Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: JBA on November 03, 2003, 02:42:04 PM
-
Go back and look at the news reports for the economy when the DJIA was at the same levels in 1999-2000. You’ll be surprised at how well off we all were.
Remember when Bush/Cheanny were warning about the pended poor economy in 1999 during the election and all the Dems screamed about "talking down " the economy as if one man had that kind of power. Now all you hear are their whines about the economy.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_162_1067891615.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_162_1067891085.jpg)
-
(I know it sounds sarcastic but it's true)
-Sik
-
I don't know of a single economist that uses charts from the DOW Jones Industrial to do anything other than wipe their ass.
The media loves it though... cause it keeps going up.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Mini D
I don't know of a single economist that uses charts from the DOW Jones Industrial to do anything other than wipe their ass.
The media loves it though... cause it keeps going up.
MiniD
You mean we're doing so poorly the economists can't afford toilet paper?
Things are worse than I thought. :eek:
-
Economists are funny. They have can have their head in a fire and their feet in ice and if asked "How are you?" they will answer "Well, on balance I feel pretty good".
-
Economists are funny. They have can have their head in a fire and their feet in ice and if asked "How are you?" they will answer "Well, on balance I feel pretty good".
:rofl :aok
-
Originally posted by JBA
Remember when Bush/Cheanny were warning about the pended poor economy and all the Dems screamed about "talking down " the economy as if one man had that kind of power. Now all you hear are their whines about the economy.
I also remeber this during Bush's election campaign, he was warning that the economy had already begun a downturn he warned of a resession. The Dems lambasted him for it.
-
Punt (for commentary from some of our more liberal friends on the board... )
-
I blame Clinton. And despite miko's prognostications of doom, I have decided to earn a dollar today.
-
Sixpence: I blame Clinton. And despite miko's prognostications of doom, I have decided to earn a dollar today.
You are not earning "dollars". You are earning purchasing power measured in dollars. You gave labor and received living accomodations, food, clothes and claims on goods or income-creating assets. Money is just a mediulm that facilitates such an exchange with many participants.
Nothing wrong with earning. Keeping the purchasing power as dollars is another matter altogether. Over the last 20 years the purchasing power of a dollar declined by half.
The world holds $35 trillion dollars. Do you think US has stuff to sell if all of you decide to cash those in?
Sikboy
:) Glad to oblige. The topic is: Mainstream "Economists".
miko
Economist: Jackson poll - A sure way to predict the future
(http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2010126)
THE high point of the international economics calendar is the annual symposium of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. The intense competition to attend this conference has, of course, nothing to do with the fact that it is held in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, a stunningly beautiful Rocky Mountain resort. The quality of the papers presented and the rigorous intellectual debate in the company of Alan Greenspan and many of the world's other top central bankers is sufficient pull.
Since these include some of America's top economists, your correspondent has made a habit of taking a poll each year. At the peak of the stockmarket boom they were asked, “is this a bubble?”“No”, they voted[/i]. In August 2001 they were asked, “will America's economy dip into recession?”“No chance”, they replied.[/i] The economy turned out already to be in recession. Last year's question was, “will the federal funds rate (then 1.75%) fall to 1% or less within the next year?” Almost everybody said “no”[/i] (a senior Fed official wisely declined to vote). Only two economists correctly predicted rates of 1%.
Given this remarkable record, it would be remiss not to poll our elite group once again this year—and then bet on the exact opposite.
Economist: Jackson poll, 2003 - A guide to the future (http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2044548)
Two weeks ago, we revealed the remarkable forecasting record of America's top economists who attend this event. Our economics editor has conducted informal polls each year.. In late 1999 our gang was confident that the stockmarket would not crash; in 2001 they ruled out an American recession; and last year they predicted that interest rates would not fall to 1%. In short, they have provided an excellent contrarian indicator. What might they get wrong this year?
Hearty thanks are due to the 200 readers who suggested questions for the 2003 poll. The most popular by far was: “Does America have a house-price bubble?” So we asked our terrace gang: “Will average house prices fall in the year to mid 2004?” All but one firmly answered “No”. We then made them work harder with a second poser: “Will the dollar fall to $1.25 against the euro at any time in the next 12 months”? When the question was put, one euro bought $1.10. Again with one exception, the answer was a resounding “No”.
Accordingly, your correspondent is betting that the dollar and house prices will fall over the next year. On the other hand, many of these economists probably read our article two weeks ago and therefore gave the opposite answer to what they really think. As one reader says, “it would be dumb for them to reply in any other way.”
Yes, it would be - and dumb is what they usually do.
After all those are the same economists who say such idiocies as: "Consumer Spending rather than saving and investment promote growth" or "By taking word's products and resources and converting them into waste and polution and not providing goods/services in return US somehow benefits those countries" and "Countries benefit from exporting stuff for no value in return rather than from importing stuff that could not be had locally as cheap or at all".
miko
-
Ok, I have decided to earn purchasing power. That actually sounds better. When nanotechnology starts spinning straw into gold, will my dollar purchase more?
-
Sixpence: Ok, I have decided to earn purchasing power. That actually sounds better.
Fortunately, the division of labor and market exchange work regardless of the people understanding the mechanics of it.
It's when politicians start believing that wealth is money that the trouble starts.
When nanotechnology starts spinning straw into gold, will my dollar purchase more?
That would depend how many of them the Fed will print. Probably not.
miko
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Ok, I have decided to earn purchasing power. That actually sounds better. When nanotechnology starts spinning straw into gold, will my dollar purchase more?
In this case soon straws will be much more expensive then gold. I suggest to invest in straw right now.
Miko, just curious, did you see "Kin-Dza-Dza"?
;)
-
Originally posted by miko2d
That would depend how many of them the Fed will print. Probably not.
miko
Bummer. Here is some interesting reading http://www.foresight.org/NanoRev/#MMfeasible
I once thought that other planets in the solar system could be used to live on. But it seems now that they will be mined for their atoms. The atoms in turn could be used to create raw materials? We can't mine the moon so we need to stick an American flag on the rest of the planets;) The more you read the more interesting it gets. End of the world? I think it has just begun. I realize now how far in the past I live.
-
Boroda: Miko, just curious, did you see "Kin-Dza-Dza"? ;)
Sure. I even have it on tape.
Are you referring to their use of matches as currency?
miko
-
Sixpence: The more you read the more interesting it gets. End of the world? I think it has just begun. I realize now how far in the past I live.
You must have an incredible arrogance to take my predictions of monetary and civil collapse of socialist US as "the end of the world". US and especially US government and monetary systen is not "the world".
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
US and especially US government and monetary systen is not "the world".
miko
To me it is, I think we will be just fine,ty. Carrying bags of money around while starving to death would seem like the end of the world, but that's just me.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Sure. I even have it on tape.
Are you referring to their use of matches as currency?
miko
Not only that :)
On Plyuk they don't have seas because they made "louts" (rocket fuel) from water, and now they have factories where they make water out of louts.
Now look what Sixpence posted:
I once thought that other planets in the solar system could be used to live on. But it seems now that they will be mined for their atoms. The atoms in turn could be used to create raw materials?
:D
Kin-Dza-Dza is a brilliant parody on modern "civilization" and "culture".
http://kin-dza-dza.etel.ru/
I wonder if it is possible to translate that movie to English.
"All this sad cataclysm that we observe here with Vladimir Nikolaevich..."
"Mister Uef! Like a representative of a civilized planet I insist that you have to watch your vocabulary!"
I watched this film 5 times in 1986. I wonder how they could even dare to show it in the theatres :)
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Sixpence: I blame Clinton. And despite miko's prognostications of doom, I have decided to earn a dollar today.
You are not earning "dollars". You are earning purchasing power measured in dollars. You gave labor and received living accomodations, food, clothes and claims on goods or income-creating assets. Money is just a mediulm that facilitates such an exchange with many participants.
Nothing wrong with earning. Keeping the purchasing power as dollars is another matter altogether. Over the last 20 years the purchasing power of a dollar declined by half.
The world holds $35 trillion dollars. Do you think US has stuff to sell if all of you decide to cash those in? miko
Miko, I've rarely, if ever, agreed with what you've written in this BBS, but......damn you're an interesting read. Never quit trying to "educate" and "enlighten" us.
-
slimm50: Miko, I've rarely, if ever, agreed with what you've written in this BBS, but......damn you're an interesting read.
That's not as good as what I've tried to achieve but still better than nothing. Being strongly empathic, I would feel very bad about people perishing from ignorance. I have no problem with people perishing from stupidity. :D
Thanks! :)
miko
-
Ain't no substitute for arrogance.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
slimm50: Miko, I've rarely, if ever, agreed with what you've written in this BBS, but......damn you're an interesting read.
Being strongly empathic, I would feel very bad
miko
er...the word I think you mean is "empathetic", unless, of course, you truly are an empath....:D
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Yes, it would be - and dumb is what they usually do.
Would this group of profoundly incompetent economists also include Alan Greenspan, whom you're very fond of quoting to support your position on the gold standard? Hm.
I'm curious why the Economist doesn't attempt to make predictions of its own based on the questions it asks the economists. Hindsight is 20/20, but beyond some sarcastic attempt to belittle the predictive abilities of prominent economists, I see precious little more foresight in the passages you've quoted.
Where are your predictions, miko? I'm sure you posted them here, and I just missed them.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
slimm50: er...the word I think you mean is "empathetic", unless, of course, you truly are an empath....:D
Actually, the dictionaries I use say "empathetic" is... "empathic"! :)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=empathetic
empathic
adj : showing empathy or ready comprehension of others' states;
empathy: Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives. See Synonyms at pity
This one seems about the same http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=empathy :
Main Entry: em·pa·thy
Pronunciation: 'em-p&-thE
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek empatheia, literally, passion, from empathEs emotional, from em- + pathos feelings, emotion -- more at PATHOS
Date: 1904
1 : the imaginative projection of a subjective state into an object so that the object appears to be infused with it
2 : the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner; also : the capacity for this
-
er...the word I think you mean is "empathetic", unless, of course, you truly are an empath....
:lol
an empath, as in a person, is only on startrek.
psst, klingons aren't real either.
-
Dead Man Flying: Would this group of profoundly incompetent economists...
They are not incompetent. They are as highly competent applying Keynesian economic "theory" as astrologers, alchemists and fortune tellers are competent applying their highly sophisticated "sciences".
also include Alan Greenspan, whom you're very fond of quoting to support your position on the gold standard?
I have no position on "gold standard". Gold is just an example he used and a commodity historically commonly used as money. I am a proponent of a market-generated monetary system. Personally, I would use commodity money - maybe even the same gold. I have a pretty good idea what would emerge as free-market money based on historical experience but I would not presume to tell anyone what kind of money suits them.
Saying that someone is for gold (or any other standard) vs. fiat money is like saying he is for green uniforms against nazi's black ones.
It's not an issue of external attribites but oppression and choice. nazism and government mandated monetary system (even the gold standard) stand for oppression. Liberty and free market money stand for ... er.. liberty.
As for Greenspan, he is not engaged in economic discussions - ever. And when he ventures economic opinions - like calling the stockmarket bubble - nobody listens to him.
He is manipulating the monetary system and most likely doing that completely aware of the sound economic theory and all the implications.
Government-run monetary system is bad but there is no chance that US would have reverted to the free market, so it may as well be Greenspan that manipulates it. At least he can use the right theory to gauge the results of government intervention.
I'm curious why the Economist doesn't attempt to make predictions of its own based on the questions it asks the economists.
Let me guess, you do not read Economist. It's a magazine on economics. Most of what it prints is predictions and suggestions. Not that they are always based on the right science. Maybe just a bit more sound than the common one. They are closes to the London School of Economics and Chicago School (monetarists) than Austian but at least not prediminantly Keynsians.
They are more correct in the issues of trade and investment that monetary matters.
but beyond some sarcastic attempt to belittle the predictive abilities of prominent economists, I see precious little more foresight in the passages you've quoted.
This was an attempt of humor on their part. You can read all their issues on the same website.
Where are your predictions, miko? I'm sure you posted them here, and I just missed them.
I've posted predictions to the degree to which the sound economic science claims the predictions can be made in social sciences.
miko
-
why we blame the president for the economy? Cant blame it all on him.
-
mia389: why we blame the president for the economy?
Cause we are ignorant of the economics and also do not know how our government works.
miko
-
Fascinating indeed
:D