BBC Blog Network

User Profile

blefuscu

Listed below are comments made by blefuscu between Wednesday, 15th July 2009 and Thursday, 23rd July 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Cameron aide emerges unscathed 09:02am on 23 Jul 2009 Much ado about ...errrrr... nothing.

Let's get on with the real issues, now.
Learning lessons from Japan 2:31pm on 15 Jul 2009 #30 shireblogger.

Your comment(last night) re the purchase of gilts being strong with the notional cash deriving from QE strikes me as quite correct.

We heard recently about Goldman Sachs (miraculous death bed recovery) making big enough profits to pay out some rather swish bonuses. We hear that the bonus culture is back in the City. I don't think that is coincidental.

Both Governments have poured QE billions into the liquidity pot which is purchasing the Gilt Issues. The Goldman Sachs of this world are making a nice profit on commissions from these purchases. Our money. Galling. QE to drag the economy out of the tail-spin created by the very 'houses' that are now turning the mechanism to their advantage and making private profit out of debt raised against our future taxes.
How long will China finance America? 12:38pm on 15 Jul 2009 Further to my point at 42.

Why was private gold possession made illegal by Roosevelt in 1933?

Why was Gold confiscated by the US Government?

Answer is to be found in Wiki.

America might just decide that the Gold that is currently sitting 'on their patch' could be handy if things deteriorate (Nationalise). Cash rich Mid Easterners and Indians know that. Funny stuff gold. Never heard of a run on rolex watches. Tulips, yes, but watches no.
How long will China finance America? 12:31pm on 15 Jul 2009 #35 Henry. With respect you forgot to add liitle sheets of paper with numbers on them to your list.

Gold is finite. Until we get fusion or go to the asteroids you can't make it. That is why it is the traditional home of the rattled investor. All about confidence.

Gold is being repatriated out of the US storage at a huge rate. Bit of a run , but below the radar. I wonder why?

Seems that a lot of cash rich folk prefer portable wealth to American bonds.
How long will China finance America? 12:02pm on 15 Jul 2009 Chinese throw-away rubbish, indeed!
So American (and British) consumers have maxed out on credit to buy a couple of trillions worth of tat?

In the 1890's Germans produced 'tat' (And diesel and otto..petrol..engines) and developed chemical and steel industries. Little Englanders didn't like that.

In the 1950's and 60's Japanese industry produced 'cheap plastic' (as did Hong Kong and Taiwan. Look at their hi-tec now.

Sniffy attitudes will not fill the British ricebowl. I suggest we get down and dirty and compete.
How long will China finance America? 11:13am on 15 Jul 2009 A previous blogger observed that should US decide not to import Chinese manufactures China would be in trouble. Sure. But that is not going to happen. Where will all of Walmart's stock be sourced at the prices that US consumers expect?

Also simple comments (backward looking) about US making things for themselves. They can't for the following reasons.

1. Where's the capital. It's not there. Only debt.
2. Where are the cheap, compliant workers with the skills.
3. Even dismantling the massive defence budgets will not release the capital because it is all in hock.
4. It would take years to retool.

ie. annoy China and you create social dislocation on a massive scale.

To counter, China just does more of what it's doing now as Robert describes.

As for China, already trading in local currencies (Brazil, Russia for example) and investing heavily in South America, Africa and Asia., where's the surprise in that. Building a 'string of pearls' set of naval bases. That's what emerging super powers do.
How long will China finance America? 10:36am on 15 Jul 2009 China 'allowing' says it all. Prosperous economies make things. Oldest truth in the world. It's just a question of time. Debt is dependency. Sure local loan sharks get relatively wealthy and can go to the casino but in the long run.....

China (like Japan, Korea et al) have always had one big advantage. What Michael Wood used to call the 'habit' of civilisation in its social structures. That is why Africa, unfortunately, will never make it. China is fundamentally homogeneous (750 million Han) with relatively few minorities which enhances cohesion unlike fracured multicultural societies.

China's century is about to dawn.

Napoleon described China as the 'sleeping giant' How right he was.

Fascinating.
Is Italy better than Britain? 09:05am on 15 Jul 2009 #30 Wonderful isn't it. It's just that Britain is not as in your face as Italy. It's 'hypocrisy' that is Britain's stock-in-trade. Not an Italian characteristic. Please don't for one second fall for the 'moral high ground argument'.

In the final analysis, I'd say Italians survive by 'arrangiarsi' and make no bones about it. They believe all politicians are jerks and bank bosses 'cheats'. Who is to say they are wrong?
Is Italy better than Britain? 08:30am on 15 Jul 2009 Britain did not start to go downhill prior to the Common Market (now EU). The moribund state of the economy made Britain beg to join. (Tories in early sixties, then Labour under Wilson and finally Tories under Heath). How many times did De Gaulle say 'Non'. That was taken as a slight at the time. De Gaulle said, quite rightly, that the Common Market was an organisation Britain could never feel at home in. He was right. Give the General credit for that.

Forza Italia. No place like it. Just fun. Yes, inefficient and chaotic but alive. There is more humour in five minutes in Italy than in a month in England and life, being short, is about spontaneity. Not a British characteristic. Must be the climate and the 300 year old Protestant Guilt Trip not yet worked out. (Only a theory)
Goldman: Recession? What recession? 07:03am on 15 Jul 2009 Joseph Stiglitz is of the opinion that there is nothing private enterprise about Goldman Sachs at all. Its all state subsidised, he points out.

Who is profiting from all the QE? Goldman Sachs.

Who is underwriting the disclosed and undisclosed debt? Tax-payers.

A personal gripe. Doesn't the term 'compensation' just reek with cynicism given that what they do is gambling. 'Winnings' would be a more appropriate term.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

blefuscu