NZ is shifting with Kim Dot.com leading the way politically. It is a member of the USA's 5 Eyes, but the people are turning against their own government. It is a socialist country, but the natural resources far outweigh the population at this point, so the capital is not bankrupted. An influx of high tech workers can transform NZ into a paradise
For anyone who has not kept up with the Kim Dotcom story I highly recommend you read this story in the guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/aug/17/kim-dotcom-megaupload-new-zealand-interviewAs Dotcom fought the extradition order through the courts, incredible details began to emerge. An unlawful court order was used to carry out the raid. Process was abused multiple times in multiple different ways. Edwards fills in the details: "He was spied on illegally. Laws were broken...
Dotcom and his lawyers discovered was that his personal data going back for years – emails, phone calls, texts, Skype calls – had been harvested using the 5-Eyes spying system...
They used XKeyscore, which is basically the Google of the 5-Eyes cloud, and they've downloaded everything, every single email, every single chat message," he says. And it was this archive of information that was used to construct the case against him.
I'm probably the one individual in the world who is closest to getting discovery on what this material is, on getting visibility around this kind of spying, and what mass surveillance actually means to an individual like me. I'm the closest anywhere in the world in a relatively good judicial system to getting the answers that they are trying to cover up. I am entitled to that data; it is a much more complete set of data than I have and it would completely exonerate me. They are sitting on a trove of evidence that I could use in my case… so what they did in order to prevent that from ever happening is that they just deleted it.
The New Zealand government froze his assets, without which he had – theoretically – no access to legal representation. (He has elsewhere tweeted: "The sad reality is that there is no justice if you can't afford it. That's why the US government seized all of our assets from the start." The result is that Dotcom, Fisher believes, is "fighting for his life. He doesn't want to do 80 years in an orange jumpsuit.
Dotcom is certainly refusing to see it any other way. The fightback has only just begun, he says. "The internet is only 20 years old. It only really took off in the last 10 years. It's all just beginning. And it's great that we now know that our data is being stored and that it can be used against us. That now will always be in the back of people's minds and it's going to drive this whole new business sector. It's going to be a cat-and-mouse game and I'm glad that everyone knows about this because we can now actually do something about it.
We can beat the intrusions of government with innovation, with technology. We can beat them with our brains. That's what the internet is all about. They can try and do all those things but in the end we'll have the technologies to beat them.
As there’s little progress in the criminal case, the U.S. launched a separate civil case asking the court to forfeit the bank accounts, cars and other seized possessions of the Megaupload defendants.
The recent US legal tactic of seizing all a persons money before a conviction depriving them of the resources needed to mount an effective defense takes us several steps down the road to tyranny. Having failed to get New Zealand to rapidly extradite and having failed to keep his assets in Hong Kong competently frozen (his lawyers can now access them for his legal defense) the US has switched tactics and is trying to win via civil forfeiture laws and just take the funds. Kim Dotcom has now been declared a fugitives from justice for refusing to voluntarily travel to the US while he appeals his extradition. The US is also arguing the Kim Dotcom's lawyers do not have the legal standing to challenge the civil forfeiture in court because of his fugitive status. Are these the actions of a free country that respects due process rule of law and constitutional rights? http://rt.com/usa/207443-kim-dotcom-megaupload-fugitives/ |
|
|
|
The whole issue of "Plan B countries" is very complex, at least for Americans. There are a slew of factors to be taken into account, and these factors have to be judged for each individual.
...
1) Plan B countries among the "developed countries"? Well, ahh, I don't know. ALL of them have arguably MOAR problems than the USA. Canada? Europe?
So where would an OROBTC go? Europe and all/most of Asia are not attractive.
In Europe Norway may be the best choice. Not tied to the Euro. Very socialist with massive taxation but sustainable (at least for a long while) with zero government debt and massive government reserves. Probably the safest currency in Europe right now. To date they have been fiscally disciplined and keep spending in line with revenues. Redistribution is not necessarily bad if it is sustainable and voluntarily chosen by an educated population with full understanding of the trade offs involved. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-30/heres-some-data-safest-fiat-currencyNorway’s central bank, which issues the krone, has among the highest capital ratios of any central bank in the world at 23.3%.
Moreover, the Norwegian government has zero net debt, i.e. its total financial assets far exceed debt.
Norway isn’t part of some supranational body like the European Union, which means that Norway cannot be stuck with some other nation’s liabilities (just as we see Luxembourg stuck with a share of Greece’s bailout…)
Last, the krone is not pegged to any other currency, so it can’t be dragged down with a sinking ship.
In a paper currency system controlled by a tiny banking elite, the Norwegian krone is as ‘low risk’ as it gets
|
|
|
|
And this is just the power of prophetic motivations. If you can dream it you can do it and if you can convince enough people of it's manifest destiny then it truly will happen.
In the spirit of having a little fun I will reply to your rational citation of Reflexivity with its natural antithesis... French poetry from the era of Romanticism"Armies cannot stop an idea whose time has come. Nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come." -Victor Hugo Of course what Victor Hugo actually wrote was "On résiste à l'invasion des armées; on ne résiste pas à l'invasion des idées." but that lacks the pizzazz of the liberal English translation.  |
|
|
|
... CoinCube must be a banker with Goldman-Sachs, look, his reply number is 666...  ... For me, that leaves Latin America. I speak Spanish, so there is some choice (but I do not speak Portuguese, so Brazil is out for me). We have our company in Peru (as well as nice in-laws there), so Peru wins by default in my case. Other places in LatAm might work: Costa Rica, Panama, Chile, Uruguay and even Paraguay might be OK. Now look what you have done. You have totally gone and blown my cover  Of those Latin American countries Costa Rica is quite nice I found it to be friendly and safe. The people were mostly middle class reasonably well educated and friendly towards foreigners. I was not at all impressed with Panama. Very poor and somewhat dangerous. I did not feel safe when I traveled there. Costa Rica also has low income taxes and no capital gains tax. There is a turbulent period coming for China wherein the people come to realize that what they've been doing doesn't work.
If China choose to tax and financially repress to prevent writing down the debt for 26 years as Japan did, then the Chinese standard of living will decline (and it is not that high yet), thus I think the Chinese peasants will riot and the system will have to change. The last major inflection point for China was when Deng embraced capitalism under a State model. This coming Minsky Moment should push China to make the shift to ending the State oppression. However during this transition, the State may try to make war with Japan as a scapegoat and to direct peasant angst towards nationalism.
I hope you are right and China smoothly transitions to a better system. Historically, however, sucessive Chinese governments do not have the best track record when it comes to smart economic choices. In an effort to maintain control the Communist party may choose the path of nationalism as you outline above and financial repression via ever increasing government spending/malinvestment. This spending would achieve "growth" and placate an increasingly agitated population for a time. To achieve your more optimal outcome requires the abolishment or at least significant restructuring/reform of the ruling communist party. I hope that happens but it does not seem inevitable to me in the immediate future. |
|
|
|
Below is a very good introduction to the concepts and consequences of fiat currency. It's is somewhat introductory but well written and easy to understand it probably a good starting point for those just learning about the concept. Great coverage of the history of fiat currency in ancient times. I learned some historical facts that I did not know previously. http://www.acting-man.com/?p=35965 |
|
|
|
Why do you think China is not bankrupt? To me they look like Japan circa 1990 http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-02-09/weak-china-import-figures-shouldn-t-spur-stimulusDriven by the vast shadow-banking sector (which contains at least $6.5 trillion of debt) and a construction boom fueled by local officials, China's debt buildup accounted for a third of all borrowing globally since 2007. In that period, total Chinese debt quadrupled to $28 trillion by mid-2014 from $7 trillion. China's public debt now stands at 282 percent of gross domestic product -- a far higher debt ratio than that of advanced economies like the U.S., Germany and Australia. The U.S. had a total debt-to-GDP ratio of about 260 per cent by the end of last year, while the U.K.'s ratio was at 277 per cent. Japan topped the world table at 415 per cent, according to Standard Chartered. It is true that current (officially reported) government spending in china as a percent of GDP at 23.9% is much lower then the USA at 41.6% or Japan at 42% But the trend is climbing and climbing rapidly.   Back in 1990 before Japan turned down it's government spending as a percentage of GDP was around 30% the government spending climbed when the economy turned down.  |
|
|
|
...
CoinCube
The time may come soon when a thread on "Plan B Countries" should be started... iamback has already given us a taste of which countries he would suggest.
I do not remember where I read a comment once, but it was to the effect of that the time to get OUT is when the pressure FIRST starts getting turned-up for real. It is clear to all who observe the trend of an "Exit Tax" that it is getting higher and higher. The comment I read pointed to when the Jews could have left Germany (at not outrageous cost) in the 1930s when all of THAT started.
One can learn from reading History. While it does not repeat, there are always parallels.
Parents of US expats are already starting to not report the birth of their children to the USA. http://blogs.wsj.com/expat/2015/02/18/when-american-expats-dont-want-their-kids-to-have-u-s-citizenship/"Jessica, who asked that her last name not be used, says she initially looked forward to getting her infant son an American passport. But after considering the implications of American citizenship, including the possibility of her son being drafted or taxed by a country where he may never live, she and her husband decided against applying for the moment.
“Ultimately it just seemed unfair to make the choice for him if there wasn’t a clear, long-term benefit for American citizenship,” she said." An American woman who didn’t want to be named and who lives in Zurich with her dual Swiss-German husband, said the American friends she consulted advised her not to apply for a U.S. passport for her daughter unless there was a specific need. “My ancestors gave up everything to move to the U.S. in the late 1800s and here I am back in Europe and not giving my daughter the right to be a U.S. citizen, a right that others have risked their life or even died to have,” she said. “Seems a bit strange but it just doesn’t make sense for us in the moment.” “I wish that it was not this way, but on balance, unless living and working in the U.S., being an American citizen is a burden not a benefit,” he said in an email exchange. “This is exacerbated by the increasingly draconian annual reporting and filing requirements for Americans abroad.” The USA may be the exception to the rule now but other countries are going to follow the example of the USA. Up next is China which will do the same. Eventually I suspect that all/most of the current bankrupt western and asian governments will go this way. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/business/international/china-starts-enforcing-tax-law-for-citizens-working-abroad.html?_r=0Chinese officials chose the American definition of income, with its worldwide scope, in issuing their tax code in 1993. It remains in force today, although with many amendments.
Now, China is taking the first steps to enforce that broad definition. China’s decision could increase pressure for similar action by countries that face sizable budget deficits and have large numbers of affluent expatriates, like Australia, Britain, France and Ireland. Although not one of these countries has shown signs yet of switching to a different model, there has been a broad increase in interest by governments around the world in sharing more information on overseas financial accounts. Japan is also likely to copy the USA. Right now they are focused on capital gains only but that will likely expand to include income in the near future. http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/1636852/japan-targets-its-expat-tax-dodgers-big-apartments-and-yachts-hong-kongThe Japanese government is planning to target the assets of expatriate citizens squirrelling wealth abroad This is not a USA problem it is a global trend. Plan B countries may become very hard to find. |
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/12/us/california-right-to-die-lawsuit/index.html"Woman suing California for her right to die at home" You have to read half way through the article to even understand that the woman in question is not as the title suggests suing for the right to die at home. She is suing for the right to physician assisted suicide. Nowhere in the article will you find the words euthanasia or physician assisted suicide. Instead she is suing for "her right to die on her own terms" and to "die with dignity." Is the word euthanasia taboo now? It looks to have been replaced with "end-of-life options." I am all for a rational discussion on the merits of physician assisted suicide. There is certainly an argument that can be made on both sides of the issue. However, when did the media starting using talking points in their news articles. I expect to see that from political pundits not mainstream news. Has it always been this bad or have I gotten more jaded in my old age and simply notice it more?
|
|
|
|
Humm 2017 huh. Early 2017 is my goal timeline to finally be debt free. If the dollar peaks in 2017 i hope its then end rather then the beginning. It would be rather anticlimatic to finally get debt free and then watch my purchasing power instantly vanish. In other news central banks are effectively financing all global government debt. I am sure this will end well.  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-15/only-question-about-so-called-recovery |
|
|
|
greek agreement deadline 28th this month grexit might start contagion I do not believe there is a high chance of a grexit. An exit would be in the best interest of the Greek people but it would cause immediate and severe economic pain. The Greek people despite recent cutbacks are not living within their means. In 2014 their budget deficit was 12.2% of GDP. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/government-budgetGreek Government Debt to GDP is 174.90% (the second largest in the world). In 2015 Greece also will owe at least 22.3 billion euros in interest and principal payments (probably more as this assumes low interest rates on Greek debt). With the planned reversals in austerity it is an open question whether the Greeks would achieve a budget surplus even if all its debt was completely forgiven (which will not happen). On the question of liberalizing labor markets, the government Greek government spokesman Sakellariis recently stated:"We will discuss it with workers and with pensioners. Whatever we do, we will do through dialogue. We will not legislate at the sole behest of outside factors." That does not sound like the stance of a government interested in building a competitive economy to but a group of people interested in spending more of other peoples money. Greece is bargaining to extract concessions from richer European taxpayers. Their government will push hard for the best deal they can get and then fold as a grexit would result in much more short term economic pain and make the pledge of the Greek government to roll back austerity impossible to achieve. The difference between the current and former Greek governments is a lot like the divide between Democrats and Republicans in the US. The former redistribute from the productive to the nonproductive poor while the latter redistribute from the productive to the nonproductive financial elite. The end result is the same. |
|
|
|
CoinCube,
Make an escape plan while you still can.
“As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air – however slight – lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.” ― Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas 1976. I do not dispute that twilight is upon us.  As discussed upthread the fee to renounce US citizenship was just increased by 422%. This means it costs more then twenty times as much to renounce US citizenship as it does in other rich countries. In the future the Ex-PATRIOT Act (“Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy” Act) or something like it will become law. "Renouncing citizenship... is an insult to middle class Americans and we will not accept it." ― Senator Bob Casey 2012 The Ex-PATRIOT Act would presume that anyone with a net worth of $2 million or an average income tax liability of at least $148,000 over the last five years to have renounced their citizenship for tax avoidance purposes. The IRS would then prospectively impose a tax on the individual’s future investment gains, no matter where he or she resides or what new citizenship they have claimed. The rate of this capital gains tax would be 30 percent. Even renouncing now for high net worth individuals may not get them the desired escape. For the Ex-PATRIOT would retroactively reclassify all people who lost citizenship or permanent residence in the decade prior to the law's passage as potentially having "tax avoidance intent" and subject them to the laws penalties. The Ex-PATRIOT act is not currently law, but it was submitted to congress for consideration in 2012 and again as an amendment in 2013. Given the underlying trends in the economy a passage of this act or something worse seems inevitable. Compared to the potential threat of something like the Ex-PATRIOT act the 422% fee increase to renounce is peanuts. I fully expect 2015 to set a new record for US citizen renunciations. We live in interesting times. |
|
|
|
I don't read the New York Times much anymore but this article is worth passing along as a cautionary story. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-middle-span-region®ion=c-column-middle-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-middle-span-regionAs she made the long journey from New York to South Africa, to visit family during the holidays in 2013, Justine Sacco, 30 years old and the senior director of corporate communications at IAC, began tweeting acerbic little jokes. No one replied, which didn’t surprise her. She had only 170 Twitter followers.
Sacco boarded the plane. It was an 11-hour flight, so she slept. When the plane landed in Cape Town and was taxiing on the runway, she turned on her phone. Right away, she got a text from someone she hadn’t spoken to since high school: “I’m so sorry to see what’s happening.” Sacco looked at it, baffled.
Then another text: “You need to call me immediately.” It was from her best friend, Hannah. Then her phone exploded with more texts and alerts. And then it rang. It was Hannah. “You’re the No. 1 worldwide trend on Twitter right now,” she said.
Sacco’s Twitter feed had become a horror show. If one bad joke can destroy your life actually advocating "wrong" viewpoints may someday bring even swifter retribution. It is quite possible that the Overton window will eventually shift to the point where even topics like economic devastation are forbidden. |
|
|
|
It's funny how no Americans want to pay for a more universal system, but when cancer comes knocking; all of a sudden everyone is willing to spend what it takes whether they can afford it or not.
...
What about when you're old: maybe you will need heart surgery, medications, cancer, a walking aid, a wheelchair... The list goes on. If you privatize all this and continue to make uninformed comments about the system, you will pay for these out of your own pocket. Are you going to do that? Are you willing to put 1/4 of your paycheck away for unknown costs now and into the future regarding your own health?
It's easy to say what you do, but you have no idea the full implications of this. I am in the healthcare profession. I see it everyday. Start thinking about your fellow MAN and not your next dollar.
Singapore has a very successful system because EVERYONE pays. The US is struggling because we are trying to transition to a system that can support everyone because the current system cannot. Of course the young are needed to get the transition started. Have a little compassion for your fellow man. Obama is not forcing the young en mass to empty their pockets to support the old and dying. It's not a perfect idea, but it has a sustainability factor to it that the current system doesn't.
% of Singapore GDP spent on health care = 3% % of USA GDP spent on health care = 18% Medical care in Singapore is generally considered excellent. Singapore has a successfully system not because "everyone pays" but because everyone is forced to save and then spend their own money on health care rather then send the bill to "insurance" where is magically disappears for future generations to worry about. As mentioned above it is a system of personal responsibility. If an individual dies without spending all of their health care savings they can pass that on to their children. Also family members can use their own health savings to pay for an ill loved one. Government only steps in when individual resources are exhausted. There is a massive power imbalance in the physician patient relationship that you touch on above in your examples of cancer and car crashes. People in these situations are not in a position where then can negotiate or make intelligent cost benefit analysis in regards to health care and are essentially forced to pay whatever the doctor charges. This is where there is a role for government. Not to step in with a blank check, but rather to forcefully pre-negotiate on behalf of such patients to control costs. As someone who profits from the status quo it is you who I would challenge to start thinking about your fellow MAN not your next dollar. Do you truly think the system of health care which in the US is sustainable? Obamacare may not be forcing the young en mass to empty their pockets en mass to support the old and dying now, but that is only because we are kicking the can down the road. The current system will do exactly that when taken to its logical conclusion. It is the inevitable result of flawed policy. |
|
|
|
The two speeches are miles apart: PM Hsien is beautifully practicing the art of obscurity; saying a whole lot without really saying anything. Very common in propaganda. Pres. Obama on the other hand has laid out specifics in his speech. He covers the insured (existing), those who may want to be insured (small business, etc.) and those who don't think they need to be (the young/healthy). Sorry B.A.S you are not understanding. The Prime Minister focused on sustainability stressing the need for individuals to take personal responsibility and save for their own healthcare (Singapore currently requires all citizens to save 20% of their income in health savings accounts which the can tap if they become ill). He stresses the need for government to keep costs contained and not shift expenses to future generations by promising things that cannot be delivered. He warns that if the government succumbs to the temptation to promise benefits while leaving bills to the next generation it will hurt Singaporeans in the long run. Obama's speech is miles apart. Here you find no talk of tradeoffs, personal responsibility or costs. Instead all you see is a litany of open ended unfunded promises. 1) Obama promises that those who have insurance can keep their current plan 2) Obama promises that no insurance company can deny you insurance coverage no matter how much treating you will cost. 3) Obama promises that there will be no limits on how much insurance companies will have to pay to take care of you 4) Obama promises that that individuals out of pocket expenses will be strictly limited What is brushed aside is who pays for it all. We are only told that everyone must do their part "especially the young and the healthy". Obama's first promise has already been broken as millions of people have been forced to transition from low cost health insurance plans that insurance companies were forced to cancel to more expensive Obamacare alternatives. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/nov/06/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-what-hed-said-was-you-could-keep/The rest of the promises will over time eventually prove equally false because you cannot promise the impossible. If you set up a system with open ended liabilities and no cost controls there is no one to blame but yourself when you go bankrupt. The only question is how far will the government go when making sure everyone pays "their part". |
|
|
|
Singapore Prime Minister Lee gave a speach about health care today. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/4-shifts-in-singapore-s/1648186.htmlCompare his speech to one given by president Obama in 2009. Its fairly clear which of these societies is in trouble just from the content of these speeches. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in a speech at the Universal Health Coverage Ministerial Meeting. "We know there will be political pressure to defer necessary fee increases and to manage the services. And it's easy to leave bills to the next generation and focus on the short-term political gain," he said. "If we succumb to this temptation, we will end up with system which becomes non-viable, and will hurt Singaporeans not just financially, but even purely in health terms."
He added that Singapore's healthcare efforts depend on "a supportive political environment", with people willing to take personal responsibility to save for their own healthcare and participate in a universal medical insurance scheme, healthcare providers ensuring that they deliver cost-effective care, and the Government adopting a people-centred approach while staying hard-headed about costs.
"(The Government must) be a trustworthy steward, presenting the trade-offs as they are to the citizens and not sacrifice tomorrow for today’s political gain," said Mr Lee.
"Healthcare is always an emotional and political issue – it's tempting to make promises and say we will do more, we will do better and it will cost less."
He added that every dollar that the Government spends on healthcare is a dollar taken from taxpayers : "This requires an honest conversation among ourselves, and hard choices made, so that we can move ahead together, with clarity on what our society wants and stands for."
Compare this to President Obama talking about health care in 2009 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/transcript-obamas-health-care-speech/President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9, 2009 Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan. First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. (Applause.) Let me repeat this: Nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.
What this plan will do is make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a preexisting condition. (Applause.) As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it the most. (Applause.) They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or in a lifetime. (Applause.) We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. (Applause.) And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies -- (applause) -- because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives. (Applause.)
Now, that's what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan -- more security and more stability.
Now, if you're one of the tens of millions of Americans who don't currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. (Applause.) If you lose your job or you change your job, you'll be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you'll be able to get coverage.
Now... there may be those -- especially the young and the healthy -- who still want to take the risk and go without coverage... The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money.... unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek -- especially requiring insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions -- just can't be achieved.
|
|
|
|
China is not entirely a false economy. They are the manufacturer for the entire world, and their people have gained much knowledge. The white Chinese are very erudite. China is transitioning from a top-down to a bottom-up economy. These debt excesses exist in the top-down economy which eventually is going away (along with the Communist Party).
I would not look to China for leadership in Asia. Lots of factors there including corruption massive malinvestment and the communist party itself that will slow China down. Instead look at Singapore. There you have something quite interesting happening. A country that welcomes foreign immigration has low taxation and has a somewhat sustainable medical system. It is also technically a democracy (although a very limited one). In a world where governments are smothering their populaces with unsustainable handouts while allowing their wealth to be stolen via fractional monetary dilution Singapore's citizens are forced to operate at a substantial if transient handicap. Perhaps that's part of the reason it has the lowest birthrate in the world 0.8 children per couple. The entire country is a competitive pressure cooker. What survives and emerges from that pressure cooker may amaze the world. It of all countries strikes me as perhaps the best positioned for the future. The worst possible citizenship to have now is USA, because the USA has the strongest government, military, and a large tax base to expropriate. If you have this citizenship, try to get out of it while you still can. Europe at least doesn't tax its citizens who reside abroad. Europe may collapse into the night without hunting its citizens abroad and its has a withering tax base unable to fund a military, but the USA is going to be hunting its citizens even with unseen stealth drones from the air.
An interesting assertion. The US is likely to be a safe haven for at least a little while if/when Japan and Europe turn south. I agree that the trend appears to be leaning towards increased tracking of US citizens abroad and discouraging them from renouncing their citizenship while taxing them on foreign earnings. If you are a high net worth individual or you have a breakthrough business idea I see the argument. However for the average Jo I do not see the advantage. |
|
|
|
I was curious today about what countries have the highest ratio of wealth * fertility. As a simple measure of prosperity this multiple tells us which countries are both somewhat wealthy and have a population that is reproducing. Using median income would have been best but the only data I could find that included all countries was GDP (purchasing power parity) per capita. Source of data was https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/The top fifty countries sorted by the multiple of average fertility multiplied by GDP per capita. Ranking Fertility Per Capita GDP1 Qatar 1.92 102100 2 Bermuda 1.95 86000 3 Liechtenstein 1.69 89400 4 Luxembourg 1.77 77900 5 Monaco 1.52 85500 6 Equatorial Guinea 4.66 25700 7 Timor-Leste 5.11 21400 8 Kuwait 2.53 42100 9 United States 2.01 52800 10 Isle of Man 1.94 53800 11 Norway 1.86 55400 12 Brunei 1.82 54800 13 Israel 2.62 36200 14 Jersey 1.66 57000 15 Gabon 4.49 19200 16 Oman 2.86 29800 17 Switzerland 1.54 54800 18 Ireland 2 41300 19 Gibraltar 1.92 43000 20 Macau 0.93 88700 21 Cayman Islands 1.86 43800 22 Greenland 2.06 38400 23 Netherlands 1.78 43300 24 Sweden 1.88 40900 25 Iceland 1.88 40700 26 Australia 1.77 43000 27 New Caledonia 1.99 37700 28 France 2.08 35700 29 Faroe Islands 2.38 30500 30 United Kingdom 1.9 37300 31 United Arab Em 2.36 29900 32 Guernsey 1.55 44600 33 Canada 1.59 43100 34 Guam 2.38 28700 35 Saudi Arabia 2.17 31300 36 Denmark 1.73 37800 37 Bahamas, The 1.97 32000 38 Belgium 1.65 37800 39 New Zealand 2.05 30400 40 Finland 1.73 35900 41 Hong Kong 1.17 52700 42 Austria 1.43 42600 43 Germany 1.43 39500 44 Saint Pierre 1.56 34900 45 Bahrain 1.81 29800 46 British Virgin Isl. 1.25 42300 47 Japan 1.4 37100 48 Andorra 1.38 37200 49 Singapore 0.8 62400 50 Turks and Caicos 1.7 29100 The top of the list is definitly skewed by the tax haven countries which have atypically large GDP's due to the wealth hiding there. Others are skewed by a very high birth rate. |
|
|
|
Sometimes the comment section at zerohedge is quite good. Asset Ownership And Our System Of Deepening Debt-SerfdomHistory is clear in the light it sheds on the tendency of human societies to freeze into hierarchical structures and remain that way until the structure fails because it can no longer adapt.
This country (America) had the good fortune to come into being about the same time that communication accelerated making it possible for men who rejected serfdom to form a like minded group with an awareness of the conditions necessary to defend against it.
They did an elegant job.
It wasn't good enough. We again have the inevitable ridgid hierarchical structure.
Communications have again accelerated. The time has come for men who cannot live as serfs to recognize that we have come full circle.
An awareness is the primary requirement. An aware person acts locally using his convictions as a guide. If we are to be a nation of free men we must believe at the grass roots level that we are not serfs and act accordingly. A true American respects our Founders. A true American also would desire to be respected by our Founders.
|
|
|
|
Dude, you're saying reducing the money supply will lead to lower prices for that currency? What?
Not at all. I am saying that a decrease in the amount of money in circulation can result one of three outcomes. Only one of those outcomes is that P the price level of goods and services drops. It's a lot easier to understand once you realize that for the economy as a whole P*T = GDP. If you decrease M and Vt is somehow held constant then GDP drops. To understand this just look at an extreme examples (things become more clear at the extremes). Imagine that government suddenly mandated that 50% of everyone's after tax wages and half of all existing liquid currency be invested in 30 year government bonds. Say then then burned or destroyed all of the money used to buy those bonds and made it illegal to trade those bonds in exchange for goods or services. In this admittedly ridiculous example we would expect all sorts of bad things to happen. One thing that would happen is a drop in the price level P for goods and services in the economy. The shopkeeper would still need to sell his goods to make a living. It would be impossible for him to charge the same or higher prices for his goods overall. People would simply not be able to pay the same prices they did in the past. Now in this extreme example we would probably also see a big drop in velocity Vt and in the real value of transactions that occurred T as well. The result would be economic collapse. However, if Vt and T are somehow magically held constant the only thing that could happen in response to a drop in the amount of money in circulation is a drop in the price level. That is just basic math. Obviously having fewer overall units of a desired but limited asset like cryptocurrency will not resulted in lower prices per unit for that asset. That has nothing to do with what I wrote. I simply showed that the quantity theory of money cannot (by itself) justify the claim that excess savings are no big deal because they make everything cheaper. the equation does not require that a change in the money supply would change the value of any or all of P, Q, or P*Q. For example, a 10% increase in M could be accompanied by a change of 1/(1 + 10%) in V, leaving P*Q unchanged.
In the real world we are seeing a massive increase in M with a simultaneous decrease in Vt. The overall effect on GDP or P*T remains in some dispute. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
