Uechi-Ryu.com

Quote
"
We are in this economic mess largely due to a wide range of horrible Leftist policies of the same sort that wreaked such havoc on much of Europe and Great Britain........people with a world view very similar to your own.

do you mean like bailing out the Too Big to fail banks??....that was a fascist policy carried out by socialists. My politics are libetarian If I was in the US I would vote for Ron Paul.the rest of the clowns there you couldn't put a cigarette paper bewteen them as regards policy.
Here is the kind of stuff I support

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBcLtKWxRKA

I like mr.Celente's opinion very much

The financial crisis that brought the U.S. economy to its edge and back is due to the following. And I know all this because I have a (late) dad who was a trader of securities and a sister who is a VP in a very large (and successful) U.S. bank.

• Some time back it became a "do good" policy to encourage more people to own their own homes. That is after all "the American dream." And a healthy, vibrant housing market drives an economy. Almost everyone was on board.
  ...
• This led to a relaxed policy for people getting homeowner loans
  ...
• Too many people who had no business getting homeowner loans were getting them. Some institutions were more or less encouraging people to fake data to get it through the approval process.
  ...
• This caused hyperinflation in the price of housing. Some folks even got into the business of "flipping" homes where they would buy a large number of them, fix them up, and sell them at a higher price.
  ...
• Large institutions were buying and selling these "junk loans."
  ...
• At some point a large number of these people defaulted on their loans.
  ...
• The price of housing plummeted as the demand dropped
  ...
• A bunch of people got stuck owning homes that were worth much less than what they borrowed to get them. It made more sense for them to just walk from their loans.
  ...
  
• The domino effect rippled through the economy. Banks failed. The housing industry - and everything that goes with it - screeched to a halt. The stock market plummeted. Companies stopped hiring. People stopped spending.
  ...
• Very large financial institutions needed to be rescued to reset the economy. GM and Chrysler needed to be allowed to go bankrupt and reorganize.
  ...
• Liberals who hate "big business" got in power and started to overregulate everything and everyone. This brought lending to a halt. That brought the economy to a halt. The damage is still seen today. The irony of it all is that these same liberals - from both political parties - were the ones who encouraged bad loans to be given out in the first place. This was all in the name of giving the poor a chance at the American dream of owning their own home. As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Moral of the story...

1) Some people should never be given loans. Centuries ago, Vilfredo Pareto observed that 20 percent of the people in Italy owned 80 percent of the wealth. That 80/20 rule is like a law of Nature. A minority of people understand how to get wealthy, while a majority don't have the discipline to do so. And some folks will always screw the pooch, no matter what you do to set them straight.

2) There should be the right amount of governance on the activity of financial institutions. Both too little and too much can kill an economy. There's a very good reason to have a 2 or 3 party system in your government. Dynamic tension of beliefs is a healthy aspect of a functioning government and economy. Or applying the Eastern perspective, yin needs yang and vice versa.

3) Unusual trends happen, but cannot be sustained. You see this everywhere in the economy (the dot-com bubble), in the weather (global war.. er... climate change), and in the performance of sports teams and players (Tampa Bay Rays had a ridiculous winning streak, followed by a ridiculous losing streak). Don't bet on unusual trends happening forever, or you will lose everything. Don't do anything with the economy that will start one of these unusual trends, or things will go to hell in a handbasket.

Yes... the U.S. borrowed too much money to fund several wars. But as long as a government doesn't owe much more than a certain percentage of the GDP, then this isn't a problem. That briefly got to be a problem. How you get out of that mess depends on your political philosophy. Democrats want to tax those evil rich people so the poor can be fed and the debt can be paid. Republicans want to give those same rich people (and job creators) breaks so they can get started hiring again. Don't get me started on what is best; I have my opinions.

The Soviets had their opinions on this matter. Ask them how it worked out for them.

- Bill

I think people should be very aware that this problem has not been resolved at all, the too big to fail banks are even larger now than they were. With Trillions of dollars on their books, much of it interest rate swaps , which is why the interest rate is kept low, although it ruins savers and the middle classes, if it were allowed to rise it would crash the big banks The stock market is only rising because the Fed is pumping money into the system, when they taper this the stock market will no longer rise.so it's a false economy, no growth......and the politicians have a very novel way to solve this. Bank Bail ins


The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Bank of England—together with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Financial Services Authority— have been working to develop resolution strategies for the failure of globally active, systemically important, financial institutions (SIFIs or G-SIFIs) with significant operations on both sides of the Atlantic.


The goal is to produce resolution strategies that could be implemented for the failure of one or more of the largest financial institutions with extensive activities in our respective jurisdictions. These resolution strategies should maintain systemically important operations and contain threats to financial stability. They should also assign losses to shareholders and unsecured creditors in the group, thereby avoiding the need for a bailout by taxpayers.

So people be very wary

Source
http://www.silverdoctors.com/fdic-bank- ... btf-banks/

I'm not sure I buy that.

The Federal Reserve has been keeping interest rates very low, and the government has been borrowing. As long as government debt is kept to a manageable percent of the GDP, this isn't bad. There's nothing inherently wrong with low interest rates if there's no inflation. If anything, we were temporarily in a dangerous deflationary period. If you don't like that you don't get a good return on a savings account or a CD, well DON"T DO THAT!!! You'll get a better return by investing in the right stocks, the right land, or the right start-up company. This is actually the beauty of low interest rates. It makes more money available for people who want to grow the economy, and that's what we need right now. A growing economy creates more taxable income, and that solves government debt problems. (So does cutting government spending, by the way.)


Nobody got rich by putting all their money in a bank for interest. They won't get poor that way, but you won't get the triple-your-assets rate every 10 years that they should be getting if they're investing wisely. The only people who should have their money in "safe" investments are the very old who have no need - and no time - to be aggressive with their investments.

I like to listen to people with a proven track record, with or without academic credentials......although surprsingly many of them do have both, people like Marc Faber,Jim Rickards, and Jim Rogers.Faber and rogers are both billionairs and they are all Doctors.......they say very similar things..I do like to look for people who contradict their viewpoints....there are surprisingly few..Ben Bernanke is a professor but not Uber wealthy and he didin't anticipate the housing crash or the bank bailouts.these guys did, and they see a dollar crisis looming.but because the dollar is the reserve currencey ( For now) it may not be the dollar that is affected first....probably be Japan or maybe the Euro...........either way "Interesting Times"

Quote
"Nobody got rich by putting all their money in a bank for interest. They won't get poor that way, but you won't get the triple-your-assets rate every 10 years that they should be getting if they're investing wisely. The only people who should have their money in "safe" investments are the very old who have no need - and no time - to be aggressive with their investments."

Well Bill you are fortunate enough to be educated financially, many are not. effectively their savings are being taxed because the interest rate is below the level of inflation, so they are losing money on what they believe is a safe investment, and it doesn't just affect them it affects any body who needs to move money through the banking system such as large businesses or even your salary, and it is not safe. Bail ins are a real possibility. Cyprus was not alone. Ireland had a similar thing happen, but under the terms orf their agreement with the IMF they are not allowed to speak about it, we had it with the UK and the Co Op bank in this case it was bondholders....the reason they were bondholders in many cases was they were getting some interest on their money, which they would not get in a bank.
People do not understand the difference between money and Fiat currencey, they also do not understand that Banks create money out of thin air, then lend it with interest.they cannot lose, and yet they were so greedy they had to take it even further ............and they came unstuck........they should have been allowed to fail, that is capitalism, they should not have been allowed to be bailed out by taxpayers money, they can screw the people for interest then when they make mistakes it is the same taxpayers who are asked to bail them out. Banks produce nothing, they help no one . people who can work but are on benefits or food stamps are useless unproductive members of society, but they are nothing compared to bankers ...folks on welfare do not get the same salary as somebody like Jamie Dimon the head of J.P.Morgan $28 million.........for producing nothing, just shuffling paper around.

check this clip out, the people here are a lot more eloquent than I am.....BTW ..in no way am I a socialist.but I think it very wrong that a group of private banks i.e the Federal Reserve have so much influence on a world wide basis.....there is a revolving door between the politicians and the banking system which should be closed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSntUK8oCWg