Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby evilgenius » Wed 07 Nov 2012, 13:08:58

It isn't just private debt per se that looms over the future. The huge derivative universe has begun to demand a real return in terms of money available in the circulating money supply. This is evident in the placing of bailout and QE funds, where they go to finance the sucking hole of nonproductive assets! Now is not a time to have a lot of personal debt, nor is it a time to expect high returns on investment.

As always the major challenge is toward the faith of the people. Will they continue to believe in investment or will they clam up and retreat into the morass of regionalism, nationalism and financial revenge?
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 07 Nov 2012, 17:27:45

Degrowth, an idea whose time has come...........in about 1950.

Too little, too late.

We are no longer in position to steer the car, it is in the process of crashing. It's just happening really slow so we don't recognize it, yet. It will speed up, then we will notice.

Cheers. :-D
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby AgentR11 » Wed 07 Nov 2012, 18:07:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', 'T')he huge derivative universe...


Huge relative to what? The number of zeros that Ben can pencil in on the end of a one? I think not. Its huge in comparison with current federal government outlays for instance. But I don't think you guys have quite grasped exactly how brutal that QE tool can be. I promise you, those folks holding the big derivative positions know exactly how brutal it can be. Its simply a poker bet that you can not bluff because you just realized the guy you were about to bluff has an infinite whole filled with chips. He'd rather not reach in the bag, but if you push, he will call, and then he will set the cards as he sees fit.

It is an absolutely brutal tool, and anyone that is underestimating it, and putting money on that underestimation is gonna get hosed horribly.

My take is that they play nice, if they want out, they'll unwind in a way that is predictable and smooth, with plenty of notice given to those that matter. To do otherwise, means they walk away from the table, and leave their chips behind.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby evilgenius » Thu 08 Nov 2012, 14:14:58

I don't think so. The corporate debt that forms the derivative universe is, as I've stated somewhere else on this site, tantamount to the PTB creating the hydra. Multiple calls exist against every instrument. Try to kill it and another set of heads pop up in place of the one removed. So much illicit and clandestine wealth relies upon it for existence that it cannot be satisfied in any kind of legitimate way, not without endangering the status of the government and the economy. If you feed it it will start to create new heads (instruments) designed to make use of the inputs. It won't go away because of a deep pockets attempt to pay it off. What began as a means to stave off inflation is now a monster in the absence of the kind of growth that it was designed to be fed by. What really needs to happen is that it has to be disconnected from the real economy in such a way that legitimately recognized debt remains integrated within the economy and illegitimate debt is left to fend for itself in the phantasmic world in which it belongs.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby AgentR11 » Thu 08 Nov 2012, 15:36:07

Why would anyone WANT to kill the derivates. You only need to cover bets that want to unwind, as they unwind, in the event no private counterparty wants the bet.

Secondly, the government and economy are already endangered, and have been since the first QE. That's why the printing is such a brutal weapon, used too savagely, and it will splatter the economy and the government like bugs on a windshield, used too gently, and the economy, industry, and government are instantly annihilated by deflation.

Thirdly, in case I haven't made myself clear, the FED DOES NOT WANT TO STAVE OFF INFLATION, they are desperately fighting deflation in the face of a contracting real economy, and they have the "mother of all weapons" with which to fight it.

Fortunately, everyone holding large sums knows this, and is very careful to unwind gently; because when it comes right down to it, everyone would like to get value for their funds when they sell. Getting toilet paper for years of work, sucks eggs.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby evilgenius » Thu 08 Nov 2012, 18:10:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR11', '
')
Thirdly, in case I haven't made myself clear, the FED DOES NOT WANT TO STAVE OFF INFLATION, they are desperately fighting deflation in the face of a contracting real economy, and they have the "mother of all weapons" with which to fight it.

Don't mistake me, I agree with you on this. What I don't think is that QE will ultimately prove successful. Meanwhile structural changes to the way things are done go begging.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby Lore » Thu 08 Nov 2012, 18:17:23

QE on to infinity is proving to be at this point a pop-gun. The Fed's bullets are 40 grams low on powder. Could be the reason why Ben is looking to go stage left.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby AgentR11 » Thu 08 Nov 2012, 18:21:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', '[')Don't mistake me, I agree with you on this. What I don't think is that QE will ultimately prove successful. Meanwhile structural changes to the way things are done go begging.


If everyone's SNAP card ends up with $100,000 dollars on it one morning, and QE is used to purchase the bonds that fill those cards, there is no way that that can fail to create fairly strong inflation. They have the perfect tool; its only draw back being that it can be used with much to great a force.

So far, the level of finesse that they've managed with it, boggles my mind.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby Loki » Thu 08 Nov 2012, 23:50:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Agent', 'T')he Fed can and will BUY IT ALL.


As I said, the number of zeroes the Fed prints is irrelevant. Banks play the major role in creating money, not the Fed. Read that again. Banks create money, not government. See Keen, you're laboring under an outdated neo-classical notion about money creation.

As long as banks don't want to lend and people don't want to borrow, we have deflation. That's barring a QE for the public, as I said before---I think that's probably the only circumstance in which your theories about (hyper)inflation could come into play. 100k of newly printed greenbacks in the wallet of every consumer would defeat deflation, no doubt. But that would hurt creditors, therefore it won't happen.

We could very well see some limited re-inflation of some debt-based asset speculation bubbles, but the deflationary trend is clear. I think you overestimate the power of the powers that be. They are currently pulling every rabbit out of their ass they can conjure, all in a desperate attempt to combat deflation. They've achieved undulating stagnation in the US and Japan, and a deflationary depression in Europe. We're still walking the razor, I wouldn't call the game quite yet. We've only just begun to deleverage. This will last for a decade or two, even sans peak oil.

This is mostly an academic question for me, poverty is poverty, deflation or hyperinflation. If you can't afford a loaf of bread, it doesn't matter if it costs a nickel or a wheelbarrow full of dollars, you can't afford it. My preps focus on investing in the assets I need to live a life of semi-self-sufficient semi-voluntary rural poverty. This year I used most of my meager savings to raise hogs, I'll have enough in the freezer to tide me over for the next couple years. Might have been a fortuitous decision given the recent rise in feed prices. Also thinking about investing in some more lead, which, along with oil and food, does appear to be undergoing rather worrisome inflation.
A garden will make your rations go further.
User avatar
Loki
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Oregon

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 08:39:34

If banks create money, who creates value?

If I build something say a shed, it has value. The median we use to express that value is money.

But if the money goes away, the shed still keeps my stuff dry, and has value.

I think that concept has been lost.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby sparky » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 09:01:55

.
Fair value was lost when the local landlord and his goons starting coming around
taking a third of the harvest and called it a " taxe "
User avatar
sparky
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney , OZ

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby ralfy » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 13:57:09

To add to what Loki wrote,

"The myth of the money multiplier"

the-myth-of-the-money-multiplier-t67257.html
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby ritter » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 15:08:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'I')f banks create money, who creates value?

If I build something say a shed, it has value. The median we use to express that value is money.

But if the money goes away, the shed still keeps my stuff dry, and has value.

I think that concept has been lost.


Which is why I'm putting money into home improvement/durable goods instead of the bank. Inflation or deflation, at least I'll have a comfortable house. At least until the zombies come. :-D
ritter
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 858
Joined: Fri 14 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 19:31:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', 'O')nce it's time for the public sector to deleverage, we get European-style deflationary depression, only worse.
Europe is not just in a deflationary depression. It is also in a dysfunctional monetary union that is starting to come apart at the seams. The US does not have this monetary union problem that the EU has. The US may have a larger debt to deflate, but it seems to me Europe's mess is going to be the bigger mess.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 20:23:42

So how to insulate yourself from the problem?

Ritter rightly suggests making physical improvements.

For a while I was trying to figure out something tangible that could act as a substitute for cash. Salt, bleach, ammo. All have their problems. The best suggestions I got were booze and smokes, but they are highly regulated and difficlut to carry across state or country lines in quantity.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby Loki » Fri 09 Nov 2012, 22:21:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'B')ut if that money goes away, the shed still keeps my stuff dry, and has value.


That's basically the gist of my “investment strategy,” I'd rather have the shed than the cash to pay rent on a storage unit for ten years. Matter of fact, I've been busy lately selling off some old gun gear, will use the money to buy a cargo trailer so I don't have to pay rent on my storage unit any more. The trailer will hold some value if I need to sell it down the road (whether traded for greenbacks or chickens), but the rent money for a storage unit is out of my pocket forever. My goal is to reduce my monthly cash expenditures to the bare minimum.

I think the deflation vs. hyperinflation question is most important for those who have the means to have a large portion of their wealth in paper investments/gambles. Since that isn't me, I spend most of my meager excess cash on stuff that I think will be useful, i.e., have real value. But cash will still be king for a good long while, it's a good idea to have at least a six month supply on hand.
A garden will make your rations go further.
User avatar
Loki
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Oregon
Top

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby evilgenius » Sat 10 Nov 2012, 13:29:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'B')ut if that money goes away, the shed still keeps my stuff dry, and has value.


That's basically the gist of my “investment strategy,” I'd rather have the shed than the cash to pay rent on a storage unit for ten years. Matter of fact, I've been busy lately selling off some old gun gear, will use the money to buy a cargo trailer so I don't have to pay rent on my storage unit any more. The trailer will hold some value if I need to sell it down the road (whether traded for greenbacks or chickens), but the rent money for a storage unit is out of my pocket forever. My goal is to reduce my monthly cash expenditures to the bare minimum.

I think the deflation vs. hyperinflation question is most important for those who have the means to have a large portion of their wealth in paper investments/gambles. Since that isn't me, I spend most of my meager excess cash on stuff that I think will be useful, i.e., have real value. But cash will still be king for a good long while, it's a good idea to have at least a six month supply on hand.


I agree, in a deflationary environment cash is king. After that I think some level of control over the factors of production concerning things people either need or want. Maybe it is the knowledge of how to make alcohol, with Jerry-rigged components if necessary? Maybe it is how to produce food, possibly in conditions nobody ever expected vis a vis the climate, amount of available land, etc? Maybe the best investment is the complete set of Foxfire books? I read about a lot of people who have spent a considerable portion of their incomes on stuff that they may never use. I wonder if knowledge isn't a better thing to have acquired? I remember reading a Dimitri Orlov piece about how the Soviet collapse worked its way out, on the ground. The people who did best were the ones who took what they needed to get things done, stripped it from the newly ownerless infrastructure. The thing is, it was only the people who already knew what could be done, who knew enough about what to take and how to put it to work under the new paradigm, who came out on top in that way.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.
Top

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby AgentR11 » Sat 10 Nov 2012, 13:51:19

I think it would be fair for me to acknowledge that while I do not believe a nominal deflation event will occur, the catastrophic nature of the possibility has me slightly favoring that side as far as what I am doing personally. Inflation/hyper inflation is so cheesy easy to balance against, some gold, some silver, some land, poof, you're set, carry on! Deflation otoh, is brutal; your taxes will NOT go down, governments will fight for every last penny of property and gains taxes they can get; meanwhile your income sources get hosed, badly. So you favor cash, and you favor it in non-productive instruments. Deflation would crush stock prices, just as it will crush other prices; so you have to sit on that cash, in its useless, meaningless, virtually nil return form.

That its consequences are so much worse than the consequences of inflation/hyper-inflation, is why I hold the opinion concerning the Fed that I do. Deflation will not be permitted. If they have to stick $100k on every SNAP card in the US to prevent it, that is exactly what they'll do. (that's extreme, and I doubt it would be necessary, but the fact that I can't find anything that would stop them, and that it would work, ought to make folks a tad less glib about underrating the power of the Fed.)
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Wall Street Journal “de-growth”

Unread postby sparky » Sat 10 Nov 2012, 21:33:36

.
" I agree that deflation is almost unimaginable"
Not so , if there is a decrease in customers , prices are under downward pressure
I've always suspected one of the cause of inflation is a rise in population
hence a rise in demand

a deflation can occur if there is a severe drought in spending ,in particular discretionnary spending
or because many customers are dead
that could happen if ( when) we get to peak food
User avatar
sparky
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney , OZ

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron