Hide your kids, hide your wife!

[deisik]

Yes, this is a common practice which is obviously not applicable here and makes confusion only (and confuses people at that). We were "talking" (lol) about Japan and their counter parties (that would primarily be the USA) in which case the whole picture is aggravated not only by floating exchange rates (this could be dealt with), but also by the discrepancy in the trade balance which from the mid-1960s has been in Japan's favor ($60 billion in 1987). Apparently, this imbalance was made up for by an increasing accumulation of U.S. government debt. If you call that mercantilism, well, let it be so. But where's fallacy here?

Actually, I'm curious whether your post about mercantilism is referred to mine at all

If the difference is just accumulated in foreign debt, it will not affect the exchange rate. I agree that accumulating foreign debt is quite common. It is a problem because it causes the market not to clear, and therefore suppresses changes in prices and therefore the signals to the market actors to change production and consumption.

Yep, you seem to have pinpointed my whole idea, congrats! If the trade imbalances were fixed through the exchange rate, this would instantaneously kill the exports oriented economy of Japan. Now you have to make just another step ahead (out of logical necessity) and agree that the rational, thought-out policy of easing is not that evil on the economy scale as it may appear at first glance...

[GigaCoin]

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. 

well said fenix, the whole Japan deflation thing was a complete lie. The media kept saying that prices were going down like its a bad thing, like constantly rising cost of living is a good thing, it's pathetic.

[Erdogan]

Yes, this is a common practice which is obviously not applicable here and makes confusion only (and confuses people at that). We were "talking" (lol) about Japan and their counter parties (that would primarily be the USA) in which case the whole picture is aggravated not only by floating exchange rates (this could be dealt with), but also by the discrepancy in the trade balance which from the mid-1960s has been in Japan's favor ($60 billion in 1987). Apparently, this imbalance was made up for by an increasing accumulation of U.S. government debt. If you call that mercantilism, well, let it be so. But where's fallacy here?

Actually, I'm curious whether your post about mercantilism is referred to mine at all

If the difference is just accumulated in foreign debt, it will not affect the exchange rate. I agree that accumulating foreign debt is quite common. It is a problem because it causes the market not to clear, and therefore suppresses changes in prices and therefore the signals to the market actors to change production and consumption.

Yep, you seem to have pinpointed my whole idea, congrats! If the trade imbalances were fixed through the exchange rate, this would instantaneously kill the exports oriented economy of Japan. Now you have to make just another step ahead (out of logical necessity) and agree that the rational, thought-out policy of easing is not that evil on the economy scale as it may appear at first glance...

Not at all. I think I was clear. Do not engage in mercantilism. Use sound money. Let the markets work.

[deisik]

Yes, this is a common practice which is obviously not applicable here and makes confusion only (and confuses people at that). We were "talking" (lol) about Japan and their counter parties (that would primarily be the USA) in which case the whole picture is aggravated not only by floating exchange rates (this could be dealt with), but also by the discrepancy in the trade balance which from the mid-1960s has been in Japan's favor ($60 billion in 1987). Apparently, this imbalance was made up for by an increasing accumulation of U.S. government debt. If you call that mercantilism, well, let it be so. But where's fallacy here?

Actually, I'm curious whether your post about mercantilism is referred to mine at all

If the difference is just accumulated in foreign debt, it will not affect the exchange rate. I agree that accumulating foreign debt is quite common. It is a problem because it causes the market not to clear, and therefore suppresses changes in prices and therefore the signals to the market actors to change production and consumption.

Yep, you seem to have pinpointed my whole idea, congrats! If the trade imbalances were fixed through the exchange rate, this would instantaneously kill the exports oriented economy of Japan. Now you have to make just another step ahead (out of logical necessity) and agree that the rational, thought-out policy of easing is not that evil on the economy scale as it may appear at first glance...

Not at all. I think I was clear. Do not engage in mercantilism. Use sound money. Let the markets work.

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

[Erdogan]

Yes, this is a common practice which is obviously not applicable here and makes confusion only (and confuses people at that). We were "talking" (lol) about Japan and their counter parties (that would primarily be the USA) in which case the whole picture is aggravated not only by floating exchange rates (this could be dealt with), but also by the discrepancy in the trade balance which from the mid-1960s has been in Japan's favor ($60 billion in 1987). Apparently, this imbalance was made up for by an increasing accumulation of U.S. government debt. If you call that mercantilism, well, let it be so. But where's fallacy here?

Actually, I'm curious whether your post about mercantilism is referred to mine at all

If the difference is just accumulated in foreign debt, it will not affect the exchange rate. I agree that accumulating foreign debt is quite common. It is a problem because it causes the market not to clear, and therefore suppresses changes in prices and therefore the signals to the market actors to change production and consumption.

Yep, you seem to have pinpointed my whole idea, congrats! If the trade imbalances were fixed through the exchange rate, this would instantaneously kill the exports oriented economy of Japan. Now you have to make just another step ahead (out of logical necessity) and agree that the rational, thought-out policy of easing is not that evil on the economy scale as it may appear at first glance...

Not at all. I think I was clear. Do not engage in mercantilism. Use sound money. Let the markets work.

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

Your answer to economic problems in general is to lower the value of a country's currency.

This is irrational in two ways. 1: This can obviously not be done for all countries, you end up with a currency war. 2: It is not the money that is essential, the money is oil in the machinery, the real imports and exports are goods and services. Trying to manipulate the value of money is not helpful.

In fact, modifying the value of money in ways not obvious or predictable to the actors, only distorts the markets, and destroys the markets' ability to continuously adapt to changing real world conditions, and the result is lower wealth. If you do not think lower wealth is a problem, think hunger, freezing, sickness, growing up in nescience.

The money printing also redistributes wealth from the poor to the privileged businesses. I suspect this is the real goal. Else they would just spread the new money around to everybody. Why wait for the trickling down, why not just give it to everybody right away?

[Erdogan]

For abenomics this is specially irrational:

He wants the public to spend more to "support" the economy, at the same time plans to increase the value added tax. WTF? There is a very real and immediate response to the VAT increase from the public. Spend less. What else can they do. Due to ignorance I guess they will dedicate their love to him when they do their harakiri.

[deisik]

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

Your answer to economic problems in general is to lower the value of a country's currency.

This is irrational in two ways. 1: This can obviously not be done for all countries, you end up with a currency war. 2: It is not the money that is essential, the money is oil in the machinery, the real imports and exports are goods and services. Trying to manipulate the value of money is not helpful.

I was talking about Japan and in a more general way about exports oriented countries, which I made clear right from the start. I gave a simple example to show how it works for them. You said that the producers of the exporting countries in this case would get less value for their production while the importing country would pay less, and the loss would be on the former. I think I showed it pretty cogently that this is not true in general and the lower prices (which you assumed as a result of the money value manipulation) can actually increase domestic production, provide higher employment, etc., and ultimately bring in more profits through volume. This is especially true for exports oriented countries. In fact, that's what they are doing from time to time (devaluing their currency)

Then you again tell me about that the goods and services are real and not the money. Do you actually read my posts? Read again if you failed to get it, exports oriented countries specifically devalue their currency to raise production (i.e. your real goods and services). Their mileage may vary, but they don't do it just for the fun of it

[bambou]

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

Your answer to economic problems in general is to lower the value of a country's currency.

This is irrational in two ways. 1: This can obviously not be done for all countries, you end up with a currency war. 2: It is not the money that is essential, the money is oil in the machinery, the real imports and exports are goods and services. Trying to manipulate the value of money is not helpful.

I was talking about Japan and in a more general way about exports oriented countries, which I made clear right from the start. I gave a simple example to show how it works for them. You said that the producers of the exporting countries in this case would get less value for their production while the importing country would pay less, and the loss would be on the former. I think I showed it pretty cogently that this is not true in general and the lower prices (which you assumed as a result of the money value manipulation) can actually increase domestic production, provide higher employment, etc. And this is especially true for exports oriented countries. In fact, that's what they are doing from time to time (devaluing their currency)

As you said, that is just what they want you to 'think/believe'.

[deisik]

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

Your answer to economic problems in general is to lower the value of a country's currency.

This is irrational in two ways. 1: This can obviously not be done for all countries, you end up with a currency war. 2: It is not the money that is essential, the money is oil in the machinery, the real imports and exports are goods and services. Trying to manipulate the value of money is not helpful.

I was talking about Japan and in a more general way about exports oriented countries, which I made clear right from the start. I gave a simple example to show how it works for them. You said that the producers of the exporting countries in this case would get less value for their production while the importing country would pay less, and the loss would be on the former. I think I showed it pretty cogently that this is not true in general and the lower prices (which you assumed as a result of the money value manipulation) can actually increase domestic production, provide higher employment, etc. And this is especially true for exports oriented countries. In fact, that's what they are doing from time to time (devaluing their currency)

As you said, that is just what they want you to 'think/believe'.

This is not what I can be made think or believe (it is just basic economics). But you can always check with the trade balance sheet. Yeah, I know, this can be faked between countries, but sorry, I am not much into that conspiracy shit...

Though the site seems to be down presently, probably, they are busy forging data, lol...

[bambou]

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

Your answer to economic problems in general is to lower the value of a country's currency.

This is irrational in two ways. 1: This can obviously not be done for all countries, you end up with a currency war. 2: It is not the money that is essential, the money is oil in the machinery, the real imports and exports are goods and services. Trying to manipulate the value of money is not helpful.

I was talking about Japan and in a more general way about exports oriented countries, which I made clear right from the start. I gave a simple example to show how it works for them. You said that the producers of the exporting countries in this case would get less value for their production while the importing country would pay less, and the loss would be on the former. I think I showed it pretty cogently that this is not true in general and the lower prices (which you assumed as a result of the money value manipulation) can actually increase domestic production, provide higher employment, etc. And this is especially true for exports oriented countries. In fact, that's what they are doing from time to time (devaluing their currency)

As you said, that is just what they want you to 'think/believe'.

This is not what I can be made think or believe (it is just basic economics). You can always check with the trade balance sheet. Yeah, I know, this can be faked between countries, but sorry, I am not much into that conspiracy shit...

The site seems to be down, probably, they are busy forging data, lol...

seriously dude you havent reply a single constructive post in this thread. plus i just saw you have created one named "why bitcoin is doomed to fail". you just cant never agree cant you? forget it im not even interested in your answer. congrats you are the first one in here i ignored.

[aesma]

Isn't the concept of "exports oriented economies" flawed from the start ? How are "imports oriented economies" that are a necessary counterpart supposed to buy stuff from the former ?

To me it's pretty clear the US is scamming the entire world and has been doing it for decades, not just since the start of QE.

It's also interesting to look at Germany and "southern European" Euro countries to see that even with the same currency and without money printing (although now there is also money printing, to wage a currency war with the US and Japan) trade imbalances are causing real problems.

[deisik]

Isn't the concept of "exports oriented economies" flawed from the start ? How are "imports oriented economies" that are a necessary counterpart supposed to buy stuff from the former ?

To me it's pretty clear the US is scamming the entire world and has been doing it for decades, not just since the start of QE.

It's also interesting to look at Germany and "southern European" Euro countries to see that even with the same currency and without money printing (although now there is also money printing, to wage a currency war with the US and Japan) trade imbalances are causing real problems.

Yeah, they "export" debt, it has already been mentioned in the thread (though nobody paid close attention to it). It may look unfair at first glance, but assume for a moment that they ("import oriented economies") would have otherwise to lower their currency purchasing power instead (to get imports balanced with exports), or, rather, let the currency market do this job...