but someone always gets 'first use' of such money (known as the cantillon effect) and thus to hand on to it - thus shifting the proportion of it held by certain groups and allowing those with it to create economic rents. Currently this is a war of the rich on the poor - but soon shooting wars may escalate - Africa - China/Korea/Japan - India/ Pakistan - Iran - assuming we are as technologically advanced as we think. / Archytas
I see that (what you say).... but there are (apparently) two parts to it, as your separation into two sentences/passages recognizes....I ask you to consider and speak to the distinction between Domestic "in-country" effects or likely outcomes as distinguished from "inter-national" or "between-country" effects or likely outcomes. The "Domestic" results.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cantillon...Cantillon effect (new and interesting lead, by the way, for me) would seem to say that the "creation"and distribution of such money by the central banks, as is now the case, benefits the "first use" "entrepreneur" recipients who get to, as you say, create and profit from "economic rents" from it before passing it on.....These "first use" "entrepreneurs" are, of course, advantaged by this as distinguished from the "second use" fixed income wage earners..... "Cantillon divided society into two principal classes—fixed income wage-earners and non-fixed income earners.[84]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cantillon#cite_note-84>Entrepreneurs, according to Cantillon, are non-fixed income earners who pay known costs of production but earn uncertain incomes,[85]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cantillon#cite_note-85>due to the speculative nature of pandering to an unknown demand for their product." ... Maybe I take some <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cantillon#cite_note-86>liberties and jump to my own (non-Cantillon warranted) overarching conclusions in this.... but my point is that the central banks, themselves, "cause" their own problems by allowing their "created money" to be "first-used" in an "entrepreneurial" way? By directing their "created money" to "fixed-income wage earning'" endeavors, instead... the central banks would (seemingly, to me) directly benefit their national economies... and also greatly diminish "money-value fluctuation"..... This isn't anything unheard of.....the Savings and Loan banks here in the U.S. went through this in the 1980s and now have to abide by standards regarding how they "spend" the monies they receive from the federal government....The Wall Street "commercial" banks and firms could easily be "regulated" in this manner, also, I'd think....Anyway.... my bigger "societal" point is.... will internal domestic politics allow for greater economic pain for the fixed-wage earners in order to continue the increased and increasing wealth accumulation on the part of the entrepreneurs......?..... It shouldn't, I'd think.... speaking in a common-sense sort of way. Internationally, the same dynamic ... rich country vs. poor country comes into play.....I ask whether the rich countries should behave in an "exploitative-entrepreneurial" manner, economically toward the poor countries or whether the rich countries should try to raise the poor countries to an equal level of economic development as themselves.... generally stated.....? On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:03:49 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > The currency wars are with us Nom. But what is a successful outcome - > having the lowest? Who is at war against whom? I suspect all the > economic blather is a cover for the money printing - as the money is > going into stuff like ETFs (exchange traded funds) used to create > monopolies in commodities and food. As an economist my guess is that > if everyone prints the same amount of dilution nothing changes - but > someone always gets 'first use' of such money (known as the cantillon > effect) and thus to hand on to it - thus shifting the proportion of it > held by certain groups and allowing those with it to create economic > rents. Currently this is a war of the rich on the poor - but soon > shooting wars may escalate - Africa - China/Korea/Japan - India/ > Pakistan - Iran - assuming we are as technologically advanced as we > think. > > On Feb 20, 7:57 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > More on QE, now in the U.S..... Up to now, the "conservatives" have been > > handed the luxury of spouting off in support their "fiscal austerity" > > budgetary and economic programs, while the central banks did what they > > could to defray the actual "pain" by putting "money" into the > economies.... > > looks like.... no more central bank "money"... time to either starve the > > population or get the money the "old-fashioned" way... get the money the > > only way it can be gotten.... where it is... stashed away in the pockets > of > > the "fat cats"..... Har... What do you think Archytas? > > > > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cae57b82-7b88-11e2-8eb3-00144feabdc0.html#a... > > > > > [image: Financial Times] <http://www.ft.com>Fed backs away from asset > > buying > > > > By Robin Harding in Washington and Claire Jones in London > > > > The US Federal Reserve is backing away from open-ended asset purchases > as > > officials grow nervous about the dangers of a bigger balance sheet. > > > > The minutes suggest that QE3 – as the Fed’s third round of quantitative > > easing is known – could end earlier than previously thought and is no > > longer a truly open-ended programme. The Fed’s balance sheet has reached > > $3,078bn and could exceed four trillion dollars if QE3 continues for the > > rest of the year. > > > > Launching QE3 last September, the rate-setting Federal Open Market > > Committee said it would keep buying assets until there was substantial > > improvement in the labour market. The goal of asset purchases is to > boost > > the economy by driving down long-term interest rates. > > > > But according to the minutes, “a number of participants stated that an > > ongoing evaluation of the efficacy, costs, and risks of asset purchases > > might well lead the committee to taper or end its purchases before it > > judged that a substantial improvement in the outlook for the labour > market > > had occurred”. > > > > That could reduce the support that QE3 provides to the economy because > > markets can no longer be certain that the Fed will keep buying assets > until > > the labour market recovers. > > > > The Fed minutes hit the US bond markets, with most Treasury prices > briefly > > paring gains or turning lower after the release of the document. The US > > dollar rose broadly, with the trade-weighted dollar index climbing 0.4 > per > > cent as the euro fell below the $1.33 mark. > > > > In the UK, by contrast, it emerged on Wednesday that the governor of the > > Bank of England had called for more quantitative easing at its February > > meeting, pushing sterling to its lowest level against the dollar since > the > > summer. > > > > The Fed minutes show that the duration of QE3 remains hotly disputed on > the > > FOMC, with “several” other participants sticking to open-ended purchases > > and warning that stopping too early could damage the economy. > > > > But the balance appears to have shifted since December, when the FOMC > was > > evenly split on whether to keep buying assets until the end of the year > or > > stop earlier. In FOMC terms, “a number” is more than “several”. > > > > The FOMC decided not to change its January statement on the costs and > > benefits of QE3 pending a review of asset purchases at its March > meeting. > > > > Several participants said the FOMC should be ready to slow down the pace > of > > asset purchases. Some dovish officials raised the idea that the Fed > could > > hold its portfolio of assets for longer instead of making its balance > sheet > > bigger. > > > > The risks that are starting to worry Fed officials include difficulties > > when they eventually come to sell assets, undermining financial > stability, > > the functioning of financial markets and the possibility of capital > losses > > when interest rates rise. > > > > The Fed’s balance sheet has now reached $3,078bn and could exceed four > > trillion dollars if QE3 continues for the rest of the year. > > > > According to the minutes, the Fed is also pondering communication > changes > > that could include publishing more information about individual > official’s > > views about the balance sheet. > > > > *Additional reporting by Vivianne Rodrigues in New York* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, February 18, 2013 7:48:33 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > > > My view goes a bit more like this: > > > The laziness of the educated middle class is the thing haunting me. > > > Rich bankers see what is happening, and laugh all the way to the bank, > > > while the middle class works to serve their interests. Risk managers, > > > lawyers, chartered accountants, all these people pretend that they are > > > working hard, while in truth they are lazy – morally and > > > intellectually. The same holds true for the university professors of > > > law and of economics. Where is constructive criticism today? This > > > laziness has become so widespread, that very few can see it for what > > > it is. > > > The bit about local Zionist Jews is likely to write off all the > > > message of course - falling foul of the political correctness you rail > > > against. I'm not sure it's worth keeping - though we should be asking > > > questions about the rentier-class. I have recently come to the > > > conclusion we should hate injustice and be more inclined to vent the > > > spleen to let others know we are hurt (too). The correct term for UK > > > government is Cuntillition. I see most of the same problems here - > > > emerging in banksterism, dismal and cruel performances and cover-up in > > > police and caring services, vile bastards making fortunes pretending > > > to help the unemployed ... > > > > > On Feb 16, 3:36 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > I not only "PLAY" the anarchist on these message boards... I > actually > > > try > > > > to "LIVE" the part.... HAR....Here's a bit from some "court" papers > I > > > > filed... I lost the"state court" cases, of course....I am thinking > of > > > > taking it "federal"....I have to do these things, "pro se"...but I > am > > > > getting "consumed" by the work and effort....can't afford a > Barrsiter > > > (Har) > > > > aka lawyer (pronounced LIAR)... even if any were disposed to take my > > > > case.... > > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/opendebateforum/Fuger/open... > > > > > > I believe it about the South.... Cunt-Etiquette... the Constipation > > > > State (that is, Connecticut).... that's where you get the more > > > > serious and insidious "mannered" style of bigotry and prejudice. > It's > > > > founded on the true bigotry of self-assumed (or proclaimed) > > > > intellectual superiority.... especially practiced by the local > Zionist > > > > Racist Jews (most even Democrats) and their yes-men lackeys... > > > > including the other true racial minorities.... blacks and > > > > latinos....you know... the social climbing blacks who got (and get) > > > > ahead by being good servants and the latinos....the latinos that > were > > > > the upper class "original Spanish" property owners or the other such > > > > despoilers of the lower or indigenous peoples from whence they > came... > > > > French Revolution, best way to deal with all such "noble" or > > > > "aristocratic" sorts.... cut their heads off and shove them up their > > > > shitty asses, I say > > > > > > [told 'em.... outright....Figurative sons and daughters of pigs and > > > > bitches] > > > > > > You the state, you the government, you are all the criminals here. > > > > From the Town Municipal Employee Defendants who committed the five > > > > criminal incident acts of bigoted harassment and sought > intimidation; > > > > to the Defendant Municipal Employee Supervisors and the Defendant > > > > Municipal Town Police Department officers and Supervisors all of > whom > > > > refused to adequately investigate and identify the criminals; to the > > > > Defendant State’s Attorney Investigators and Prosecutors who refused > > > > to instate a proper investigation of the criminal acts by your own > or > > > > by other (State) police authorities and did not prosecute the > criminal > > > > acts; to the Defendant Commission On Human Rights and Opportunities > > > > who also refused to investigate and did not prosecute the criminal > > > > acts at the Constitutional – Civil level; to the pertinent State and > > > > Appellate Court Judges named above Fuger, Lavine Espinosa and West > all > > > > of whom ruled in favor of your fellow State or Government Defendant > > > > parties; you are all criminals, be it directly or be it by virtue of > > > > your liability as supervisory officials with the responsibility to > > > > legally and ethically uphold the law and Constitutional Rights. > > > > Regarding all claims of ersatz State Absolute or Sovereign immunity > as > > > > they may regard the Defendant parties and including Judges, I > > > > personally do not hold in the least with Judge Learned Hand’s dictum > > > > that a judicial injustice need not be rectified if the authority of > > > > the Courts is thereby compromised. Instead, to the contrary, > ethically > > > > I am an advocate of the historical French Revolution approach when > it > > > > comes to this matter, which holds that all “Sovereigns” (actual or > > > > ersatz) of the tyrant persuasion deserve to have their heads > removed. > > > > Punishment. As I see it, State Party criminals have been given > > > > authority and responsibility above the “ordinary” and so you merit > > > > corresponding greater punishment for your wrongdoing. As a matter of > > > > law, state parties up to and including judges are subject to Court > > > > Action for violations of the Constitution, which I have here > alleged. > > > > So, the only seeming recourse a wronged party such as I may have > > > > against you all is to appeal to some “Higher Court”. For your > > > > incompetence, your negligence, your bias or prejudice, or your > > > > corruption, I who have to suffer for it, Damn you all to Hell, even > > > > though I am an agnostic in the matter of “Heavenly Justice”. If such > a > > > > Supreme Being exists, from my lips to God’s ear, I ask that you each > > > > get the justice that you deserve for the injustice that you now > foist > > > > upon me, preferably in this lifetime, but certainly in any > afterlife. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
