« China's Economy Even Hotter Than Japan's | Main | The Flood Of Red Ink Here Creates Flood Of International Investment »


larry, dfh

What does it mean when Chinese farm incomes are stagnant while food is scarcer? Do the Ciniese, like the U.S. capitalists, have an interest in maintaining a large pool of poor people? Remembering the S&L rip-offs in the '80s. (Unka James Baker was Treasury Secretary), I knew something would happen during Bush. Alot of default properties during the 80's were purchased at 10cents on the $, by the same folks declaring default. With the exceptions of the rare Milkin types, the young financial wiz-bangs around today are not as smart or imaginative as they think. Is this all a re-hash of the S&L's? The government bailed out some of the losers that time, those who stole the cash (Neil Bush-Silverado S&L) largely got away free and repurchased at low prices. Is this the M.O. this time around? Only without the government assistance to the 'victims'. The government already assisted the robbers, like in the '80s. 30% under stated value doesn't seem like a big enough margin of comfort for the robbers. I'm thinking there are more gimmicks left to be exposed. I appreciate your attention in these financial posts; I'm really ignorant of finances, or maybe it's just the (intentionally) confusing jargon.


If you are ignorant of economics, it is only because the rich and powerful want you to be that way. That is why they coined the term "economics". In the distant past, we had no need for such an obtuse term to describe something that goes on between people on a daily basis -- trade.

During the S and L crisis, the innocent victims were portrayed on TV, but it was the rich who made out like gangbusters. Their debts were forgiven and they got new loans to buy up distressed properties. It was like they had planned the whole thing, so yes, I think they do plan all financial collapses so that they can take advantage of the chaos that ensues.


On Yahoo business news there is an article about how we have lost 3 million factory jobs since 2000. In the article, it shows the obvious distress of those laid off permently, but then tells us that service sector jobs are soaring and thus replacing the lost manufacturing jobs. Service jobs now account for 84% of employment in America. Some unnamed economists then make this statement:

"Some economists say the United States is experiencing a normal economic evolution from farms to factories and now to service jobs."

What nation, country, province, empire, federation, state, or kingdom ever "naturally" progressed to a service type economy in human history?

The article does not say, other than giving another ridiculous quote from a Daniel Griswald of the Cato Institute in DC.

This is deliberate madness. Deliberate deceit.


So much for an 'interesting' Monday. Evidently, nobody else read that article.

Liquidity trumps all. No end in sight.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad