Jump to content

InternationalRockSuperstar

Members
  • Posts

    1,874
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by InternationalRockSuperstar

  1. doubt mortgage rates will rise much. there is a finite number of state thugs (~80,000 polis) and thus a practical limit as to the rate at which debt serfs can be forced from their homes and kept out. http://www.zerohedge...stest-pace-2009 well TBTP chucked us off the land some 250 years ago, denying us access to most natural resources etc, so PAYE serfdom is the only option for most
  2. why the hell not? it only costs them like a penny to print a twenty pound note. so it's not like they're investing any of their own wealth into it; just what they've nicked via seigniorage. if they buy a mansion for £50m with their freshly created money, it hasn't actually cost them anything.
  3. tho that doesn't necessarily mean they will go up in real terms.
  4. or did sterling just go down? have you managed to actually sell it for 50k more? 25% more what?
  5. a $10 ohmmeter from Radioshack would have spotted that.
  6. traktion was calling for a free market in money; not for monetary chaos. no such thing threatening people into doing what you prefer is evil so what? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford
  7. actually, it can be. just because money is made of useless cr4p at the moment doesn't mean it was always that way, or always will be.
  8. he is a very good president. (bearing in mind that the job of president basically involves being a lying, thieving, mass-murderer). PS. the 'logic' in your above argument is f***ing retarded.
  9. so you've avoided my question. even if somehow you do think the US economy is improving, you can't ignore that the fiscal position is absolutely dire. how is allocating capital to real estate (a fiat asset) instead of allocating it to the means of production going to be of use to the economy? do you assume that I have not already by now allocated my surplus capital to profit from my expectations?
  10. you've misunderstood my 3 questions in bold. I'm not asking if the Fed has the means and motive to intervene in the Fed funds rate. (obviously they do!) I'm asking if the Fed has the means and motive to intevene in the Fed Funds futures market.
  11. how reliable is that indicator? does the Fed have a motive to intervene in that market (as they do in the US gov't debt market)? does the Fed have the means to intervene in that market (as they do in the US gov't debt market)? how does the Fed charging banks 1.25% with one hand have any effect when they are bailing the banks out with the other hand? even if it were possible for the Fed to reap 1.25% in interest payments from an utterly bankrupt banking system, isn't that still below inflation? fixed. even a complete spastard couldn't mess that one up. and the USA doesn't.
  12. nah, more like more printy printy. no they're not. higher rates means large commercial banks would fail. it's pretty clear that the central bankers have decided not to let these banks fail. it's still negative in real terms. not if you're a UK tier 1 bank / FED primary dealer / other country equivalent. they all have access to central bank money at well below inflation. cool, so they're only insolvent 5 times over. almost every major central bank on the planet is lending money to their cronies at rates that are both lower than inflation and lower than the market rate. yes they can be. in fact, they may never rise. no idea if that's true or not. a source would be nice. er, why would people buying houses at higher prices firm-up a recovery?
  13. hyperinflation (of USD) started in July 2009. http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/fed-buy...y-auction/23880 I'd guess currency repudiation by July 2012.
  14. how can everything be in a bubble? in a bubble relative to what? it already is.
  15. 18 :lol: the most leveraged players in the silver market are probably 'the' banks - and they're on the short side.
  16. economies are bound by real world physical constraints. and if you waffle all the time then no-one will take your posts seriously at all.
  17. it isn't. the system is insolvent. if you don't want to collapse then feel free to bail it out. if the space program couldn't be paid for without defrauding people, then people didn't actually want the space program! shaking-off a parasite does the host a world of good.
  18. feel free to bail the system out with your own money then.
  19. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...any-itself.html
  20. notice that she doesn't say WHY and HOW it's happening.
  21. another one of your vague groups to attack. IIRC, Hayek won the Nobel Prize for demonstrating that the boom-bust cycle is caused by state intervention, in particular the manipulation of interest rates. Federal Reserve Act passed in 1913: I guess you're gullible enough to think the regulator will act in your interests. damn right the monetary unit itself now is problematic as a measure of value. worthless bits of paper. it takes lots and lots of violence to make people act as if the valueless has value.
  22. pretty crap logic, tbh. the majority view of what something is worth is not the same as the market value - since the few with much wealth can affect prices much more. the bulk of the population probably wouldn't pay $1000 for gold bullion, but that doesn't stop it trading at ~$1200 (or whatever it is when you read this post).
×
×
  • Create New...