This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Paul Woolley: "The Market Has Become Dangerous For Humanity...It Isn't Reaching Equilibrium, It Is Falling Into Chaos"
For anyone who is still confused why the tail-wags-dog reverse relationship of the stock market as a leading indicator to the economy, and to western civilization in general, can be a problem for said civilization (not to mention the former) once the current iteration of central planning loses control over everything, as it always does, here is an interview between German daily Spiegel and Paul Woolley, a one time fund manager, and currently head of the LSE's center for Capital Market Dysfunctionality (sometimes affectionately known as the Princeton Economics department) who explains why things are on the edge of a precipice. His message for anyone who thought that Irene may have been a risk: you ain't seen nothing yet. "The developments in recent weeks have made it quite clear that the markets don't function properly. Things are spinning out of control and are potentially dangerous for society. Only a fraternity of academic high priests connected to the finance markets is still speaking of efficient markets. Still each market participant is pursuing their own selfish interests. The market isn't reaching equilibrium -- it's falling into chaos."
From Der Spiegel:
Financial markets are inefficient and growing to the point of overwhelming the economy, according to Paul Woolley, an expert on market dysfunctionality. In an interview with SPIEGEL he explains why it's up to investors to stop dangerous trends and hold financial institutions accountable.
SPIEGEL: Mr. Woolley, you were fund manager for many years, but went on to found a research institute at the London School of Economics to study why financial markets repeatedly go haywire. Now speculators are once again betting against the euro, and share prices for big companies are falling by 20 percent in a day only to shoot back up again. What is going on?
Woolley: The developments in recent weeks have made it quite clear that the markets don't function properly. Things are spinning out of control and are potentially dangerous for society. Only a fraternity of academic high priests connected to the finance markets is still speaking of efficient markets. Still each market participant is pursuing their own selfish interests. The market isn't reaching equilibrium -- it's falling into chaos.
SPIEGEL: You've compared the finance markets to a cancer. What do you mean by that?
Woolley: The finance sector can -- and is -- growing until it overwhelms the economy. In good years the US finance industry cashes in on more than 40 percent of all corporate profits. In bad years they are saved by the taxpayers. The agents are doing a devilishly good job of developing innovative, complicated new products that people can't understand. It gives them the opportunity to earn excess returns and attract the best talent. While they are acting rationally, the result is a catastrophe.
SPIEGEL: For someone who took part in this activity himself, that is a harsh judgement.
Woolley: I suppose as an investment manager for a large fund manager I was quite successful. But I also spent much of my career taking advantage of investors' herd instinct. Most fund managers follow only the newest trends and strengthen them by doing so. In the short term that leads to success, but in the long term it leads to a crash. This connection occurred to me when we pulled out of technology stocks in the late 1990s and investors with us withdrew money. After the new economy bubble broke in 2000 they came back to us because we were better than the rest of the market.
SPIEGEL: Why did you leave the finance industry in 2006, then?
Woolley: I wanted to do something socially useful. We want to revolutionize the finance industry with our institute. You have to build into the models and the self interests of the banks and fund managers to which the most investors have delegated their investment decisions. The finance industry is characterized by many innovations. Because the customers hardly understand their innovative products, banks make amazing returns. But simultaneously there is a moral hazard: When something goes wrong the bankers just move on to the next employer. The banks bear the losses. Or, in the case of bankruptcy, the state takes on the costs.
SPIEGEL: Governments are trying to curb the financial industry. What are their chances?
Woolley: I'm skeptical about this. There are many incentives for banks to get around the rules. Sanctions won't help in the long run.
SPIEGEL: You rely on the insight of the investors, then?
Woolley: Right. The big investors are in a position to force their service providers, the banks, fund managers and bankers into better behaviour. I have developed 10 simple rules that big investors should introduce for their own interests. After all, average returns on pension funds worldwide, for example, have decreased repeatedly after the market crashes in recent years.
SPIEGEL: What should investors take to heart from these 10 rules?
Woolley: They should stop chasing short-term price changes, and instead take a long-range approach to investing. That's why they should cap annual turnover of portfolios at 30 percent per annum. They should stop paying performance fees to managers who increase the worth of funds because it encourages gambling. It is nearly impossible to assess whether above average returns come from a manager's skill, luck or market moves.
SPIEGEL: What can insurers and other large investors do additionally to contain the excesses of the financial markets?
Woolley: They shouldn't invest in hedge funds or private equity companies. Managers at these companies are particularly good at hiding high costs to enrich themselves. To generate returns they must take on significantly higher risks. Big investors should also insist that trading take place on a public market. Bank profits would sink almost automatically if they were no longer allowed to sell opaque products.
Interview conducted by Christoph Pauly
»
- 24633 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
You guys should check out what they are actually doing. They are on the brink of allowing depositories like Gold Money and Bullion Vault as a means to store earnings and savings insulated from the destruction of Federal deficit spending.
It could be a real crap storm dealing with the Feds, but they at least have a Republican House going for them.
Good KWN interview with Ken Ivory, a principle of that deal.
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2011/8/22_Ken_Ivory.html
I would go as far as to say that the central banking industry is the greatest national security threat facing Western democracies. The US Joint Chief of Staff even said on two occassions that the economies pose the greatest resks, followed up with Hillary Clinton saying same thing.
If the central banks can't figure out how to re-monetize their 21st century debt slaves, they're threatening to take us down with them.... 'Please, don't throw us in the briar patch, Mr. Banker!'
Ahhh. Yes! The Joint Chiefs of Staff and Hillary. Two rock solid information sources. This group and Hillary and her ilk are the greatest security risks for this country. "They" are the terrorists. Not brown men with turbins in caves or domestic "white" Al Qaeda.
As we speak, the same Al Qaeda that supposedy took down the twin towers on 9-11 are working hand in hand with NATO forces to overthrow the sovereign nation of Libya!
They're everywhere like the "Cubans" were in the 60s and 70s (Bay of Pigs, Kennedy Assassination, Watergate).
JFK's disaster with the Bay of Pigs lead us to Vietnam to demonstrate a get tough face to the Soviets.
Vietnam lead us to removing silver from our currency and gold to back our money.
Fiat money and Keynsian lunacy, coupled with plutocracy/oilgarchy and bankster mafia, utilizing bot algos and their Fed pawn will lead us to ...............
Sing it, Soul Train.
It is a cartel--the true "irony of irony's" actually. "Of all things governments want...what they want the most is a private banking cartel." Needless to say "they must want a very broke government too!" Without a doubt Warren Buffet get's it. Only now is everyone else of course.
Speaking of equilibrium... http://nowandfutures.com/cot.html For anyone that cares.
Hmmm, the markets aren't functioning properly...uh, what markets would you be speaking of?
The market that sells cherimoyas down the street?
YOU'RE ASSUMING DEBT SLAVES ARE EVEN NEEDED OR REQUIRED ANY LONGER....
Why.. hello there.
/Cheshire cat
Well they need dumb fvkkerrs to watch their 24x7 propaganda on all channels of TV. Anyone who watches TV is complicit with the elites/banksters. If American serfs pulled the plug on Tv enmasse - our overlords would sh*t all over themselves. The sheep are too stupid.
bugs have quite the appetite indeed, but enough to fuel the snake once their chariot rides in?
a thing called Ike, that happened in 2008. total destruction galveston area. major damage houston. category 2 storm. who knew?
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/09/the_short_but_eventful_life_of....
sometimes you just never know about these things.....
HPD, ever check out Dutch Sinse's observations? http://www.youtube.com/user/dutchsinse
Keep your skeptics glasses firmly secured (his astronomical observations are worth ignoring, his earthquake and weather mod specs quite interesting and accurate), but check out the scalar circle NW in the storm yesterday. Not no ordinary radar return. Weather mod (remediation?) at its most obvious. If there really were markets, this info would be quite useful in predicting volatility in the futures market, and making some fiat to boot.
well this storm that hit along the eastern seaboard turned out to be a whimp. but sometimes even whimps can do bad things....a lot of people stayed in galveston when they saw that storm coming because they thought it was a whimp. well it was a whimp and it wasn't....and they paid the price for staying too......
or how about hurricane erin that came toward new york on 911 and then all of a sudden veered off to the northeast.....nobody hardly even knows that a major hurricane was just outside of new york on 911......hmmmm
some people say that erin was brought in to be used for some reason, perhaps to clean the air after the 911 event of nuclear radiation fallout.....of course that would be considered tinfoil.........not sure though....
one thing is for certain, many 911 first responders are sick and many are dead and or dying from some kind of illnesses as a direct result of working around the wtc area during the days after 911....
HPD:
Nazi/Zion's long range terror plans are still in play.
The Nexus Linking 9-11 and the Financial Crisis
The financial crisis of 2008, like 9-11, did not simply fall out of the sky. Both 9-11 and the financial melt-down are the results of decades of planning and preparation.
http://www.bollyn.com/public/Solving_9-11_-_The_Deception_That_Changed_The_World.pdf
a look at disinfo artist alex jones by rys2sense.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YePhhbLJpGM
its the tenth anniversary of 911 and its about that time again when the conservation about 911 should start .......again....
HPD, you can continue to swallow propaganda from the establishment media if you must, but I am a faithful Alex Jones fan. He woke me up 2 1/2 years ago. One question HPD. How did Osama get NORAD to stand down for two hours on 9-11? We will welcome you to the awakened at some point I trust?
no, he did not wake you up. you were getting awake when you seeked him out. so there he was, the controlled opposition waiting for you to come to him. i know. i know. i did it too. i lasted about two months on the jones parade until i realized that he only goes so far and does not dare go further. jones does not wake up anyone. you see, people who question the msm go searching for alternative sources of information. so tuco went searching and he found jonesy.......this happens a lot believe me. it happened to me. when i woke up, i started searching for alternative news sources. i found jonesy. i remembered seeing him long ago ranting and raving late at night on public cable access channels. a lot of what he said was true. it piqued my intererest. so when i woke up, i remembered jonesy and i went and i suffered for about two months listening to his bullshit and then i realized something just wasn't right. i remember one time several years ago, some youngster called up and said. alex, when are we going to do something? when are we going to act? he said, all you do is talk about what is happening. when are you going to get in the street and help get this thing started. jonesy did his texas two step and stumbled around and tried to dodge the question. so you see, he is controlled opposition. he is like a pacifier that you can suck on, and listen to and all you do is get mad and many sycophants call in and bitch but nothing is ever done. alex jones is the rush limbaugh of patriot radio. always has been and always will be. i live about 45 minutes south of him. if you ever decide you want to talk about where the bodies are buried on this punk, you be sure and let me know. i know the whole score on him and more. believe me. its a texas thingy. jones is a liar, a opportunist and a zionist israel supporter and when the shit hits the fan, he won't make it out of town, believe me on that one..........old scores will be settled and debts will be collected. right now, nothing can be done about these hanoi jane types but one day my amigo tuco, one fine day............ha ha ha ha ...........
Amazing photos, particularly #11. Good to see JPM got hit. "Every cloud has a silver lining."
jones doing his spider immitation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IH8GkSXH0w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpUehXXOG4U
here is jonesy crying.....
he does that crying schtick a lot i might add.
just listening to this creep gives me the willies. i can't believe i lasted as long as i did listening to this moron...
more videos. this one about his stupid money bomb bullshit, that he uses to pay off his house in a gated community....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJuQ6YmFA7w
tuco if you are satisfied being around him and his message, then that tells me you are not growing. in this business you either grow in knowledge or you die.......that is the way it is....
this one by his former close friend and associate , jack blood, and a guy who always thought he wanted to be another alex jones......except the day, lunatic jonesy attacked him and stabbed him in the back and got him fired....(this has happened more than once believe me...
http://hotk.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/alex-jones-exposed-by-jack-blood-fu...
the enemy has the leg up on many of us. such is life in the gulag called amerika....
*
*
I wanted to do something socially useful...
Twaddle.
It is nearly impossible to assess whether above average returns come from a manager's skill, luck or market moves...
More twaddle. Growth stocks go up because growth funds are buying. This asshat just won't come out and call it a ponzi.
Need partner in unique, on the ground gold and silver mining opportunity: http://bit.ly/goldenlifeboat http://bit.ly/goldenlifeboat2
goldenlifeboat @gmail
Just received this from an old friend in Spain. "Greetings from Valencia! We're all happy that the hurricane didn't do as much damage to you as originally thought. Unfortunately we have a storm coming here that will sweep everything before it, and as you know there is nothing that humans can do to stop a storm like Irene once it has formed and gone into motion. None of us think this storm is going to fall away and become a minor nuisance like Irene either. We have seen too many financial storms in our history to have that kind of silly optimism. My father who was a boy when the Second World War began in Europe tells me that everybody knew it was coming for years before it arrived - they could see it building, they could taste the fear, and they knew it could not be avoided, but the worst part was that they had no idea when it would happen! That is exactly how all my friends feel right now - this storm could be upon us in an instant, any day now, for sure. We know it is coming, and we know it cannot be stopped, and we know that tens of millions of us are going to suffer terribly. Please pray for us - not that we survive, which we will not, but that the end will be swift and not too painful."
I wrote Juan Carlos back "You are not alone." It was all I could think of to say.
You summed it up nicely. I feel the same way.
the 10 simple rules are smoke and mirrors for the fact that mr wooley does not want to impose moral hazard - the state of affairs where failed investments result in liquidation of the investment and, if large enough, the business....bail outs guarantee reckless behavior just as free money guarantees misdirected investment...
the absence of moral hazard is one significant reason why markets don't function properly. the introdution of "sophisticated" financial instruments masked behind the rubric of providing "liquidity" is a ruse for controlling markets to make up for insolvency. what possible interest does goldman-sachs have in buying and selling massive amounts oil instruments? absolutely none!
the markets don't work because they are controlled by sociopathic and psychopathic people who maintain the charade that the banks are provding capital to business when in fact they are manipulating markets for themselves and politicians....
cast out the money changers from the temple.
SPIEGEL: "Governments are trying to curb the financial industry."
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!
+1 Well said Sir!
And according to msm it's all Finland's fault. I hope the Finns demand referendum and exit the euro. It's the only way to have a real future. The alternative is to become a slave for the small elite in Brussels and the international banking cartel and eventually exit the euro by force when the eurozone breaks up. But then you would have massive debt load on board after being part of the bail out machinery. Go Finland, do the right thing!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/business/global/finland-casts-doubt-on...
And so the lava flows. Month end that is. This might help the junksters to jump start their trading weeks.
http://www.fxstreet.com/ click on ( Rates charts) . Then click on live currency rates. You get a live interbank chart 24/7 for people that don't have a platform.
The above article is PROPAGANDA, advocating more "regulation"
Been banned, many a site for publishing "Regulation is Futile". Enjoy your epiphany:
Where to start refuting a near infinite artificial reality and dangerously false paradigm?
Start by realizing that any ORGANIZED opinion has a self-interest agenda, determined by what they believe is in their self-interest in their environment which determines the choice possibilities available. In other words, any organized viewpoint and most individual viewpoints are parochial, within a narrow paradigm.
What should be clear to all competent thinkers is: REAL massive organizational failure has occurred. REAL factors are driving REAL events. The laws of reality (action inevitably leads to consequence) are imposing attrition costs for FALSITY. We, the people have already paid a hefty price for this and, the cost IS increasing. Our children will be slaves to the debt we have bequeathed them. This is OK, by some perspectives.
The first thing to do is to KNOW that regulation is an attempt of central command and control. As such, accurate information and models of reality are required, else: garbage in, garbage out.
I posit that anticipation of the future even if we have correct behavioral models is IMPOSSIBLE due to information corruption as it traverses hierarchies and the fact that such information is used to the detriment of information providers, encouraging lying. Proof:
www.nazisociopaths.org/modules/article/view.article.php/c1/33
The best (assuming honest regulators) that regulation can do is, in response to known action (choice) sequences that result in crime, deem these sequences illegal. This, presumably will prevent problems that have happened in the past, from recurring.
But, it appears that regulators, enforcers and interpreters are coerced by the regulated (lobbyists, bribes).
Another problem is that, since we live in an action precedes consequence reality, regulation must, by definition be reactive.
The result is that we have a massively expensive war (paid for by business, taxpayers and consumers) between regulators and their lawyers and innovative criminals and their lawyers. When innovative criminals manage to create a new method of fraud, such as subprime, well, they can honestly say: we were obeying law, nya nya, cannot touch us. This is a very expensive moral hazard, an environment that appears to be designed (by the legal profession) to achieve these very results.
There is only one thing that can be done to restore an honest economy, given that the future cannot be predicted. Respond to crime after the fact (and compensate victims), using REAL, basic definitions of crime. Restore the "rule of law":
www.nazisociopaths.org/modules/article/view.article.php/c1/34
Else, the costs of predatory regulation (ballooning to infinity as it attempts to track and anticipate infinity) and criminals running amok will continue to collapse civilization.
Mathematics of Rule irrefutably PROVES this:
www.nazisociopaths.org/modules/article/view.article.php/c1/32
We, the people KNOW we are prey. We are slowly achieving consensus regarding what to do about it.
Why talk about "free markets" when these fucks have been bailouted out by governments and by central banks across the globe. "free market" my ass!
Like a poster said above "show me a free market"! Right, show me one without a taxpayer or central bank backstop. When I invest, I get NO friggen back stop, if I lose, I lose my ass. Big boys get bailed, little guys sink.
Hey Jack... "We really shook the pillars of heaven, didn't we Wang?" Loved you in Big Trouble...
No Free Markets. Only way to make money is to come upon an insightful "Cheater Analysis." That's why ZH has 20 million hits a day... people looking for "Cheater Analysis." And funny thing is - ZH is one of the best places to find insightful "Cheater Analysis" on the planet.
To all "Cheater Analysts" and ZHers everywhere - À votre santé!
The market is efficiently representing the chaos that the economy is made into.
What a load of shit - the players on the field will play to win. So this assclown is now sitting in the stands and feels the rules of his game should be morally assuaged to his version of fair play? Stupid article with no relevancy to our current dilemma.
I'm dumber for having read this, I award you no points sir, and may God have mercy on your soul.....
If you want to be cynical - he's 'won the game', but desperate to keep the winnings relevant.
Buffet, Rothschild [I was told that the French banks didn't need the heroic gesture, but apparently style + fashionable wins French hearts], all those bill/millionaires desperate to chip in - solidarity with the masses?
*ahem*
Fear that their chips will get removed from play. That's if you're being cynical, which I notice you are.
Simple questions that are looking for good answers.
Risks are inherent in life. Is gambling the same as risk-taking?
Is gambling a vice or virtue?
Is a financial industry that is mostly based on gambling a vice or virtue?
Is it wise to force everyone to be a gambler in order to retain their savings from their other virtuous endeavours? Must everyone be forced to play this devilish game of 'investing' (gambling) just to hold on to their savings?
Is it virtuous to spend all of one's life energy and intelligence gambling for a living? What a waste of talent and energy. Cute euphemisms such as 'traders', 'speculators', and the like don't change the fact that gambling does little if anything productive for improving society.
How do we create a virtuous monetary system the naturally excludes gambling from its anatomy? We need a system that is simple and honest so that talent, energy and intelligence goes toward doing and making things that matter. Not going into pointless, selfish 'careers' called trading, speculating, gambling.
If you think you have the solution, then you are a part of the problem - George Carlin.
Well, despite the many, many sins of the Banksters, I still think that it is .gov spending that is the BIGGER problem. We have allowed our politicians to spend and open the monetary flood gates to banksters and other assorted garbage. WE put these (admittedly self-selected people, and THAT is an issue too) in charge.
Yes, I know there are elites out to pillage us. But, it is up to EACH OF US to find a way through the mess we are in.
Buy gold.
Give money to Ron Paul.
Take $500 out of the ATM today.
Many things we can do, as individuals. Like others have said, more eloquently thatn I, STOP playing "their" game.
In anything it comes down to being able to identify what the real problem is. Being able to put a finger on what is going on. If you don't know what is going on it is hard to stop it.
What is going on? Really It's quite simple. The fuckers are robbing the banks in broad daylight. How are they getting the money out of the banks/stocks/finacial intruments. That again is really simple. They make shit up and charge fees for it. THINK ABOUT IT!
When people loot stores they are called "social misfits" and arrested for the evil antisocial behavior.
When bankers, hedge fund managers and those that regulate them, loot the system, bringing the world to the edge of chaos, cause millions to lose jobs and homes, they are bailed out, and given bigger bonuses.
One suspects that the latter is far more socially destabilizing than the former.
The take home is if one is going to loot, make sure one is a memeber of the status quo.
Um...
A market based on a debt based monetary system is never ever going to reach equilibrium... It is going to be highly unstable...
Money is borrowed into existence. Every Dollar/Pound/Euro/Yen is backed by a debt. These debts all demand interest at a percentage per unit time. This is a classic exponential function, and debt does indeed grow exponentially.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth
An exponential can be expressed as n(t) = n(0) ekt
Which can be broken eiy = cos(y) + i sin(y)
So you have these millions of personal, corporate and national debts, all adding together. Lots of COS waveforms and lots of SIN waveforms there feeding in to one another.
This is never going to be stable and of course the banks & politicians are there pumping the amplitude up every time there is a problem. So as people use debt based credit rather than cash, the economy and markets are bound to become more and more unstable.
Truth is the financial "experts" and economists have no idea what they are dealing with.
Next 3 weeks should be "interesting".
An exponential can be expressed as n(t) = n(0) ekt
Or using Wall Street math... U to the f power
and its derivative FU
How did you get a complex exponent from the exponential growth function to equate it to Euler's equation? I don't see how they equate.
You're right, debt is unstable, no mysterious math is necessary to understand that if everyone holds everyone elses debt it's a problem. Then one gets hit with a reactor meltdown and devastating natural disaster, market prices are going to reflect huge volatility as the ability to service that debt comes into question. It's the stochastic equivalent of breaking a debtor's legs. What does it mean? If it's bad enough, expect War. Also remember that money and debt are only measures, prosperity comes from efficiency, innovation and work. Lead your economy out of a state focused on efficiency and wealth into one of misallocation for a long enough time and you've burned it out. Individuals are reduced to surviving on an animalistic level or third world conditions.
"I also spent much of my career taking advantage of investors' herd instinct. "
"I wanted to do something socially useful. We want to revolutionize the finance industry with our institute."
This white man speak with fork tongue.
Want to do something socially useful, give everything away that you made taking advantage of investors.
The financial sector is *not* attracting the best talent. Far from it, they routinely reject the brightest people who apply, instead, favouring shysters and crooks who are able to best market themselves.
agreed. They attract only the least ethical talent
agreed. They attract only the least ethical talent
I'd argue with that - both in sector and country.
There's no argument that WS is hiring awesome math/physics/coding talents for HFTs. None at all.
There's no argument that WS has a nasty streak of the 'old boy network'... sorry, I meant 'ivy league', but that's to be expected. If you've not poured treacle over another man and wrestled him homo-erotically at alpha-chi-delta-pie how can you expect him not to overlook your bending of the rules? But at the very top, IQ has to be mixed with squid blood of the highest order.
There's no argument that certain asset management funds / corps / banks attract the best talent - and that in different countries, this is done differently. [i.e. Progress / time up the hierarchy means more in EU countries than the US, I think - feel free to discount that, but the 'cut' is made in-house in the EU (?)]
Or, if you want a nose wiggle: the best talent, where-ever you're working with money tends to get invited to certain parties and networks. You're looking at the cutting process in totally the wrong light. Why the fuck do you think the 'revolving door' works so well? Or the 'IT crowd'? Ad nauseam. Looks to me that you don't know how poker is played.
Oh, and since when did morality come into money? This isn't a rhetorical question.
This is like Straight out of Roman history. Plenty of people see the problems, but, of the class that are listened to, most will only recite some version of "we need to get back to Traditional Values!"
And I dispute that the markets are not functioning: They are Very well representing the state of minds of their participants. THEY are "haywire" because We are haywire.
Put another way: The trail of lemming footprints leading to the cliff is not the problem, it is a byproduct of the problem.
President Jackson puts it so much better than I could...
"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves."
Andrew Jackson, 7th US President 1836.
It's a bit confusing in the interview, but he talks about finance markets and not markets in general.
He actually demands more free market principles be applied to the finance markets.
I fully agree with Woolley.
If you liked this little taste, you should head over to thetrader.se and read the whole article. I think it was posted last week some time and you'll have to click through to the der Spiegel interview. Definitely worth the read.
poor guy
he only wants to save the world for humanity
enough to look for a rope
a proper oak
but violence is out
so what can be done?
life is so simple
with just this one
why don't we all write letters to the congress and
vote for a president of this us of A
get a life!!!!!
As long as the ideas here at ZeroHedge willfully ignore the tacit affect of Peak Oil on not only all tradable markets but on mankind's psychology of survival, they are doomed to be no better than those at HuffingtonPost.
Everyone knows that the two most important reasons to ignore PO are the psychological need to deny such a grievous future and the fact that TPTB, who control the MSM wants to keep civilization in the dark about the amount of annual global production and the real amount of proven reserves existing today.
We are headed into the terra incognita of not enough oil to grow our economies. War will be too big a waste of oil to fight for the lion's share. And remember most of our oil arrives here by tanker.
It's probably going to be a battle of the international banks.
I'm fairly sure that most posters here know about Peak Oil theories. So you're trolling, but that's cool, I'm a little bored.
Note three things:
#1 Peak Oil hit in 2005
#2 Like coal, we won't run out of oil, but we will run out of uses for oil, or at least this is the thrust of some major investments [just go to peakoil.com and see the arguments already]. Plastics being replaced by biodegradable cellulose products is already possible, art projects showing oil based plastics being eaten by bacteria & producing energy are so last year darling [http://we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/bioart/index.php?page=1]
#3 Peak water is actually a more dangerous threat, and really not mentioned by ZH. Ecological education is lacking around here - PO? Well known1 - basic ecology? A fucking black hole of ignorance.
Junk away, but 'tis the truth!
Use,
And peak capital?
What year for it, 1970-something?
There's a fairly solid theory that equates the peak (first world) in the 70's when basic salary raises were replaced by credit functions and we saw 40 years of (inflation adjusted) non-rises in first world labour costs compared to higher level pay scales. Not to mention the infamous "trickle down" not actually raising labour prices in many countries [although, that's tied into TMZ and privileged tax zones, so more complex].
Do I have to post the obvious graphs? (Ok, I know you all love graph pr0n, but really - this isn't argued anymore, is it?) But yes - the credit/debt model took off in the 70s.
I always enjoy reading Gail The Actuary's work, http://ourfiniteworld.com/2011/08/15/oil-limits-recession-and-bumping-against-the-growth-ceiling/
The ZH Gold folks are not going to agree with her view on Gold... I concur with her thinking.
http://ourfiniteworld.com/2011/08/23/dont-count-on-gold-in-a-downturn/
My name is bid the soldiers shoot and I am a peak oil troller.
That's probably because there have been no peak oil posts that I remember since I've been here. I don't want to spend the rest of my days at The Oil Drum. You guys are much funnier.
1) Peak oil hit in 2005. That's what the oil exporting and importing nations and TPTB want us to believe. Not I, nor anyone else has knowledge of the veracity of the production numbers in 2005. Or any other figures concerning PO.
2) No, we won't run out of oil. But the economies that are light in the possession of oil, will be very covetous of and problematic for the countries that are well endowed with crude. How will economies that depend on growth transform into economies that cease to grow? Beats me.
3) Peak water, if it does occur, will be ameliorated by Global Warming, which will put more condensed water from land and ocean into the atmosphere where it will precipitate back to earth to be captured by the products of the high tech cistern industry.
Moi? Abiotic oil? I don't think so. Unless there's also spontaneously created Au, which, of course, would send the price of gold back to double digits.
Okay, Peak Oil is the 600 lb gorilla at the trollfest. Even though it is the prime cause of every terrible thing that's happened to the planet since Y2K.
I went for a couple weeks without mentioning Peak Oil. I can do it again. And I'll save my powder for defending Ben Bernanke, the Emmanuel Goldstein of Zero Hedge.
1) Very true. But... I'll point to recent USA agencies suddenly not being funded to produce data charts, and Saudi figures. I actually think the reality of the situation has been massively under-reported. Otherwise, why the holy fuck would the neo-con game plan be Iraq / Afgan / Lybia / Syria / Iran. Psychotic? For sure. Stupid? Hmm. Let's just say, you don't put three trillion on the table if you're not betting on oil becoming scarce. This goes for the Chinese as well (hello, South America) and the Russians (hello, making friends with Kim Jung to strengthen Siberian security). Or, you could pull up the frankly sickening pictures of the Canadian oil sands - http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2010-03-01-TarSandsDestruction_Web.jpg -- this level of immense destruction for an energy inefficient [and water intensive] process shows the desperation.
2) There's two schools of thought - the optimistic, which is we all switch to thorium reactors and hydrogen cell tech to replace oil [GS has banked heavily on this, btw]. The pessimistic is that the race to the bottom is predicated on this. The 'haves' and the 'haves more', remember?
3) Yeah, that's where your basic ecology is letting you down. Here's some (serious) home work - research and look through the ecological and geological processes for producing pure water. It relies on: marine life, filtration through rocks and biomass over land to fix. All of which we've severely fucked up. The dream that water production is purely a hydrostatic weather product is fucking stupid - and the imagining that a human scale industry (high tech cisterns?! lol) can match the vast amounts required by humans, industry (just pull up the usage rates for chip production, ffs) is insanity. Just take a look at the modern city - even recycling it seven times, as most modern ones do. I'd urge you to start pulling data on water tables in industrialised countries - snap shot - they're fucked [hello, entire USA grain bowl which is suffering from massive drought btw]. The agrarian revolution was predicated on irrigation - and modern irrigation has decimated water tables1
Or, you could investigate the UN water treaties, the IMF demands placed on 'developing' countries visa vie water, and private investment in global water supplies. Multi-billion $ stuff there, and full of corruption. Bottled water is already more expensive than petrol, btw.
Oh, and nope - snark was at another poster, calm your paranoia.
Mention oil and water - but, here's a plea: put some real science on the table, eh?
So we agree. Something is rotten in Oil Patch.
"I'll point to recent USA agencies suddenly not being funded to produce data charts, and Saudi figures."
"A Wikileaks cable has reportedly revealed that Saudi Arabia may not have enough oil to stop prices from skyrocketing. That is, depending on how you define the country's oil reserves.
Cables from the U.S. embassy in Saudi capital Riyadh reviewed by the Guardian, describe a warning from a senior Saudi oil executive, who said the country's crude oil reserves have been overstated by nearly 40 percent, some 300 billion barrels.
The Guardian reports that Sadad al-Husseini, former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, told the U.S. consul general in Riyadh that the Saudi oil company could not keep up with the 12.5 million barrels a day needed to keep prices low. Peak oil, he said, could be reached as early as 2012."
Saudi Arabia's Ghawar oil field, the largest in the world, 50% of the Saudi production, supposedly is running down.
Russia is the largest oil producer in the world, producing an average of 9.93 million barrels of oil per day in 2009 for a total of 494.2 million tons.[2] It produces 12% of the world's oil and has a same share in global oil exports.[4] In June 2006, Russian crude oil and condensate production reached to the post-Soviet maximum of 9.7 million barrels per day (b/d). Exceeding production in 2000 by 3.2 million b/d. Russian export consists more than 5 million b/d of oil and nearly 2 million b/d of refined products, which go mainly to the Europe market. The domestic demand in 2005 was 2.6 million b/d in averaged.[5] It is also the main transit country for oil from Kazakhstan.
"why the holy fuck would the neo-con game plan be Iraq / Afgan / Lybia / Syria / Iran"
Afgan and Iran are redundant. We need bases in oil-less Afghanistan for the two pronged invasion of Iran.
Hugo Chavez is recovering from cancer treatment. I wonder whether he will get the message about whose oil Venezuela is just looking after?
Except for Iran, I don't think there will be any big wars about oil. When the big players get down to the end game, some Strangelove will suggest as a solution to the oil problem, a diminished world population. I remember reading a prediction of 2 billion on some site.
As far as science and pure water production goes, put me down as a subscriber to your letter.
Over population. Diminishing returns.
"You can't outrun fate."
way to take the high road bid, nice convo both. but why argue when you may be able to swat 2 flies w/ 1 paper?
http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/research/data/122458-scientists-find-way-po...
Thanks for the tip, tip.. Tomorrow I'm buying NYT and shorting TWC.
Now you're sure the News Paper industry didn't plant that story?
perhaps bid, one can never be too skeptical these days (quite unfortunate, but that's another conversation). nonetheless, if you see the newspaper waste that i see on a daily basis, it's an encouraging development on the surface for sure. gotta pick our demons. for me, corn's a nutrient whore and the less grown the better.
That newspaper waste reminds me of that scene in "Blade Runner." I didn't think it was a classy future when I saw it, but I'd take it now.
What do you have against corn? The only corn I see are some of the remarks here, and they're usually very funny.
Use,
Thanks---you are good company----well said, the water is the real deal-----self-contained watersheds, covered in mature forest and running to the highway---watersheds like this are few but they won't last long with the 'boys' looking for them for the banker types---
Shit, maybe I could do an IPO thanks again om
Peak Oil has been argued ad nauseum here on ZH. It fits in somewhere near Global Warming.
The oil companies love the message. It helps pricing.
The topic always attracts religious fervor. You are a believer or you are not.
And finite is always a relative term.
Ask Bicycle Repairman for elucidation.
The inability of most ZH'ers to separate the political issues over climate change, and the actual science is depressing.
The actual science is rock solid now.
The political debate? Like the red/blue divide, both sides are pushing angles they don't understand.
>>On record: if you doubt climate change, your basis in reality is non-existant. Sure, argue over the politics of it, but the science? Kinda like arguing over evolution. Its a "theory" supported by such a massive amount of data, you're a fruit cake for ignoring it. You can argue over the usages of the science to push agendas, but if you doubt the science- you're a fucking idiot.
So yes - deny that the environment is suffering catastrophic damage, which is altering flora, fauna and base line processes (e.g. Water), then you're fucking stupid. There's no conspiracy over the science, unless you imagine that 50 years of data has been altered to fit a model - which simply hasn't happened. [Remember - they built nukes, so have some real world experience].
http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/research/data/122452-cern-cloud-study-throws-climate-change-models-into-doubt.html
Rock solid science my ass... Your an idiot or a schill take your pick. Rock solid climate change science would know something about how clouds are formed, you know those big white puffy things that either block or trap radiative heat. Up to this CERN study released last week nothing has been known, nothing, no one not Al Gore not Hansen no one could explain cloud formation. Refute the CERN study or take your claptrap solid science bullshit elsewhere..
Your excuse for a command economy with your guys in charge to putatatively save gaia is just another Goebbels "Big Lie" and fat Al's recent petulance at losing the "conversation" is glaring proof of the failure.
The CERN study was very interesting and yet one more piece of the puzzle, still much more work to be done.
“It was a big surprise to find that aerosol formation in the lower atmosphere isn’t due to sulphuric acid, water and ammonia alone,” said Kirkby. “Now it’s vitally important to discover which additional vapours are involved, whether they are largely natural or of human origin, and how they influence clouds. This will be our next job.”
But I fail to see how this study supports your position that climate change is ”another Goebbels "Big Lie"".
It would appear that you failed to "read" (or perhaps understand) the article you cited......Further, if you prefer not to have other people do your thinking for you I suggest you read the actual CERN publication, it can be found on this link.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v476/n7361/full/nature10343.html
"Detailed" climate change modeling has always been viewed with much concern. The issues of potential "feed back loops" both positive and neg, have been an issue. The IPCC report drew the reader’s attention to this, changes in rainfall patterns are a major concern and a big unknown.
I wonder if you believe that because there are differences, discrepancies and many unknowns with respect to Quantum Physics and Newtonian Physics that those too are "junk science"?
My friend / colleague just spent a few weeks in the arctic collecting marine specimens, and has been doing this amost every year for 25 years. Without a doubt there has been a dramatic warming trend, this year he couldn't believe how warm the water was, at 5 C when usually it is freezing. There was no ice anywhere!
The science is undisputable. AGW denier is a legitimate term, they are deniers.
www.nsidc.org
Wow, your friend has a whole 25 years of historical background, hmm well it must be true then, I trust your friend after all... You and all like you had damn well better hope that enforcing that denier label with anything other than mild social pressure does not come to pass, friend, as I am done backing up.
If MMGW is anything but a fairy tale your side would be working toward adaptation or mitigation but no, the thrust is on controlling energy in the developed western world let us know when you get China, India on board. See how easy it is to dispel the fairy tale. The entire movement is a political / religion one if it were not we would be discussing adaptive strategies not political solutions as they have already failed..
I never said my friend was the ultimate expert, but it's a very close-to-home confirmation of whatthe scientists are saying.
Umm, "my side" IS working towards adaptation and mitigation. I ordered my Nissan Leaf electric car, got lots of solar panels, and I'mdoing lots of other things to become energy independent if needed.
It isn't about "controlling energy", the point is we are quickly running out of energy from fossil fuel sources (but there is tons available from alternative sources), but our leaders are part of the corrupt fossil fuel industry's plans to keep everyone addicted to FF's for as long as possible untl the crunch happens, then we all have to pay sky high prices, we will be nothing more than pawns. If anything, it's about relinquishing control.
Well sure it's a political movement, of course, we want to get oil corporations out of everyone's pocket. But it's in no way religious, it is the antithesis of religion. It is backed by hard science. And aren't we discusssing alternative strategies? Or are you selectively tuning out those discussions because for people to suggest real alternatives would run coutner to your opinion that they are all trying to cotrol your life?
Of course anything that disagrees with your religion is misunderstood. Cloud formatiuon was misunderstood and yet the sciecne is rock solid.. No one beleives they misunderstand it anymore. They do understand that the science of your movement has been politicized and faked to the point of irrelevance how is that for understanding? Your argument to the authority of thermodynamics falls flat..
http://www.petitionproject.org/
Global warming petitions project 31,487 U.S. scientists disagree including 9.029 PhD's. How many PhD's collaborated to write the IPCC report; NONE, written by UN staffers.. Schill's, nothing but schill's trying to control the language because they cannot prove their psuedo science.
Hey...sounds likie Al Gore is here.... Shallow, generalized "climatre change" rant with "you a fecking idiot" or you are a fe3cking racist" follwoing.
Very funny as it is low brow.
@ UoW - There's no conspiracy over the science, unless you imagine that 50 years of data has been altered to fit a model -
The fanatical adherence of most climate changers to separate the political issues over man-made climate change, and the actual science is depressing. If one has the scientific data to support a claim then one does NOT destroy the evidence, instead the data is widely distributed and made available for EVERYONE to rigorously test the data. But, the opposite is what occurred and is the central issue for honest, trustworthy scientists.
The Sunday Times - November 29, 2009.
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece
The leaked emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) director centered around how to thwart sceptical scientists seeking access to the raw climate data. The whole flap revealed one very important detail when it was admitted: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”
Show EVERYONE the raw data and not some data set that has been massaged and manipulated. Then, and only then can the scientists and researchers who tout a THEORY be trusted. Until the raw data is released and made available you WILL NOT be trusted. That is the crux of the matter.
The controvery is not about the idea that Earth's climate is changing because Earth's climate is ALWAYS in a state of change, the controversy is about what DRIVES the change.
Sorry for the delay in answering this.
You're correct, in a fashion - ever since scientists got weather so wrong, there's been politics in science. [Quick reference for the non-involved: most models thought that weather prediction was a dead cert. in the 50/60's, until chaos came along; this was the dawn of chaos, fractals etc etc]. Systems theory was/is predicated on bad/simplistic modelling - and it was the driving force of ecology during the last century - and economics. Only now are we getting to accurate models that discover things like "what happens when you wipe out all the top predators"1 and so on.
But you're not really discussing the science of it - you're discussing the modeling of the science. CRU was hacked for a political reason2, and has been under stupid amounts of political hassle for their simple aim: to get somewhat accurate models out of the door. CRU isn't NASA3. CRU is a tiny department (like three people) in a small UK university, with a funding level below your average small sized Corporation's PR spend / annum. Why do they need these models? Because everyone (and non-scientists) love graph pr0n. If you look at the data sets / drive of CRU, it was a pressure to present science to everyone else. I'm not going to get into the entire saga, because, quite frankly - the amount of disinformation is massive from both sides [one side a lot more than the other, btw - follow the cash, as ever].
Ah, right, so climate change is totally bogus!! Wrong. The science of it takes (through circumstance, the fact that human agents are tiny, lack of funding and so on) time, and is made up of tiny snippets of data. The issue is the 'accurate map' paradox: to get a 100% correct map of the world, you need a map on a scale of 1:1. Since nature is fractal, this is impossible. So you aim for a 'somewhat' accurate model - and the issue with 'quality controlled and homogenised' bit is what every statistician does with data - you have to figure simple things in such as "is my satellite at X angle to the earth relative to the sun" - another source of corrective sets that caused all the idiots to cry "but its COOLING". Er, no - not if you adjust for position.
And, I'm sorry - you're mixed up. The issue is about the TIME SCALE of changes. Not change itself. Everyone accepts that change happens. All models seek to add in the 'base line' - which is the earth without our additions. The argument is that in a TIME SCALE of 100/200 years, the additions we can trace to humans [itself involving complex science] are provoking a destabilsing multiplier. This goes for water cycles, adaption of flora/fauna (not to mention introduction of alien species), pollutants and so on - for example, a lot of prior lack of cooling was due to particle mass in the atmosphere due to burning (and still is - and yes, volcanoes get modeled in BEFORE us, before we hit that chestnut) which, ironically, we've removed due to being more environmentally friendly. Look up Smog in London - that shit used to be so thick, people suffocated in it. CO2 percentages ARE a tiny fraction of atmosphere, but the real issue is that you're adding a multiplicity of additional burdens on quite complex systems that naturally self-regulate; and so if one tips over into disequilibrium, it has a cascade effect. I refer back to removing top predators: DSK being one.
Simpler - look up coral bleaching. Approx 90% of ALL CORAL GLOBALLY has been bleached. Coral ecology (reefs) is the food supply of (roughly) 25% of all fish - on which, another X percent feed. Get the issue? The coral get bleached [through warming of top surface temperatures, and acidification leading to slower carbon fixing in shells/cells], and we're over-fishing, both effects crash into each other to produce a massive issue.
It is a very complicated set of problems - but, I'm afraid, if you deny that burning a few million hectares of forest, or wiping out 80% of all fish species out, or strip mining from horizon to horizon, or having 7 billion of us on a globe, or using 88kw/person average in a nation of 320,000,000 when the up and coming industrialised nations are using 16/8 [India/China] then you're deluded, and simply don't understand scale. When I see people stating: "But, but, during 400,000 years we had two ice ages" I inwardly groan. 100 years / 400,000 years is a ratio of 1:40004. Even Zynga doesn't expect that kind of ratios on preferred shares.
That's the issue - Most humans don't get scale. The problem is, instead of being mature, and saying "Ok, fuck - I really can't grasp that, I'll accept that someone else might", they look for an explanation that doesn't require them to have those abilities. And those explanations are wrong. Like ID is wrong. Or perpetual motion is wrong. For those of us who can, please imagine Religious Fundamentalists at work, or rabid Communists - I'm fairly sure you'd imagine that neither could comment on issues such as homosexuality or Capital as 'a good'. This is how climate change deniers appear to scientists.
This is where a lot of tension is also rising - the will to accept those who can't process such things results in radical splits. The progressives are losing, and progroms are on the table. Remember: "my grandmother can't process the dramaturgical" (well, she can, if she's part of the Bene Gesserit, but that's a different story). Cthulu likes fish - you eat them all, it's pissed off.
It was the Law of the Sea, they said. Civilization ends at the waterline. Beyond that, we all enter the food chain, and not always right at the top. H.S.Thompson
/long rant over. Shit, there's my trolling cover blown - pretty sure I was better as a rabid troll :(
And finite is always a relative term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No kidding.
So if someone comes and tells that human beings have a finite time to live, it is relative...
And US citizens picture themselves as innovative...
The US is not the solution, the US is the problem.
I don't doubt peak oil has been argued ad nauseum. I would only tell those leaning over the railing to stop pigeonholing depleted oil supplies separately from the economic disaster we're in and the Fed's solution for it.
As if the former had nothing to do with the latter.
There are a few scenarios/conspiracy theories tying them together. One of them is a category 5 nightmare.
the market is as it always was...i'm waiting for the print...
yeah yeah yeah
dow 20,000 gold 5000 silver 250 and they'll still be saying the same thing
the trick is to plan accordingly
Did you say plan accordion? Well here ya go!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDAtmYhQuxI
"Fannie and Freddie are owned by US taxpayers. The Obama administration wants to dump all of these proposals on the backs of taxpayers, perhaps without addressing the problem that "American homeowners currently owe some $700 billion more than their homes are worth."
Supposedly this can be done at "little to no cost."
Obama is either too dumb to see what's going on or he simply does not care what it costs to buy votes."
Read more: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-seeks-holy-grail-of-housing.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MishsGlobalEconomicTrendAnalysis+%28Mish%27s+Global+Economic+Trend+Analysis%29#ixzz1WOWs5bjSExcellent!....but I don't see the Theft ending anytime soon. The fox is guarding the hen house.
There is no market, only manipulations.
Thus, all theories about markets are theories about fantasies.
Must Read! -- This has been my position for my entire career. Like Pavlov's dogs we look at the Dow and use that as a weather vane by which to deny all of the other realities manifesting themselves. All the Dow measures now is how fast wealth is being transferred from the poor to the rich. And the one's being eaten cheer it and take comfort from it. While others, with clearer vision see and warn of the imminence of collapse. -- Michael C. Ruppert
http://goo.gl/TGT6D