. But I doubt it’s m uch above 25%. And surely it must be well below 50%.

The problems of raising unemployment will yield an extension of bueraucrats jobs and this have to be paid by less and less productive corporation. We slide down the spiral faster and faster….
At the same time the industry is searching for skilled workers. I wonder why it is not possible for the somewhat 3 Millions jobless people here to get skilled. With minimum wages in every area the incentive to do so
will just vanish like snow in the sun……

If we see that their are less and less children nearly everywhere in developed countries we’ll find another problem that of higher unemployment and more payments to the elder generation. This gap just can be filled by immigration and that’s another very hot area, in which deledefs never ever got it right. I’m not very optimistic about the outcome. I expect that „real“ poverty will raise it’s ugly had. This usually has meant war and starving in the past…..

I never will understand how people are able to think that more „regulation“ will be the cure. The more the markets are hampered the worse the end effect for all will be. But they are trying this route over and over and over and over again…. I can not find another expression as „stupidity“ for that….

There’s not much to add

Schreibe eine Antwort

to
http://mises.org/Community/blogs/morley/archive/2011/05/02/osama-39-s-death-changes-nothing.aspx

But does that really is the most urgent problem? Terrorism? Or isn’t it the ruthless money printing of the Fed?

Does the death of Osama means that the soldiers are called back or won’t the war just go on? Really how much threat can be put on a „normal american citizen“? How likley is it to die in an
terrorists attack and how likley to die just be „normal criminals“. The above mentioned link gets it right (IMHO) the fear will be raise, and well how could anyone think that fanatics will be stopped by the killing of one of their idols.

There are much more thing to fear, among is the bankrupt of such country as the US. So is there any reason to celebrate? I can not see it, another men was killed and tens of thousands will „follow“….

Just a few things I found

Schreibe eine Antwort

Today. One of my sites I visit regularly is:
http://www.memeorandum.com/

Today I found this two entries:

Obama’s Medicare Appointee Has Accidental Encounter with Reality, Learns Nothing


and

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/266028/discredited-mark-steyn

and there are at least to more entries about „sense“ and „no sense“ maybe one should write nonsense, but at least something funny is usually around nonsense.

The points made are the extreme prices for health care (and their raising) and well on the other hand the „debts“. And believe it or not markets are taken as „beeing“ efficient will day where there is market there hardly is much inflation, but if there is state induced „social fairness“ all hell breaks loose. And guess what. If anyone complains about the debts collected by government and not willing
to allow even more debts, than this one is a terrorist. You can see how far away these guys are from sanity. There is not excuse for such lies. It just shows the path we follow if we believe in
„more government“ as a solution.

Fact ist government just life on the expenses of those producing wealth. And states are just there to „lower“ wealth. They start with laws, bring in more an more bureaucrats and more and more regulation and more and more ineffician work. Which is just there to keep the bureaucrats busy and show to everyone how important those are. But in fact the bureaucrats live in a world of „no customer“ they do not serve anyone but themselves and they influences is just destructive. But then in the TV shows some „bad“ thing is shown and then the usual answer is we need more control. It would be simple to just have judges which would sentences those wrong-doers to pay for their wrong-doing. But that does not happen, theay get limits and caps and all this from bureaucrats. And there we go the more bureaucrats the more stupid „laws“. So we are circling upwards in spiral.

Lybia and Syria

Schreibe eine Antwort

Well „nice“ to see if two do the same it’s not the same.

Ghadaffi kills his population and all but a few come with planes and bombs.

Assad kills his population and it’s not even mentioned.

I wonder what will happen if the population will walk the streets in Germany and USA. Maybe in Germany we start another war for „freeing“ the poor population?

One can not believe this. The most important thing yesterday has been some totally unimportant wedding but the killing of a few dozens or even hundreds. Who cares?

Reputation of the Fed

Schreibe eine Antwort

Well I just can conclude it sinks faster than ever for me.

Now they want to stick to their program of printing money. And well if you have savings you got robbed day by day, monthy by month year by year. The inflation raises (just remember:
http://mises.org/Community/blogs/fdominicus/archive/2011/02/03/my-predictions.aspx. And more an more of them are getting real

We’re not yet in the common over 4% inflation rate, but just in a few areas. The politicians start blaming whomever for „unfairness“. Especially unfair are those more successfull ones. Subsedies are paid
but do not yield the proper cash-flow. And the large corporations do whatever they can to not pay taxes (I wished everyone could afford the tax specialists of this corporations). And so the government does not get any earnings and starts printing money. With the „circle of „money““. The government issues bonds, the feds buys this bonds and the new money is spend in anything having some worse. Inflation raises and so on.

I doubt that ever in history a failure of a world champion has happened in such short time. In just 3 years the USA turns from a free system in a government controlled nightmare. They overextend their means and are now paying dearly, but currently the deledefs lovers „gain“. And I’d not be suprised to see more of them buying land. I bet they are preparing for the after-crash. And then they will claim themselves to be the „true“ americans. The question is are thieves the „true“ americans or aren’t they?

Maybe not all is lost at least some states remember what value means. And maybe this will save them. We just have to wait and see what the bureaucrats in washington and everywhere will do….

Oh yeah

Schreibe eine Antwort

That’s an awful message:

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2011/04/27/biggest-u-s-economic-story-of-the-year-federal-government-v-boeing/

You can not produce where you want any longer? Or how else does one has to understand it.

Well one can see it the US is deledefs land of plenty….

Maybe it’s just an example on the how bad subsedie really are. I’m not sure, I can not see why the government should sink money in Boeing. But if they did and
Boeing just tooks the money well then I can understand the troubles. But it would be easy to fix. Just ask Boeing to pay back the subsedies….

However one might see it. It’s big business and big government and both usually are catastrophes in itself. Put them together and it’s fourth as worse…

Kinder, Deutschland OECD

Schreibe eine Antwort

Ok die OECD Studie besagt klar, alles so tollen Ausgaben für Kinder in D hat nicht zu mehr Geburten geführt. Und schließt daraus „messerscharf“ wir brauchen mehr….

Nun ja mehr scheint das Zauberwort zu sein. Wir brauchen mehr Gerechtigkeit, mehr Kontrolle, mehr Einnahmen, mehr Gesetze, mehr was auch immer.

Hier meine einfache Gegenantwort. Wir brauchen nicht mehr Aktionismus sondern weniger, weniger Bürokraten, weniger Gesetze und auf staaatlicher Seite definitv weniger Ausgaben.

Auch das spielt für die Entscheidung pro/kontra Kind nicht die entscheidende Rolle. Die entscheidende Rolle spielt die Zuversicht speziell der „Erwachsenen“. Und hier sieht es ziemlich mau aus. Es gibt immer weniger „selbst“ zu entscheiden und das Korsett wird immer enger geschnürt. Entscheidet sich heute eine Frau zum „Mutter“ sein, dann wird die Entscheidung gleich mal „der Frau“ vorgeworfen. Willst Du nicht selber was „sinnvolles“ machen? Willst Du kein Geld haben, willst du nicht. Entscheidet sich eine Frau gegen Kind, heisst es „Ach ja die, die haben ja keine „Verantwortung“. Und bei den Männern ist klar: Hast Du eine Frau zahlst Du, hast Du Kind und Frau zahlst zu zigfach. Warum sollte das ein „Mann“ wollen? Was sollte Ihn motivieren wenn er damit rechnen muß in mehr als 40% der Fälle zu „verlieren“. Im Falle der Scheidung (oft) eine ganze Stange Geld und Umgangsrecht mit den Kindern wird fast immer der Frau zugesprochen. Die dann allein entscheidet was das „Beste“ für das Kind wäre und unser Staat unterstützt das in allen Bereichen..

Aber auch wenn man zusammenbleibt, der Staat entscheidet über das Leben Deiner Kinder und da heißt es auch „mehr“ statt weniger. Mit dem G8 gibt es weitaus mehr „Arbeit“ das soll aufgefangen werden durch „mehr Betreuung“ und mehr „Schule“. (nämlich den ganzen Tag) Der Staat will das als „Angebot“ aufgefasst sehen… Ich sehe das ziemlich anders, aber ich bin ja auch „nur“ ein Vater.

Nur zurück wie soll das Mann und Frau Zuversicht empfinden? Das kann ich Ihnen auch nicht sagen. Und in Zeiten der Unsicherheit entscheidet man sich eben „auch öfters gegen Kinder“.

Das gibt die Studie ja nicht her und sich darüber „Gedanken“ zu machen, steht „Erziehungs“ und „Kinder“ Experten, die Normalobürger haben sich „Ihre“ Gedanken gemacht und das Resultat ist. „Lassen wir es…“

Auch interessant der Automatismus der gedacht war. Mehr Geld -> mehr Kinder. So einfach ist das…. offensichtlich falsch gedacht, daraus folgt nicht sich Gedanken zu machen sondern „noch mehr Geld“ soll es richten. Es wird vergebens sein solange nicht die Zuversicht stärker wird. Und dafür kann ich keinen Hinweis erkennen.

The three golden deledef rules

Schreibe eine Antwort

Translated from: http://fdominicus.blogspot.com/2011/04/das-mochte-ich-hier-festthalten.html

1) a politician never is guilty

2) if a politician is guilty 1) takes immediate precedence

3) if a politician is guilty an lying, it has to be blamed on the markets

Just have a look at a few entries on the mises log in the past few days:
http://blog.mises.org/16587/when-in-doubt-blame-the-speculators-%E2%80%93-again/
Just an example from Germany, The taxes on fuel are well beyond 70% IIRC they are even near 80%. Who get’s blamed the oil companies. Well they are responsible of 1/3 of the price but
with every cent more the deledefs get 0.7 cent more robbed cents. That’s the „truth“ and no-one can deny it, but the deledefs do over and over again….

Keep that in mind and you have much easier times to understand, their actions.

I like it it subsumes everything nicely what’s happening in EU or US country. Strange enough one does not hear such garbage from Neu Zealand, or Australia. Well the Japanese are
similiar and the Chinese are well „different“. We know the lie (but how does not) but they are culitvating their own bubbled. I can not see a city without population as a good investement..
See e.g:
http://blog.mises.org/16436/the-inevitable-result-of-central-planning-chinas-ghost-cities-and-malls/

Das möchte ich hier festhalten.

Schreibe eine Antwort

Weil es von mir ist und mir gefällt 😉
1) Ein Politiker hat niemals schuld
2) Sollte ein Politiker mal schuld sein
tritt automatisch 1) in Kraft
3) Sollten ein Politiker beweisbar schuld sein und lügen, ist grundsätzlich der Markt schuld.

Ich möchte das einfach als die goldenen Regeln der Delebets festhalten. Und wie man weiß, daß Netz vergisst nicht 😉

The US creditability

Schreibe eine Antwort

Well how interesting that the verdict of the rating agents still is on AAA for the US. They just have a few trillions debt and they „just“ another 1.4 trillion during this year.
And still the blame the rating agents and call it a „politicial“ decision. I wonder what does it mean? Is S&P a unknown party? Are the democrats and republicans not the only
parties everywhere else.

Are the owners the democrats or the republicans or what?

No it’s very easy the deledefs are fucking afraid. They know they are just playing on time and it seems there only desire is being pensioners if their own build card-house will collapse.
They fire out money as mad and never hardly anytime in history there was such a fiat-money flood. Just in and around the finances are devastated. And this was all done by the politicians of the both parties.

If AAA gots lost the debtors can not count on getting money for nothing (and the taxes for free). No they will have to offer higher interest. And this means it will get more expensive and still there is no plan for „paying“ back the debts. Just the „plan“ to reduce the amount of new debts. So we translate this kind of saving into our world.

Problem 1. The debt of a rate is measured against GDP so there is no GDP for use. That’s bad so we must calculate differently. I found this as „official“ values for paying the debt. It’s 10% of the budget we need to use it for the „income“ of our family so let us assume our debt are as official told 50 000 ME (money equivalents (read dollar)) . So we’d have to pay pay (we are not the government so we have „real“ interest of let’s say 5%. BTW having this as interest rate would break the US.) So we’d have 2500 ME to pay for debs. So our budget is 2500 / 0.1 = 25 000 ME.

We are still lacking our GDP. So we need some help. Because the GDB is nearly exactly 100% of the debs we have GDP of 50000 ME. Great so we need new debts at or around 10% of it, that are 5000 ME.
Just let us assume this stays for „let’s say 3 years. Let’s compare it with how much it is for our budget. The the 5000 ME are 20% of our budget we had before taking the debt. So in reality we’d just have 20 000 ME at our disposal (- the interest which we must pay) . But we spend 25 000.

So in three years we’d have a debt of around 65 000 ME and have to pay 3250 ME interest /year. Now how much does our budget grow? This is hard to tell, but I have calculated with constant 5000 ME extra debts each year. And so our budget still is the same 25 000 three years ago we’d have to pay 2500 for the debt (the 10%) and three years later 3250 / 25000 = 13% of our budget. We’d have not paid bake one cent of our debt and we still are spending 25 000 ME (which is not possible because we can not spend the amount we pay for interest. So in fact we are taking new debts to pay old debts. And that means we have pay on interest of interest of our debt and we extended our whole debt around 30% !!!

If you can see you can stand that. Well you’re right. You can stand that for roughly 10 or so years, then you are fully broken. And well now see the US they are doing something similar for more than 10 years. And yet they still should have a rating of triple A? Hard to believe that something so obvious unsustainable should get a rating of „being“ save….

You can see however how besides reality this kind of debt calculations are. We do not have any GDP which can help us, we can not tax away other. We just have our income as the „only“ calculation base. I can not see and accept that this should be different for states. Just imagine the following all the pension payments are not covered in the budgets of today, although we know there will be some expenses in the future. In private you must save to have something, but the states do not do that. So the pension payments have to be beard from the current budgets, and you still have to pay for zillions of other things. There is nothing comparable in the private sector. (GM was broken by their pension plans BTW)

States should not be allowed to use GDP for calculations but their own budgets, and if they promised for pension payments this money has to be „saved“. If that is not possible no pension promises can be given an the money should be left to the people… They have to take care that they have enough for later. If you think how different the rate is comparing GDP and budget. Now let’s see what really is our income. We have a budget of 25 000. We have new debts of 5000 ME and 2500 ME interests payments. So that are 25000 – (5000 – 2500) = 17500 ME that’s your „earned“ money.

And yes I have used official numbers, there are so many shadow budgets etc around that this may be just the tip of the iceberg…

I write „earned“ because the earning of states are in fact robbed. You have to pay tax and you have no choice…..
With everyone else you pay what you ask for with governments you pay what you asked for and everything else also…..

Very interesting to read

Schreibe eine Antwort

Here on the Mises blog:
http://mises.org/daily/5170/The-Myth-of-Japans-Lost-Decades

That is interesting and we can really build on it.
Let’s assume the production stays the same for one year. Let’s say it#s 100 PP (Product Pieces) now we just have the amount of 100 (money units) for paying this services.

Now the „stimulius should“ start with more „money“ . Well we increase the amount of money to 105. nothing will happen to PP. So we have 105 MU for 100 PP and so what happens to the +5 MU?
Well in the end the prices will have to rais to 1.05 MU/PP.

f

But in fact nothing more was produced. And still we’d an GDP growth of 5%. Which would imply that there are more goods. But it’s just an illusion. We have the same products just more money
so we did not get richer by any means. We could not have saved more nor could more be consumed.

I’m quite aware that the „illusion“ of having more money makes a difference. If you think you have more money. You either consume more or of you are a producer you think about expanding your production. And here comes the base for the boom/bust. You invest in something under the impression that there is „really“ more demand. But it’s not there really. And you investements will make you more poor.

So our problem always is to figure out if there really is more demand or just more money. I have though about it today and written down my ideas here:
http://fdominicus.blogspot.com/2011/04/welche-art-von-aufschwung-haben-wir.html
Sorrry it’s in German but I concluded from all the surrounding that we here in Germany see a boom driven mostly by thinking the demand is higher. It’s not fully clear because our car makers produce much more than before, but you have to see they had a sharp decline the former years. I’M not fully sure if we are on the same level of production as in 2008. But even if we’d have we do not know if all the cars really get sold.
So the above articles makes it very clear on how difficult this areas is. And it’s getting worse with every other non-market driven action like tax reductions or tax raises or new laws for social security etc.

Anyways the link gives us an idea. We can take e.g the car output as measure. Cars are real and so we’d have at least some better base. If we than see the raise in the in money valued growth, We can see if we really got „richer“ by the means of more production or the „production of“ money…. From this I think one can draw better conclusions as from any money valued growth alone…

A few calculations II

Schreibe eine Antwort

„This time for the debt growth rate in Germany. I cite :
„Als Zahl: 2.080.000.000! Die deutsche Statsverschuldung hat sich seit 1990 damit vervierfacht, von “

translation the overall debt id 2 080 000 000 000. Well that is high but more impressing
we have four times the debts from just 21 years ago.

If we’d have in 21 year each year an expansion of 3.5% extra debts we just would have doubled our debts. So in fact
the debts have risen around nearly 7%. And that is „more than“ ugly.

And that are „official“ numbers. Not included are the to be expected pension payments for public servants. Because this is unique just to states. They do not have to pay into
some sort of pension funds. And so all the forthcoming pensions have to be paid from the current budget.

Even if the interest rates are on historical lows in nearly any developed country such kind of debt growth is „unbearable“. If we calculate with an average of 2.5% BIP growth. The economy has grown
at around 51 % but the debts have risen nearly 200%. So there is a gap and this gap will get larger and larger and the the day comes when this gap will be too big to be filled. The question is just when not
„if“ any longer….

Neues (teures) Acronym CCs

Schreibe eine Antwort

Und wieder finden delebets mit traumwandlerischer Sicherheit die teuerste Lösung für ein eventuell nicht vorhandendes Problem. Co2 soll „unterirdisch“ eingelagert werden. Man stelle sich vor. Erst mal muß man da Co2 ja möglichst rein haben (Energieverbrauch) dann muß man die ganzen Tunnel etc erkunden, evtl. ausbauen (Energieverbrauch) und dann muß man das Zeug da runter pumpne wahrscheinlich auch mit einem gewissen Überdruck (Energieverbrauch). Den einzigen Vorteil den es gibt unsere Nachfahren werden irgendwann riesige Speicher mit CO2 haben und wenn Sie intelligenter sind als unsere delebets dann machen Sie daraus Pflanzenmasse.

Es ist wie immer eine Allianz gegen die Steuerzahler:
1) die nötigen Investitionen können nur große Firmen schultern, die das dann mit Sicherheit in irgendeine Art auf die Verbraucher abwälzen werden.
2) es ist anzunehmen das es eine Vielzahl an Vorschriften etc geben wird. Was dann natürlich auch kontrolliert werden muß. Die Kosten sind vom Steuerzahler zu tragen
3) die Kosten für die Erkundung von „Lagerstätten“ dürften mit an Sicherheit grenzender Wahrscheinlichkeit auch vom Steuerzahler zu tragen sein.

Also große Firmen (wahrscheinlich ein Oligopol) mit staatlicher Flanktionierung und typisch dt. Gründlichkeit mit Folgeabschätzungsgutachten noch und nöcher. Mit Sicherheit wird es auch Demonstrationen dort geben wo das Zeug in den Boden gepumpt werden soll. Für ein Problem was
a) noch nicht wirklich verstanden wurde
b) mit einem Ausgang der mit Sicherheit nicht dem entsprechen wird was man sich damit vorstelle (nämlich wahrscheinlich eine Zurückführen des „unnatürlichen“ C02 Gehalts der ja ganz allein für irgendwelche Klimaänderungen zuständig ist. (Die Sonne spielt offenbar in den Überlegungen keine rolle)
c) mit dem Nebeneffekt,daß zu dessen Umsetzung ein ziemlicher Aufwand verbunden ist der immer mit Energieverbrauch einhergeht.

Deutschland ist wirklich das Paradies für Ökosoziologische Faschisten….

good news?

Schreibe eine Antwort

I’m puzzling, Why is it good news that the US shutdown did not take place? They still have an insane budget deficit and the only thing they’ve agreed upon is written on some sheet
of paper.

We’re still talking about a deficit at or around 1 trillions. I calculated once how much this will cost in the future. And this money is not invested just „spend“. Spend for the current obligations of government.
There still are enormous amounts of money needed just to pay the „promises“ like pension payments etc.

If we „break“ it down to private people it’s that they needed new credits just to pay their eating bills. And there’s nothing left for uncertainties. You get ill or layed of? Well too bad, just ask for more credit.
So I can not the the success. It does not show how desperate the situation really it is. It’s just a message that everything goes on (bad) as usual.

Still all the money is sunk in diverse wars, and sunk into the most jails world-wide. The unemployment rate is not change „automagically“ and people just get older and older. And just a few get all the money.
So where’s the good news really?

Next money too be burned

Schreibe eine Antwort

Now it’s Portugal.
http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/thursday-papers-portugal-appeals-for-eu-bail-out-money-and-other-news/a485095

The failout plans have not worked, do not work and never will work. It’s not a problem of too less money and credit but too much of them both. One just hase to compare the
money base expansion and output expansion. There’s too much money and so the prices start raising. Portugal has accepted and asked for too much debts and the EC countries do
not accept that. They want to provide them with more cheap money. And so the ones having taken risks (while buying bonds from portugal) will get all the money from those
having not taken any risk. So there is no relationship between taking and earning and this will lead in the end to a crash unprecedented.

Suggestions for the investor. You have two just take care of one think Sell your bonds early enough if the EC runs out of money. Till then one can buy as much bonds as one like. All the tax payers in EC guarantee your interest… So I think short runners may be quite interesting. Try to get back what the governments steal from you.

Very interesting

Schreibe eine Antwort

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/05/government-shutdown-threat-deal-unreached_n_845014.html

As I understand even if the government won‘ t pay you still have all our obligations. So you have to go to work and do whatever you did
just for nothing. Wow that’s nice for the government and bad for the government paid workers. I guess they will have to pay their bills. But no governments
do not have to.

Do I find that disgusting? You can bet

I’ve something else for you
http://thejjb.com/topic/669526/Bristol-Palin-Earns-262-000-as-Abstinence-Ambassador

You don’t like it? Well you can bet, me too not. But that’s „justice“ the deledefs way. Lie and earn big, do wrong and earn big. akt irresonsible and earn big. And let the stupid citizens pay for you…

FDP die bald? endende Geschichte?

Schreibe eine Antwort

Nun ja es war wohl ein offenes Geheimnis Rössler soll es richten und heute lese ich noch in den BNN von einem jungen liberalen. Was war das erste was man hörte? Man muß „sozialer“ werden.

Danke genau das braucht die FDP NICHT. Aber offensichtliche Fehler haben noch nie einen Parteigenossen gekümmert. Doppelsprech und Doppelmoral ist gut und damit gibt es keine Fehler. Wenn es sozial nicht reißen wird (was jetzt schon klar ist) dann wird das sozial halt in irgendetwas anderes umgebogen.

Diese FDP hat völlig jedwegen Bezug zu den Wählern verloren. Kein Wort von Freiheit mehr also eine weitere Gutmenschenpartei die es mal wieder „besser“ weiß als alle anderen und so haben wir so um die 600 Gutmenschen die danach trachten alle anderen knapp 80 Millionen zu erziehen. Ich bin „begeistert“. Die FDP als etwas rechter Flügel der sozio-ökologischen-faschistischen-Einheitspartei-Deutschlands (SÖFEPD) nun denn, verschwinde möglichst bald Du Feiglingspartei Deutschlands.

Mehr als 60 Jahre wurde Geld von den Kapitalisten verdient und jeder hat daran teilgenommmen nun möchte man die Kuh die einen ernährt schlachten und dann wahrscheinlich ökologisch korrekt „verbrennen“ und dann?