Hide your kids, hide your wife!

[bambou]

Could not stop thinking of that simple chart:

I mean, thats economics 101! It is going down at some point! (hell, it is even outperforming bitcoin's super exponantial hypothesis!)

And they claim that bitcoin is actually more volatile/dangerous.. i mean.. seriously???
How can they misguide 7Bn of human being like foolish sheeps into the depth of their incompetence without an ounce of remorse?
Are they all corrupted or do some of them actually buy this? ('they' = medias, governments, central banks and so on...)

The FED is EVIL (and surely not Bitcoin):

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-11/guest-post-greatest-myth-propagated-about-fed-central-bank-independence-part-1

FED is THE rapist of all times!

So my advice: hide your kids, hide your wife.. and get some BTCs!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHpluwP328A

edit: although i believe most people in this forum are actually aware of this, i figured that this 'bed intruder song' fits the FED perfectly

[1715552284]

1715552284

[1715552284]

1715552284

[1715552284]

1715552284

[Lethn]

Most people on this forum have already known about this for awhile now but yes, it is pretty amazing how the central banks have such a huge amount of the population completely fooled, to be honest, I just look at it as a far better chance of me becoming a millionaire than the lottery.

[deisik]

I mean, thats economics 101! It is going down at some point! (hell, it is even outperforming bitcoin's super exponantial hypothesis!)

And they claim that bitcoin is actually more volatile/dangerous.. i mean.. seriously???
How can they misguide 7Bn of human being like foolish sheeps into the depth of their incompetence without an ounce of remorse?
Are they all corrupted or do some of them actually buy this? ('they' = medias, governments, central banks and so on...)

The FED is EVIL (and surely not Bitcoin)

As long as they can constrain inflation in reasonable limits as they do, it doesn't matter. In fact, the FED is fighting with deflation which is more dangerous for the economy (the Japan example is pretty evident, since they lagged with their QEs)...

[FenixRD]

I mean, thats economics 101! It is going down at some point! (hell, it is even outperforming bitcoin's super exponantial hypothesis!)

And they claim that bitcoin is actually more volatile/dangerous.. i mean.. seriously???
How can they misguide 7Bn of human being like foolish sheeps into the depth of their incompetence without an ounce of remorse?
Are they all corrupted or do some of them actually buy this? ('they' = medias, governments, central banks and so on...)

The FED is EVIL (and surely not Bitcoin)

As long as they can constrain inflation in reasonable limits as they do, it doesn't matter. In fact, the FED is fighting with deflation which is more dangerous for the economy (the Japan example is pretty evident, since they lagged with their QEs)...

Uh, get the fuck out. I cannot stand this fucking lie. That only is true if you want to disincentivize any travel beyond your national border. Perhaps governments do.

My wife is Japanese. Besides some major corporations that can afford to export their products again, let me tell you something. There was no homelessness or joblessness, no credit misuse -- they don't even have CCs except for international travel, and everything is cash or RFID-debit-card (PASMO, SUICA, etc).

The only thing that's different now that they've done their own QE, for 99.999% of Japanese is the JPY/USD rate went from $1 = 73¥ to 100¥ in mere months. It's at like 105¥ now. And the USD is depreciating against other assets (like the CNY) so that's not even the whole story. So for a Japanese, that just means one thing: Your wages are the same, your savings are the SAME, but unless it's bread and rice bought IN JAPAN, it costs 130% what it did. There goes your retirement trip to Guam, or Hawaii. Trips to NYC to buy American fashions.

All of a sudden your money doesn't do near as much. And for what? Why would they do this foolishness?

1) Pressure from all the foreign bankers and governments in regimes more inflationary.
2) Japan had also succumbed to the ponzi promise of social security, paying for today's retires with estimated future GDP. With no luck getting the birthrate up, there was only QE.

Regarding #2, there is immense sadness and irony because perhaps your pension and social security comes in now, as due, but you can't buy shit with it if you leave Japan. So I hope your retirement dream was to sit at home and not travel.

FUCK you for perpetuating the lie, fuck the banks for doing it, fuck Abe-san for agreeing to this madness. Her parents now have to be far more careful about when to visit, or how to travel. Just 1 year ago this was not even a thought in their minds, but now I have their daughter 6000 miles away and all of a sudden their savings are worth 2/3 what it once was, through no fault of their own. 

[Kungfucheez]

I mean, thats economics 101! It is going down at some point! (hell, it is even outperforming bitcoin's super exponantial hypothesis!)

And they claim that bitcoin is actually more volatile/dangerous.. i mean.. seriously???
How can they misguide 7Bn of human being like foolish sheeps into the depth of their incompetence without an ounce of remorse?
Are they all corrupted or do some of them actually buy this? ('they' = medias, governments, central banks and so on...)

The FED is EVIL (and surely not Bitcoin)

As long as they can constrain inflation in reasonable limits as they do, it doesn't matter. In fact, the FED is fighting with deflation which is more dangerous for the economy (the Japan example is pretty evident, since they lagged with their QEs)...

Uh, get the fuck out. I cannot stand this fucking lie. That only is true if you want to disincentivize any travel beyond your national border. Perhaps governments do.

My wife is Japanese. Besides some major corporations that can afford to export their products again, let me tell you something. There was no homelessness or joblessness, no credit misuse -- they don't even have CCs except for international travel, and everything is cash or RFID-debit-card (PASMO, SUICA, etc).

The only thing that's different now that they've done their own QE, for 99.999% of Japanese is the JPY/USD rate went from $1 = 73¥ to 100¥ in mere months. It's at like 105¥ now. And the USD is depreciating against other assets (like the CNY) so that's not even the whole story. So for a Japanese, that just means one thing: Your wages are the same, your savings are the SAME, but unless it's bread and rice bought IN JAPAN, it costs 130% what it did. There goes your retirement trip to Guam, or Hawaii. Trips to NYC to buy American fashions.

All of a sudden your money doesn't do near as much. And for what? Why would they do this foolishness?

1) Pressure from all the foreign bankers and governments in regimes more inflationary.
2) Japan had also succumbed to the ponzi promise of social security, paying for today's retires with estimated future GDP. With no luck getting the birthrate up, there was only QE.

Regarding #2, there is immense sadness and irony because perhaps your pension and social security comes in now, as due, but you can't buy shit with it if you leave Japan. So I hope your retirement dream was to sit at home and not travel.

FUCK you for perpetuating the lie, fuck the banks for doing it, fuck Abe-san for agreeing to this madness. Her parents now have to be far more careful about when to visit, or how to travel. Just 1 year ago this was not even a thought in their minds, but now I have their daughter 6000 miles away and all of a sudden their savings are worth 2/3 what it once was, through no fault of their own. 

What are you even going on about? You people need to take a fucking chill pill every once and awhile 

[deisik]

The only thing that's different now that they've done their own QE, for 99.999% of Japanese is the JPY/USD rate went from $1 = 73¥ to 100¥ in mere months. It's at like 105¥ now. And the USD is depreciating against other assets (like the CNY) so that's not even the whole story. So for a Japanese, that just means one thing: Your wages are the same, your savings are the SAME, but unless it's bread and rice bought IN JAPAN, it costs 130% what it did. There goes your retirement trip to Guam, or Hawaii. Trips to NYC to buy American fashions.

Just taking this part of your post

For an export oriented country (which is Japan) this is good on the economy level. If you don't get what it means or just can't fathom how this can ever be possible, I may try to explain this to you in simple terms. It means that when your currency is depreciating against the currencies of your trade partners, the life of population on average becomes better, because you (your country) begin earning more abroad from your exports than you spend on your imports (simple arithmetics), whereas domestic goods (bread and rice) stay the same as you correctly noted...

[FenixRD]

The only thing that's different now that they've done their own QE, for 99.999% of Japanese is the JPY/USD rate went from $1 = 73¥ to 100¥ in mere months. It's at like 105¥ now. And the USD is depreciating against other assets (like the CNY) so that's not even the whole story. So for a Japanese, that just means one thing: Your wages are the same, your savings are the SAME, but unless it's bread and rice bought IN JAPAN, it costs 130% what it did. There goes your retirement trip to Guam, or Hawaii. Trips to NYC to buy American fashions.

Just taking this part of your post

For an export oriented country (which is Japan) this is good on the economy level. If you don't get what it means or just can't fathom how this can ever be possible, I may try to explain this to you in simple terms. It means that when your currency is depreciating against the currencies of your trade partners, the life of population on average becomes better, because you (your country) begin earning more abroad from your exports than you spend on your imports (simple arithmetics), whereas domestic goods (bread and rice) stay the same as you correctly noted...

Kid, just don't. I'm far more qualified to discuss any form of mathematics you care to invoke. You can begin by recognizing that the plural of arithmetic is arithmetic. I'm not going to bother listing qualifications; they're floating around here in places, and this is a forum so who gives a shit if I claim to be the Prince of Wales, but I will not be party to any "if you don't get..." condescension. I know more about this than you can possibly imagine. My qualifications are, let's say, very related and strongly math-based. And yes, I am fucking pissed, because this just reminds me of how goddamned heartbreaking it is for her parents and millions of others in the same situation. They aren't getting anything out of this. There are other ways of fixing it.

Put simply: QE is not incentives-compatible with repairing economic mismanagement in a global economy.

Go nuts, show me how it is, with your "arithmetics".

[deisik]

The only thing that's different now that they've done their own QE, for 99.999% of Japanese is the JPY/USD rate went from $1 = 73¥ to 100¥ in mere months. It's at like 105¥ now. And the USD is depreciating against other assets (like the CNY) so that's not even the whole story. So for a Japanese, that just means one thing: Your wages are the same, your savings are the SAME, but unless it's bread and rice bought IN JAPAN, it costs 130% what it did. There goes your retirement trip to Guam, or Hawaii. Trips to NYC to buy American fashions.

Just taking this part of your post

For an export oriented country (which is Japan) this is good on the economy level. If you don't get what it means or just can't fathom how this can ever be possible, I may try to explain this to you in simple terms. It means that when your currency is depreciating against the currencies of your trade partners, the life of population on average becomes better, because you (your country) begin earning more abroad from your exports than you spend on your imports (simple arithmetics), whereas domestic goods (bread and rice) stay the same as you correctly noted...

Kid, just don't. I'm far more qualified to discuss any form of mathematics you care to invoke. You can begin by recognizing that the plural of arithmetic is arithmetic. I'm not going to bother listing qualifications; they're floating around here in places, and this is a forum so who gives a shit if I claim to be the Prince of Wales, but I will not be party to any "if you don't get..." condescension. I know more about this than you can possibly imagine. My qualifications are, let's say, very related and strongly math-based. And yes, I am fucking pissed, because this just reminds me of how goddamned heartbreaking it is for her parents and millions of others in the same situation. They aren't getting anything out of this. There are other ways of fixing it.

Put simply: QE is not incentives-compatible with repairing economic mismanagement in a global economy.

Go nuts, show me how it is, with your "arithmetics".

Lol, I can always back off that English is not my mother language, but this is irrelevant to the point I made about economics (and which is not about mathematics) as well as your notion about arithmetics (and you are wrong actually about even this, so your qualifications are strongly doubted). Now it is your time to explain where I am wrong (besides sheer nitpicking and unrelated semantics)...

You may use either arithmetic or arithmetics, I don't care as long as you're concise and your ideas are clear

[FenixRD]

Lol, I can always back off that English is not my mother language, but this is irrelevant to the point I made about economics (which is not about mathematics) as well as your notion about arithmetics. Now it is your time to explain where I am wrong (besides sheer nitpicking and unrelated semantics)...

Pretty sure you said you had arithmetic to show me wrong. Prove it already. Break out the Cambridge equation, move some numbers, account for variables, and show me your mastery of the interactions of myriad semi-isolated economies in the context of the global economy. Don't leave out any currencies or subeconomies where value can be transferred and stored.

The burden is absolutely on you. Not only has it not worked anywhere else its been tried, not even here; and, not only was John M. Keynes himself utterly against it, though the so-called Keynesians would be shocked to find this out I'm sure; but we have multiple clear examples where wealth has been absolutely stolen from populations who have spent their lifetimes maintaining and acquiring it responsibly, under the murky guise of some economic doomsday that could not have been solved any other way!

Show me. Give me a sliver of mathematical proof that hints that your theory is right.

[deisik]

Lol, I can always back off that English is not my mother language, but this is irrelevant to the point I made about economics (which is not about mathematics) as well as your notion about arithmetics. Now it is your time to explain where I am wrong (besides sheer nitpicking and unrelated semantics)...

Pretty sure you said you had arithmetic to show me wrong. Prove it already. Break out the Cambridge equation, move some numbers, account for variables, and show me your mastery of the interactions of myriad semi-isolated economies in the context of the global economy. Don't leave out any currencies or subeconomies where value can be transferred and stored.

The burden is absolutely on you. Not only has it not worked anywhere else its been tried, not even here; and, not only was John M. Keynes himself utterly against it, though the so-called Keynesians would be shocked to find this out I'm sure; but we have multiple clear examples where wealth has been absolutely stolen from populations who have spent their lifetimes maintaining and acquiring it responsibly, under the murky guise of some economic doomsday that could not have been solved any other way!

Show me. Give me a sliver of mathematical proof that hints that your theory is right.

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

[FenixRD]

Lol, I can always back off that English is not my mother language, but this is irrelevant to the point I made about economics (which is not about mathematics) as well as your notion about arithmetics. Now it is your time to explain where I am wrong (besides sheer nitpicking and unrelated semantics)...

Pretty sure you said you had arithmetic to show me wrong. Prove it already. Break out the Cambridge equation, move some numbers, account for variables, and show me your mastery of the interactions of myriad semi-isolated economies in the context of the global economy. Don't leave out any currencies or subeconomies where value can be transferred and stored.

The burden is absolutely on you. Not only has it not worked anywhere else its been tried, not even here; and, not only was John M. Keynes himself utterly against it, though the so-called Keynesians would be shocked to find this out I'm sure; but we have multiple clear examples where wealth has been absolutely stolen from populations who have spent their lifetimes maintaining and acquiring it responsibly, under the murky guise of some economic doomsday that could not have been solved any other way!

Show me. Give me a sliver of mathematical proof that hints that your theory is right.

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

Ignore the plural / singular shit. In my anger I committed a logical fallacy; let's not continue that bad habit. Your use of arithmetics, right or wrong (or regional, which is more likely) has little bearing on your point. Likewise, my qualifications are not as a linguist, so we can safely disregard it I reckon.

But if you believe that economics is not mathematics, we may have to part ways now, because you might as well predict and model it with astrology if you aren't using math.

[deisik]

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

Ignore the plural / singular shit. In my anger I committed a logical fallacy; let's not continue that bad habit. Your use of arithmetics, right or wrong (or regional, which is more likely) has little bearing on your point. Likewise, my qualifications are not as a linguist, so we can safely disregard it I reckon.

You raised that shit and it remains on you

[bambou]

Fair enough gentlemen, please stop comparing your junks.
I believe no one can seriously think QE is a sustainable policy for any country and considering the long run (and the future generations).
Wealth has to be created.. not printed..

[deisik]

But if you believe that economics is not mathematics, we may have to part ways now, because you might as well predict and model it with astrology if you aren't using math.

I don't believe, I know this for sure. Economics is about human psychology, first and before all. I never said anything about economics being based on astrology. And yes, astrology also uses some math (should we discredit mathematics on account of that?). Your assumption is wrong again...

Should we go on?

[FenixRD]

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

Ignore the plural / singular shit. In my anger I committed a logical fallacy; let's not continue that bad habit. Your use of arithmetics, right or wrong (or regional, which is more likely) has little bearing on your point. Likewise, my qualifications are not as a linguist, so we can safely disregard it I reckon.

You raised that shit and it remains on you

Are you absolutely dense? I just admitted that I brought up the pluralization of arithmetic foolishly, illogically, and emotionally. Move on with your end. Stop sidetracking the issue. No one here cares to allow you to belabor the fact that I made a poor debate choice 6 posts ago. I admit it, now on with the math, please.

[deisik]

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

Ignore the plural / singular shit. In my anger I committed a logical fallacy; let's not continue that bad habit. Your use of arithmetics, right or wrong (or regional, which is more likely) has little bearing on your point. Likewise, my qualifications are not as a linguist, so we can safely disregard it I reckon.

You raised that shit and it remains on you

Are you absolutely dense? I just admitted that I brought up the pluralization of arithmetic foolishly, illogically, and emotionally. Move on with your end. Stop sidetracking the issue. No one hear cares to allow you to belabor the fact that I made a poor debate choice 6 posts ago. I admit it, now on with the math, please.

How can I be sure that you won't go on like that, lol? You discredited yourself, period. Hope this will serve you a lesson, though scarcely...

[FenixRD]

But if you believe that economics is not mathematics, we may have to part ways now, because you might as well predict and model it with astrology if you aren't using math.

I don't believe, I know this for sure. Economics is about human psychology, first and before all. I never said anything about economics being based on astrology. And yes, astrology also uses some math. Your assumption is wrong again...

Should we go on?

Oh, fuck me, you're one of those.

Never mind, no, don't go on. I might as well debate Scientology.

Astronomy uses math. Astrology uses superstition regarding temporally-relative positions.

To properly model economics and include the element of human behavior, some brilliant fellows laid the groundwork for game theory, thus allowing it all to still be math. This is the calculus of economic modeling. Not using this is akin to trying to work out quantum field theory with an abacus. No wonder you're lost.

/subthread... carry on gentlemen. Derailed due to emotional response at mention of Japan; it turns out the commenter has no knowledge of Japan, or any general economic theory relevant in the last two decades.

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

Ignore the plural / singular shit. In my anger I committed a logical fallacy; let's not continue that bad habit. Your use of arithmetics, right or wrong (or regional, which is more likely) has little bearing on your point. Likewise, my qualifications are not as a linguist, so we can safely disregard it I reckon.

You raised that shit and it remains on you

Are you absolutely dense? I just admitted that I brought up the pluralization of arithmetic foolishly, illogically, and emotionally. Move on with your end. Stop sidetracking the issue. No one hear cares to allow you to belabor the fact that I made a poor debate choice 6 posts ago. I admit it, now on with the math, please.

How can I be sure that you won't go on like that, lol? You discredited yourself, period. Hope this will serve you a lesson, though scarcely...

Ah. Yes. I trust that we can all look past this... I certainly am much more clear on who knows what. I have learned my lesson, please forgive me my assumptions... all of them...

[deisik]

To properly model economics and include the element of human behavior, some brilliant fellows laid the groundwork for game theory, thus allowing it all to still be math. This is the calculus of economic modeling. Not using this is akin to trying to work out quantum field theory with an abacus. No wonder you're lost

Lol, the deepest insights into the most important economic matters (such as subjective valuation of things which makes exchange ever possible) can be formulated with primitive mathematics (or even without it) and are based entirely on human psychology...

[deisik]

Now to the point (let's forget about you being a douchebag)

Your country exports 1000 units of goods (in money terms) and imports 500 (typical export oriented economy). Due to depreciation of its currency it can now export twice as many, i.e. 2000 units, and import twice as less, i.e 250 units. But since it has got the net surplus of 1000 units through exports, it can now easily buy missing 250 units and still have a surplus of 750 units

[FenixRD]

Now to the point (let's forget about you being a douchebag)

Your country exports 1000 units of goods (in money terms) and imports 500 (typical export oriented economy). Due to depreciation of its currency it can now export twice as many, i.e. 2000 units, and given initial conditions, import twice as less, i.e 250 units. But since it has got the net surplus of 1000 units through exports, it can now easily buy missing 250 units and still have a surplus of 750 units

I can think of not a single case when such an oversimplification could be useful. You have disregarded almost every variable and initial condition possibility. There are more countries, timescales are involved, natural resources. This is so absurd I will not bother to go on. Please just stop.

To properly model economics and include the element of human behavior, some brilliant fellows laid the groundwork for game theory, thus allowing it all to still be math. This is the calculus of economic modeling. Not using this is akin to trying to work out quantum field theory with an abacus. No wonder you're lost

Lol, the deepest insights into the most important economic matters (such as subjective valuation of things which makes exchange ever possible) can be formulated with primitive mathematics (or even without it) and are based entirely on human psychology...

Primitive indeed. Let's just stare at the stars and rationalize them as fireflies on a bedsheet. That sounds so very peaceful... I hope you'll join me...