Thursday
“The Federal Reserve...along with other central banks, is a legal counterfeiter."
Paul Kasriel, economist at Northern Trust, the US bank. He is in favour of all this "quantitative easing", by the way, but he is far too honest an economist not to identify what that euphemism actually stands for. And he predicts that it certainly will trigger inflation later on.
Well, talking about banks, I just read in The Telegraph that in the brave new world decided by the G20-
"In future, each bank will have to judge the risks taken by individual traders or executives. Only those taking average, or below average risks, will receive cash bonuses.
Those taking more risk, will be paid in shares or other financial instruments which cannot be cashed in for several years. Banks could only circumvent the rules by setting aside large amounts of extra capital to reflect the extra risks being taken."
Who is going to judge what level of risk a banker is taking? The banks themselves? The regulators? Are we not, even in the consensus view, here because neither of those correctly judged the level of risk, which could only be done with hindsight?
And is this not saying that people are, effectively, going to be paid more for trying less hard to make a profit? Is that a good policy thar?
Posted by Ian B at April 2, 2009 10:29 AM
Now according to the Telegraph, we're going to be subjected to a lot more legal counterfeiting on a global scale-
"The IMF will also embark on an ambitious plan to effectively begin printing money. Countries will be able to swap so-called “special drawing rights” issued by the IMF for currencies such as dollars and euros. This will provide a vast injection of money into the world's economies."
The whole world plunged into an unprecedentedly fierce stagflation. Glorious.
Posted by Ian B at April 2, 2009 01:49 PM
"...it certainly will trigger inflation later on."
Wrong. This "quantitative easing" is the inflation. What he's talking about is the rise in prices which is a consequence of inflation, "later on".
It would help a great deal if these people could address this stuff with the precision that it requires.
Posted by Billy Beck at April 2, 2009 03:01 PM
It would help a great deal if these people could address this stuff with the precision that it requires.
Billy, Billy, Billy,
You've GOT to be kidding. Precision and clarity is EXACTLY what these criminal bastards DON'T want. They don't want the sheeple understanding what they're actually doing; they just want them to stampede in the direction they consider proper, which is toward a reduction in both freedom and money for the average person.
This is the triumph of the governing classes over the productive classes and it looks like it might be the last straw for the Anglosphere under American leadership. Ayn Rand nailed it in 1957; it just took 52 years to overcome the world economy's innate resistance. What they're proposing won't work, of course, but it will ruin the old system forever, which is what Obama and his sycophantic supporters wanted.
Posted by mac at April 3, 2009 09:42 AM
Of course the mainstream media (and the Nobel Price winning "economists") do not mention that controls on top pay were brought in by Presdent Clinton.
That is what made the "bonus culture" so big (the regular pay cap). And the bonus payments themselves are already determined by government regulations (made even worse by President Bush).
Oddly enough the mainstream media (and the Nobel Price winning "economists") do not mention this either.
By the way.....
Why is no one protesting about the vast bonus payments just made to the managers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Far bigger than the AIG bonus payments.
"Do not look at that man behind the curtain".
Posted by Paul Marks at April 7, 2009 08:53 PM
