Summarizing 2011 In Nine Easy Charts
If one had to summarize 2011 in one sentence, it probably would be: "a year in which the market ended unchanged, in which the world got within seconds of global coordinated bankruptcy, and in which central planning finally took over everything." Simple. On the other hand, conveying a comparably concise message full of hope and despair at the same time, using charts would actually be slightly more problematic. But not for the Economist, which has managed to do just that, however not in one but nine discrete charts. Here is what they did.
From the Economist:
IN 2008 banks were saved by governments. The question that dominated 2011 was how to save governments. The euro-area sovereign-debt crisis metastasised from a problem affecting small, peripheral states to one that threatens the single currency itself. The rise in Italian bond yields in particular marked a dangerous new stage in the saga (chart 1). European banks, stuffed full of government bonds, have suffered a severe funding squeeze since the summer (chart 2). The euro was oddly resilient against the dollar, but Switzerland and Japan intervened to hold down their currencies as investors sought shelter (chart 3).
Faced with skittish creditors, countries in Europe tried to instil confidence by cutting spending (chart 4). Austerity and growth do not mix, however. Euro-area GDP remains below its pre-crisis level. American output did at least regain that mark in 2011 (chart 5) but US unemployment remained very high.
The emerging economies again outshone their rich-world counterparts in terms of growth and jobs. But fears about inflation (chart 6) slowly gave way to fears about growth as the year went on and Europe’s problems worsened. Emerging-market stocks dropped sharply in the summer as investors put their money into less risky assets (chart 7). Gold also benefited from another year of fear. The metal was set to post its 11th consecutive annual gain in 2011 (chart 8). Google searches for “gold price” rose whenever measures of market uncertainty did (chart 9). If governments aren’t safe, after all, what is?
Chart 1
Chart 2
Chart 3
Chart 4
Chart 5
Chart 6
Chart 7
Chart 8
Chart 9
(15 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- 22476 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:
- Guest Post: Energy Independence - The Big Lie
- It's Not Just Alternative Energy Versus Fossil Fuels or Nuclear - Energy Has to Become DECENTRALIZED
- Erste Group's Complete 2012 Oil Price Outlook - "Nothing To Spare", Crude Could Reach $200
- Guest Post: Nate Hagens: We're Not Facing A Shortage Of Energy, But A Longage Of Expectations
- Chris Martenson Lecture On Why The Next 20 Years Will Be Marked By The Collapse Of The Exponential Function
charts, BiCheZ!
9 = Groundhog Day
GahhhhhhhRhhhhahhh!
Centrally planned economy, based on Management of Perceptions (MOP).
It's all fake and it's all being kept alive with increasingly feable intervention attempts. How long the criminals and liars can keep the MOP facade going is the key. Reality has to re-emerge at some point.
i thought it was pretty cool leno let ron paul on last night for an extended period and let him talk we must be near the end,,,,,
on the other hand world news tonight the other night called him a racist for things he didn't write himself and called his following "THE FRINGE and RADICAL" element of society,,,,thats you people on here the fringe and radical thats who diane sawyer is talking about
Newt said I wasn't a decent American. :(
Its a lot worse than you think because those chart numbers have been fudged by the squid.
2011 can be summarized in a few words WTF happened. This has to be the chippiest recovery I have seen my years.
http://www.dailyjobcuts.com
Want to see the EU time-bomb?
Look at chart 5. Spain, GDP and UN-employment. That is a powder keg. And Japan.
These are the visible tender spots, while the US continues to apply lipstic on ze Piggy.
Good luck everyone, 20i2 is going to be a zinger. A hummmmmmdinger.
;-0
ori
/world/
Newt is a fat prick do not listen to that corrupt arse head.
+1K
Have you checked out Buddy Roemer? THE Anti-corruption candidate, and not taking any PAC money!!!
I love Ron Paul, and I hope he wins. But if not Roemer is a possible alternative. here's a pretty good interview with him I saw the other day, and if Ron Paul doesn't make I would seriously consider him.
http://www.andmagazine.com/stipkolive/
Good interview ! I'll bet we have a million Americans who could make a better President than Obama ! Roemer would have to be with those at the top of the list ! First job requirements....you have to be an American and not a CIA protege puppet....and you have to have a healthy love for your country !
Someone just told me he believes TPTB are going to back Ron Paul for president
because he is the only candidate with a chance to save the U.S. from total collapse,
and he would put us on a gold standard to protect the value of the dollar. Most of
TPTB own many dollars and much gold. Hmmmm.... It makes sense to me.
Time will tell.
If they are doing that they intend to cannibalize the lowest ranks of TPTB and throw out a lot of scapegoats.
The second benefit is that they keep the current power structure intact and profit from it.
The big problem w/ RP and the gold standard is it would guarantee hyper inflation when they had to re-peg the dollar to gold. If it happens, it won't be pretty as the US gold reserves are pretty dam low, imho... to cover all that cash they've pumped into the system over the last 10 years.
that wouldn't cause hyperinflation, the hyperinflation already happened in real assets a gmc yukon cost 60,000 dollars 60k,,,,,,that same car in with steel aluminum and rubber cost 4800.00 in 1979...........do a cost comparison from 1940-1970 i don't think you will have a 55k difference.......it will kill the value of pensions, 401ks's and ira's and imported goods may cost some more, but we won't have hyperinflation if gold is at 5k, 50k or 500k an ounce,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
He was referring to the amount of gold in existence to be able to back the dollars needed if M3 were to stay where it is. The value of homes and cars have inflated substantially due to availability of credit, which is exactly why a return to a gold standard would be hyperinflationary - the amount of gold in existence pales in comparison to dollars in existence and it would show dollars to be worthless on a relative basis almost immediately.
THE INFLATION vs DEFLATION DEBATE MISSES THE MAJOR PROBLEM
The big problem facing modern economies like the United States is the Falling Energy Returned on Invested (EROI). We could survive a hyperinflation event after several years, but the Falling EROI is forever. People tell me that there is all this ZERO POINT ENERGY and FREE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY to save us.... and in theory they might be right.
But... on the other hand, ROME was sitting on a great deal of resources like oil, metals, minerals and etc and could not take advantage of it. It's one thing to have the theory of FREE ENERGY or whatever, and another to have an economic system already able to utilize it. We only have the former.
In reality, hyperinflation or deflation will not be the KILLER of the US EMPIRE. It will be the Falling EROI. As I have stated before, the huge increase in Derivatives and Monetary Printing has been to COMPENSATE for the Peaking of Global Oil and the Falling EROI.
For the Fiat Currency Ponzi scheme based on fractional reserve and compound interest to continue, the ENERGY SUPPLY must grow with it. Global Oil supply has plateaued since 2005. Thus, without energy growth the Fiat Monetary System cannot grow. So instead the Brain Surgeons running the Central Banks have decided to PRINT and PRINT to give the ILLUSION of growth.
This will have a very BAD ENDING indeed. Time to be in GOLD and SILVER unless you want to get the PAPER ENEMA of a lifetime.
Even accepting that oil has plateaued, it is not the end-all be-all of energy. It is entirely possible that we could reserve much more oil for uses such as plastics and fertilizer while ramping up consumption of coal and gas, of which we have plenty. We can do this today, it is not contingent upon new technology being developed. It does seem to me that economic growth is to be sacrificed on the altar of declining energy availability, in the name of the environment and "saving the planet" from the evil humans.
Fedaykinx, I'm not sure you understand the concept of EROEI. The only reason there currently appears to be "plenty" of nat gas is fracking. It turns out that a fracked nat gas well produces orders of magnitude less gas over its lifetime than a conventional nat gas well, but costs more to complete. This is a perfect example of declining EROEI...
once NG and coal peak (and they HAVE in various countries, wells/mines, and fields), we'll just ramp up production of unicorn farts.
And as if we can burn increasing amounts of coal with no environmental consequences...lol
Don't forget those growing populations of whales ... blubber to oil ... that should save us
Yes, basically we've compensated for insufficient increases in productivity with debt issuance. Sad thing about this is that we did it to ourselves; or rather allowed those that control the supply of fossile fuels to enculture this into our society. The internal combustion is like apple pie and Thanksgiving here in the USA and it's all due to marketing - During the 70s, the diamond industry, through constant saturation of advertisements in magazines and other mediums, within a decade, made the wedding ring an integral part of Japanese culture; a country that previously barely had a concept of courting and/or amorous love. Well the oil industry did the same to us.
EROI, I read recently that around the start of the industrial revolution, for every unit of energy it took too drill oil, 100 units were returned in production. Now, due to dwindling supplies and greater difficulty in extracting remaining supplies from more complex locations, this return has reduced to 3.
dude, the oil industry didn't ADDICT people to eating as many calories now on average as Roman Emperors.
People CHOSE oil because it is a superior project...liquid energy. Oil IS the "free energy" that everyone thinks is out there waiting to be exploited. It's precisely how we were able to work magic over the past 150 years.
Our population went vertical and we can actually fucking FLY now. Think about this on a deeper level, the advent of the machine age. Life is more different now from 200 years ago BY FAR than things were in the previous 1, 2, 3, 5 thousand years.
As usual, you're oversimplifying it and I think it's because of your melanin. For you, oil is the beginning of civilization and the end. I think most everyone else recognizes that it's far more complex than that. Not everything is as black and white, as you'd like.
Consider the following quote:
A critical fact in the world of 1801 was that nothing moved faster than the speed of a horse. No human being, no manufactured item, no bushel of wheat, no side of beef, no letter, no information, no idea, order or instruction of any kind moved faster. Nothing had moved any faster, and as far as Jefferson's contemporaries were able to tell, nothing ever would. - Stephen Ambrose.
Sure, oil was absolutely fundamental to the Industrial Revolution and for propelling human prosperity into the stratosphere, but you must ask yourself why did it take so long? The oil has always been there. What happened in the early 1800's that enabled humans to suddenly break out of our Malthusian Trap and to experience a sudden, massive boom of prosperity that continues to this day? For thousands of years, we lived poor, nasty, brutish and short* lives. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, human civilization took off.
There were four factors that came together at relatively the same time, and oil was not one of them. Again, the oil had always been there. If you're wondering around Barnes and Noble, check out The Birth of Plenty, by William Bernstein. It's written by a Jew, so I know trav7777 won't bother, but for everyone else, it's really fascinating.
Max Fischer, Civis Mundi
*Thomas Hobbes
Max... sometimes it is THAT SIMPLE. No words are going to move you from your beliefs and opinions on this matter. And in reality....that is just fine with me.
On the other hand, I gather you think we have done something great with all this wonderful technology and etc. You ever been to a BLACK FRIDAY SALE? Ever watch Fox Business or the Kardashians? How about all those high IQ's at a Monday Night Professional Football game?
Hey, I am not bashing JOE BAG OF DONUTS, but your so called idea of modern "CIVILIZATION" is not that impressive if you just sit down at WAL MART and look around for a few hours.
With a FALLING EROI comes the inevitable collapse of the JUST IN TIME SUPPLY CHAIN. The illusion of CIVILIZATION will disappear faster than you can say "A DOUBLE DECAF LATTE".
Sorry..... I wish I had better news, but thats the facts.
"What happened in the early 1800's that enabled humans to suddenly break out of our Malthusian Trap and to experience a sudden, massive boom of prosperity that continues to this day?"
Malthusian Theory is about the consequences of perpetual growth. The "boom and prosperity" that you talk about resulted in MORE growth, which is EXACTLY what Malthus was warning about. That is, you've got the logic completely BACKWARDS!
Have you NOT watched Dr. Albert Bartlett's presentation Arithmetic, Population and Energy? I highly recommend it. Key is that ALL measures MUST include rates of growth else they are meaningless: your statement about there being enough gas and coal is devoid of any meaningful measure because it doesn't state expected growth rates (increase in rates of consumption). It's pretty simple: if you have a glass of water and I tell you have a LOT of water, enough for 30 minutes given the rate that you're currently drinking it and you then SHARE it with others, then that glass of water (given your previous rate of consumption) will NOT last you 30 minutes! You cannot consume something at a faster rate and expect it to last the same as if consumed at a lesser rate! Yet, this is exactly the failure in logic (or omission by way of ignorance) that you and others who speak in terms of "plenty" exhibit.
What happened 200 years ago? Are you all still asleep this morning?
What happened leading up to 200 years ago was that in the quaint Puritan Towns in the 18th Century Americas the world had the first spiritual Great Awakening of the modern age. They also taught their children how to think. These children became active in their government and learned all about governments from the past by reading lots of old books. Then a band of radicals amongst these civic leaders emerged and felt obliged to tell the King where he could put his Centrally Planned taxation and brutality. But not before they constructed a new form of governance that was unlike ANYTHING the world has seen before. A vast open playing field that would allow ANY honest, hard-working, God-fearing man to not only succeed but thrive.
That new government was a rousing success, it is called the US Constitution. One man called it "the 5000 Year Leap" and wrote a book on it by that name. You should read it sometime.
Did you even think about the post before you read it? The point that I was making was not to summarily criticize the advent of the use of fossil fuels and, in particular oil, but rather to make the point that the returns are dramatically contracting with the passage of time. We have not replaced this reduction in its productive return with enough new technologies. In the process of acquiring wealth by selling oil and other fossil fuels, the producers of these commodities were able to yield undue influence, whether it be through politics or economic means, that has warped public and private policy against the development of new technologies that may have put them out of business or reduced their power. Do you think it was just a coincidence that two of the last four presidents were directly tied to the oil industry?
Obviously, oil and the internal combustion engine produced great utility to the world economy and this was a good thing. Oil may have been the 'free energy' for the last 150 years but that doesn't matter when we run out of it or if more energy is required to extract it than is produced by burning it.
With that said, you are right I am completely against flight and all machines - I just use them all of the time.
Yes. Return on crude oil has declined so badly that corn-based ethanol is now competitive on its own. So competitive in fact that Congress just voted to sunset the corn-based ethanol subsidy which was ongoing since 1979. The industry is no longer considered startup and no longer needs a subsidy to remain competitive. 10% ethanol gasoline is here to stay. There's a push to up that to 15%
EROI (or EROEI) is the most important topic of our day. It transcends, but is linked to, general geopolitics and economics.
One truth table, regarding EROI, might be: Agree/Disagree & Action/Inaction.
Agree+Action=Informed (many on ZH); Disagree+Action=Impossible (incongruent) ; Agree+Inaction=Wastrel (1+ STDV) and Disagree+Inaction=Hopeless (another 1+ STDV).
If you disagree, on any level, calculate how much energy you consume each day and compare that to how much energy you can produce (or hire) in a day. Armed with your energy consumption data, compare it to historical levels (by class, if you prefer) and then to your desired standard of living.
There is no rational argument, short of a global epidemic, that can forestall the rapidly approaching net energy shortfall. Efficiencies, replacements, alternatives and so forth (even at optimum projections) do not close the gap.
I'm an optimist. We will advance. Efficiencies, replacements, alternatives and more will come. However, they will be late. There will be an adjustment. The prudent will prepare.
It's simplistic to assume that there will be a seamless adjustment to any new type of energy source. Think about it. It took 100 years to build out the current distribution system.
And this System, which is MAGNITUDES greater than any before, was built on high density, plentiful energy.
Not only will we NOT be able to make any change seamlessly, we WON'T be able to replicate the current System, there's just NOT enough energy to support continued GROWTH.
http://fora.tv/2011/10/26/Growth_Has_an_Expiration_Date#fullprogram
https://goldsilver.com/news/peak-silver-revisited-impacts-of-a-global-de...
"pretty darn low" is too high of an estimate for U.S. gold reserves!
http://www.fgmr.com/accounting-for-the-esfs-gold-swaps.html
https://www.imf.org/external/np/tre/activity/2011/122211.htm
ESF, SDR, physical gold rehypothecated... possession will be 9/10ths of the law in time, and there won't be enough lawyers on the planet to handle the paper arguments MFer's go Global, who's got the real gold??? Oh geez, it's the Federal Reserve and they're going to save us. Hahahahahahaha! Grunch time!
I think you need to rethink that.
If you haven't read "The Creature from Jekyll Island (5th edition)", by G. Edward Griffin yet, please do so. You will have a clear understanding of who the players are and what they ultimately want. A MUST READ.
I heard about this book for years, this year I finally read it. Every ten years or so a book comes along that completely changes how I view the world. Must read!
Agreed.
I was actually thinking it would be fun to buy 100 copies in bulk and hand them out @ OWS events to folks that could pass a simple "I know how to think and am open to new ideas" test.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I see this same thing with many (even here) who don't get it that ANY system that's predicated on perpetual growth on a finite planet is going to FAIL.
A gold standard cannot nor ever will protect the value of your dollar. For that you still need the best of the best for public sector budgeting, borrowing and spending. A gold standard DOES protect the value of your gold however. As we now know it does so in at least two ways: by locking in a (high) price for said metal and by quite simply not allowing it to be stolen by a Bankrupt Judge. How still unclear how Congressman Paul'smviews on a gold standard jibe with his views on Banking. The two seem to totally at odds at me...like some massive "star collision" is going on inside his head or something...anywho...
He has very clear lines of logic in his published books.
While Dr. Paul does suggest that Gold and Silver are viable currencies, his main point is that anything can be used as currency, provided that no one entity can control the supply and flow of capital.
A comment earlier in the thread rings true- there's a better than even chance that TPTB will back Dr. Paul this time. Two possiblities for that play exist- the first is that they want to discredit his theories by allowing him to take the helm of a sinking ship, and the second is that they do not want a collapse, and honestly back him.
The second, despite the bad press, is entirely possible. No matter how I look at it, there is no way that chaos and anarchy that is not severely controlled in both time and location can be good for anyone, no matter where they are on the ladder of society. Sure, temporary chaos is an essential component of scientific human control if you want to change the rules of the game, but TPTB gain far more from contented and productive workers in all levels of society than they do from ragged revolutionaries that are trying to kill them.
+1. I think there will be a chain reaction without Paul v. Obama. Win or lose at that level and it will send a strong signal to the establishment and their MSM presstitutes that they need to change. This foriegn policy stuff is absolutely going to backfire on the MSM for the left and the right. The more they both hatch schemes and false flags like the saudi ambassidor assasination plot in D.C., the fast and furious stuff, the Iraq contention, "ron paul doesn't love isreal". etc ... the deeper a hole they dig. well read types can see right through it. And those types of people are observed by others. I watched a vid clip of MSNBC Racheal Maddow with a guest host trying to triangulate. "Ron Paul and the republicans are extreme opposites of each other, why isn't there someone in the middle" ... wink wink ... obama ... TPTB..
And I also agree that Paul will implement sound money. There will be no return to gold as an "official" basis for the currency. He will cut 90% of the tax code out and audit the fed, which will take 90% of the tricks they use away, while retaining the minimal artifacts that people think are "just supposed to be there." even though they have no idea why.
If it is a Romney v. Obama contest they will have a war primed up or already going before the general, and then yes, you are going to have a breakdown in the USA that TPTB do not want.
"This foriegn policy stuff is absolutely going to backfire on the MSM"
TPTB use the MSM (they OWN it!) to float balloons. At the same time TPTB are programming the common citizen via the MSM.
The MSM is just TPTB's programming channel. The MSM doesn't care about ANY policy that it's controllers pursue just as long as they (MSM) can continue to do TPTB's bidding.
Hand me the MOP, we have a spill in aisle seven.
Management of perceptions? The question isn't what the inflation expectation number is going to be, it's what is the consensus of what people think the inflation expectation number is going to be. In order to count as a modern economy, we have to be at least 2 meta levels removed from anything meaningful. The Powers That Be exert their power by controlling what people think the inflation expectation number is going to be.
then, they program their trading bots with stochastic perception and infrared laser-tag technologies, but with different scales, ratios, denominators, time frameworks and moving averages to simulate "markets"...
...then, they have breakfast...
...then, they have someone else's breakfast.
Happy new year, slewie!
The headline for 2011; All the printing did jack S period.
I mean you think about it. Add it all up, the QEs, the operation twists, the secret bank bailouts, Greece haircuts, EU treaty after treaty, ECB cuts, ECB $600 billion bank drop.......add it all up and put that beside th S&P for the year. It 's done jack and they have saved nothing.....except for another day.
Oh must not forget my favorite Ben Bernake RED ALERT we have a Lehman moment swap lines.
Man they printed like there was no tomorrow this year. Someone do the math please.
Correct Jim....all this printing did nothing to offset deflation. And gold and silver prove it. Silver below January prices, gold still a bit up....but if there has been ongoing relentless printing, why aren't we seeing inflationary prices in commodities?........
Ans - DERIVATIVES. The ability to offer the UNBACKED paper promise of a real hamburger tomorrow for a piece of paper saying you own it today. Clear enough?
JPM still has a risk that it might have to pay back the customers of MF Global. Gold and Silver have to sink in price to allow a much lower pay-back, if/when that risk is fulfilled, from the funds that JP Morgan stole.
I expect to see further falls in gold and silver resulting from the MF Global heist. The open interest contracts fell dramatically, and the price has fallen due to a simple lack of trust in the futures market by the average, private, investor. Proof of this comes in the form of WSJ MarketWatch starting to shill the precious metals ETF's.
On silver, however, I was monitoring the futures price. My indicator apparently was for December delivery and is now gone.
What is the current indicator, and how do I update my symbol for monitoring going forward?
The bankers will disagree, they picked up a ton of prime farm land this year.
I feel disjointed
So this is the best I can come up with...Sorry...
I work my ass off all year and the best you can do is summarize it in 9 charts? I'm good with these 9. 10 was going to be frequency of copulation so I got lucky we didnt go any further.
Taxing the rich won't help get out of this mess. It's is a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
Ten Consequences of "Tax the Rich"
Care to comment on the wealth gap? Do you believe that the concentration of wealth has no effect at all on our present economic environment? If not, what other method would you propose for redistribution?
Sure. With no wealth gap at all, there would be no incentive to produce. Why produce if you can go to the beach or party or teach your kids and not produce, and still be just as wealthy as the next person?
Of course the government can try to shrink the size of the wealth gap and redistribute the wealth, but in the long run, even the beneficiaries of the wealth distribution would be better off if there was never any wealth redistribution at all because redistributing restricts the growth of the economic pie and growing the entire pie will ultimately grow even the smallest slices.
I don't mind high concentrations of wealth earned by creating capital, but I do mind high concentrations of wealth gained through political connections and by controlling where government diverts resources to.
Yes... but I'm talking about a one-off event. Do all of the anarcho capitalists think that unbridled capitalism actually exists when 1% of the starting field gets to take off minutes ahead of the rest? And I say that as a staunch libertarian and free market advocate.
Otherwise we end right up where we are... except with the very real possibility of even less constitutional protections (if that is possible).
The obvious compromise is to immediately prosecute financial crimes and see where we are then, but I suspect we're talking mole hills.
I'll posit that how level the playing field is when the starting gun fires is directly correlated to how long the charade lasts till the next inevitable bust (it's going to happen regardless of what economic system we use).
PS, it might help if you directly addressed my questions rather than talk in theories... we agree in theory.
I thought I answered it pretty well by giving a more complete answer, but I'll stick to your questions.
Q) Do you believe that the concentration of wealth has no effect at all on our present economic environment? If not, what other method would you propose for redistribution?
A) No, the concentration of wealth does effect the economy. Like I said above, if there was no wealth gap at all, there would be no incentive for anybody to work.
I propose no redistribution. I think people should keep what they earn. The government does need to collect some taxes in order to have enough resource for a national defense (not a national offense) and to protect property rights, and in order to do so it should be collect through a sales tax. I do not believe there should be an income tax, which is how it was in this country for the majority of the time. An income tax gives incentives not to produce which is bad. A sales gives an incentive not to consume and to instead save which in my book is ok because savings and investments is where the capital comes from to create business and jobs and grow the economy.
TheSilverJournal.com
TheSilverJournal, though your analysis is correct from the standpoint of economics. The problem is that you take for granted that what is 'kept' is always 'earned'. More and more, one needs to replace the word 'earned' with 'extracted' or even 'stolen'.
Which is why the power of the federal government needs to mostly disappear. The politically connected are able to profit too much from who government decides to dole the money out to. Give the government less resources and less power to regulate and crony capitalism / fascism / socialism, whatever you want to call it, will come to a halt.
TheSilverJournal, though your analysis is correct from the standpoint of economics
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
A US propagandist coming to strengthen another US citizen propagandist's propaganda.
This is how it works in this US driven world.
Perfect scheme for consumption of resources.
But what? Facts exist outside US citizens. No matter how numerous they are, US citizens voices can not turn insane assumptions into facts.
wtf, you think ASPIRING to be rich people is why people work? WTF kinda idiocy is this?
People trade their labor for goods. The more the government squanders, the more labor is needed in order to get the same amount of goods.
What the fuck is with everybody +1ing themselves? +1 capital punishment for +1ing yourself.
A) No, the concentration of wealth does effect the economy. Like I said above, if there was no wealth gap at all, there would be no incentive for anybody to work.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Makes me laugh. US citizen and their truisms. Laughable.
A lone person. Is a wealth gap possible between you and yourself?
Too funny actually.
If ever one finds oneself isolated, there is no more incentive to work because there is no wealth gap possible.
And that is the primary issue of the current state of the world, US citizenism. Leading people to manufacture absolutely nonsensical propaganda in order to try and justify US citizenism.
The US is non the solution, the US is the problem.
The question is not whether there should be a wealth gap or not... THERE WILL ALWAYS BE ONE BECAUSE ALL PEOPLE DO NOT PRODUCE EQUALLY (or, alternatively, are not equally politically connected). That is not the issue...
You have to address the present world, right here, right now, and discuss the wealth gap... We all understand the paradox of socialism (ultimately, it is self defeating in that there is no marginal incentive to produce). That's completely beside the point.
Further, the comment "if there was no wealth gap at all, there would be no incentive for anybody to work" is not accurate... this only affects marginal production. I promise that you would be in the cotton fields if a gun was pointed at your head... having nothing more than whip marks on your back to show for your efforts. You would be there working with bells on.
You also skate around the word "earn" without defining it... that's neat and all... but working america has a complete and total disconnect and misunderstanding with the notion of "work" in the FIRE industry... by your definition of earn, there can be no illicitly obtained wealth... your notion is patently incorrect.
The only thing the "work" that some produce is a devalued currency and a tax bill they'll be able to avoid. Is the wealth from this really earned?
I will dissagree with you on your answer. "If there was no wealth gap at all, there would be no incentive for anybody to work."
People produce best when they do the things they love to do.
Most successful people i've known are so because they are working for more then a paycheck.
If someone is doing a thing they hate they will not stick around and do it for long.
People will always produce things. I would suggest that you are the one who needs to change rather then trying to change others so they fit in your box.
Nothing wrong with a world full of only mom and pop operations.
I thought Ayn Rand was dead.. Holy fucking shit you guys are scary.
"If not, what other method would you propose for redistribution?"
I don't know if the wealth gap has any effect and I don't care. I would be ashamed to ask my neighbor for money just because he has more than me at the moment. I'll go out and earn my own.
When I was poor, and boy was I poor, I looked up to wealthy people. Bill Gates is worth what, $50 billion? Who cares, other than to inspire me, Gates doesn't affect me or my ability to earn and build wealth. Opportunities abound in every economic circumstance. Many fortunes are made during economic contractions. I'm out looking for deals and yet prepared for various outcomes.
Banking on the hope that someone will hand me money doesn't seem like a viable strategy. Even if it happens, it won't be enough to do squat, so why bother.
Be carful of looking up to theives.
All games need a high score i would suggest that money also have a high score. It wouldnt matter where you set its limit. Once it is set the game changes for the best.
Congradulations you won now here's a cookie, now if you would plaase get off the field so others can play. Thank you.
I'm seeing the wealth gap as intentional. I've got my own theories as to why this is useful for TPTB, but there are plausible scenarios in which this could be done with a specific goal in mind.
I'll advance one, and try not to overdo it. Let's say that you believe in "peak everything" and you do not subscribe to the Mathusian solution to the problem, but would prefer to push for humanity to expand into space. The problem is, people have been conditioned for half a century to expect relative comfort and ease as a birthright- hardly good stock for colonists.
On the other hand, scientists and engineers don't function well if they are half-starved and worrying that their wife and children are in danger, and you need them to create the technology required for the expansionist goal. It requires a caste society in which TPTB first aquire and then redistribute the wealth of the world unevenly, keeping the scientific and medical sectors healthy and protected, while the rest of the people are forced to adjust to an ever-deteriorating quality of life to both harden them against deprivation, and to make a chance at a better life more attractive, even if it is extremely dangerous.
I think all the moves are being broadcast, and this is the audtion for all of us. A two-tiered society is coming, and there's almost nothing any of us can do about it at this point. I can't presume to know the whole endgame, or the requirements for any given caste, but the writing is on the wall. This is the time to stake your claim in the new system that is rolling towards us- from what I am seeing, the choice is going to be to join the technocratic elite, or devolve to pig-farmer.
Not even sure that that scenario is "evil" or incorrect, if true. Sometimes uglyness is necessary to reach goals- Manifest Destiny certainly was no picnic on the prairie, and wildcatting for oil was not a safe and clean occupation. It's going to suck hard for some of the people, and represent a real improvement for the rest. It's happened before, and there's no reason why it couldn't be happening again now. If you don't believe it can and will happen, ask a wheelwright what he thinks about it.
Chart 4 is classic statistical propaganda:
Year on year
percentage change of
budget surplus (deficit) as a
percentage of GDP*
*Estimated
The percentage change of a percentage? Sounds like Liesman rationalizing his dick size.
Got to love some Liesman right.
But really down 10% NSA and down 21% in the NE US.
Pending Home Sales Down -10% NSA in November (But Up +7.3% SA) – CoreLogic Estimates Residential Shadow Inventory at 1.6M Unitshttp://confoundedinterest.wordpress.com/2011/12/29/pending-home-sales-do...
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
Ohhhhh, it's not too early. It just hasn't happened - on a scale of any size - yet. Sooner or later, they're going to run out of road to kick the can down. I thought 2011 would be the year, but they're more nimble than I gave them credit for. Getting close, though.
It's that last chart that is the kicker. VIX is so horribly mispriced just now...as signaled by T bill yields...that it is just plain stupid.
Yeah...no fear...Europe abot to pull the plug on a couple of its members, followed by a bank run/freeze, debt default, currency converstion chaos, etc...and there is no fear. Brilliant.
Criminal syndicate Wall Street bankers sending every last false signal they can to ill informed sheep to buy low volume melted up equity positions to them...on the hope of a new year.
Beyond expressing absolute disgust and nausea at TPTB for their fiendishness, this music captures the 2011 mood:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR8LFNUr3vw
And this captures the 2012 mood:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msyl5BxL9M8
And 2011 in 3 easy words: "Screwed The Pooch".
2012 in 2 words: Pucker Up
2012 in three other words : Bend Over Bitchez
2013 in 1 word: Frucked.
Same words as used in foreplay "brace yourself"
"Think of England"
2011 in 6 words: "Sleep, sheeple, sleep. Everything is fine."
2012 in 6 words: "Pre-collapse, 2011 in fact showed..."
"Watch your television for further instructions."
"Bend over and grab your ankles"
As long as folks are dumb enough to play stock market they will keep pretending and extendsing ...