COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 2047

starting strength gym
Page 2047 of 2473 FirstFirst ... 1047154719471997203720452046204720482049205720972147 ... LastLast
Results 20,461 to 20,470 of 24727

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #20461
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,881

  2. #20462
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rkjohns1 View Post
    Can you please cite the specific promises broken by NATO? What treaties and/or formal, documented agreements did NATO break regarding enlargement and Kosovo intervention? Seems to me Putin's Kremlin, and those who sympathize with it, are the ones pushing this revisionist history.


    This is quite simple rk, you can pick and choose which MSM you agree with regarding civilian deaths and infrastructure damage in Russia, much like you could choose with COVID.

    I'm in a debate with my close uncle over this very thing right now; he too was onboard with what was really up with COVID but has gone overboard on this Russia stuff- he keeps shouting about the Ukrainians sufferring dEaTh aNd DeStruCtIon.

    Can someone older here fill me in on how strong the anti-Soviet sentiment was back in the day, how fearful this Cold War made us feel in everyday life? I'm trying to figure out this gut reaction to all things Russian, regardless of the facts on the ground!


    But at the end of the day, it comes down to this: do you think Putin can/should keep enemies' alliances as far away from his borders as possible, can/should protect his ethnic brothers when under attack, and can/should employ force when diomacy fails? I would say that the newest #MuhRussia madness boils down to your opinions on THAT, just like with the two-sided presentation presentation of COVID "facts," it all came down to whether you thought the federal government even possessed the powers to enact such restrictions, regardless of circumstance (it doesn't).

    And BTW I'm sick of "conservatives" like Denniger (even Tucker!) qualifying their analyses of this and other conflicts with admissions that, nonetheless, Putin=BAD. He's no more of an asshole than Republicans "want poor people dead" when they pursue certain policies. So, next time, think of the childish, visceral propaganda you must be internalizing, when you exclaim how BAD that tricky Russkie Putin is.

    I would tell Denniger this directly on his board, but he has displayed himself to be 1000x less tolerant of critique and insult than our magnanimous host Rip here is.

  3. #20463
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    1,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by francesco.decaro View Post
    What you are saying is that QE is an accounting maneuver to balance sheets while buying up huge quantities of commodities? Which you said creates inflation for those commodities.
    So I still don't see how this environment can be deflationary, or how the money supply could decrease in such an environment.
    I am not saying this, you are interpreting what I said from the London School of Economics faulty perspective. QE is an accounting maneuver, yes. QE is not increasing the money supply. In the monetary system that we have, central banks do not create money, private banks do. They do it by lending money to customers. What QE does is increase the bank reserves, but bank reserves are not money, they are one of the assets on a bank's balance sheet. It also enables the central banks to "buy" government debt, but they are not really buying anything, they are swapping bank reserves for government debt. This is somewhat useful for governments, because they can then issue debt and use it to meet their obligations. Some of this goes back into the economy in terms of governments paying employees or running infrastructure projects, but since the whole thing encourages further conservative behavior by the banks, any money that manages to make its way into the economy is offset by constantly contracting bank lending. Japan is the best example of this, they have had outright price deflation for two thirds of the time in which they have been running the so called inflationary QE. Europe is a good example too, bank lending has been contracting for most of the ten years of QE.

    You can call what we have been seeing for the past two years inflation, since prices are rising. This is the standard London School of Economics (neoclassical) bullshit. The problem is that prices are rising in an environment in which bank lending (actual money creation) has been on the decline. There are many reasons for price increases, they are all connected to government actions, and in China and Russia's case this might be belligerent action, but since this is happening in an era of contracting money supply (so actual deflation), we are in for a very interesting ride. I can't really explain this much better, since I am not a professor. In case you are interested in how money and the economy really work, I suggest you stop reading the news and the financial analysts right now and get your hands on Milton Friedman and Anna Schwarz's A Monetary History of the United States and Keynes's General Theory.

  4. #20464
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,916

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    The idea that the EU will come out of this stronger in any way is simply the opposite of the truth. Europe might be fine after a while, but not the EU. The EU is also largely responsible for everything we have gone through in the past two years, because the major element of the Covid saga has been the European sick and idiotic attempt to supplant the dollar with the euro as the reserve currency.
    This my opinion, I could be wrong, but I think the US is fading as a global power and Russia is spilling its guts in The Ukraine and in other skirmishes around the world, the EU ( the revived Roman Empire) on the other hand may appear to be weak, but they may be the next great empire although they will not last that long. All they are waiting for is a new leader, some thought Macron, but perhaps not. The old roman empire was made up of roman catholic states and that is where the gathering together will come from. The Roman Church whose pontiff is the self appointed king maker would like to gather in all these nations and even absorb the orthodox churches of the east into this new empire. European history shows the attempts to restart this empire. The Roman church is above all a political entity which has its own ambassadors in most counties around the world. Everybody wants to rule the world.

  5. #20465
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    50,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wal View Post
    This my opinion, I could be wrong, but I think the US is fading as a global power and Russia is spilling its guts in The Ukraine and in other skirmishes around the world, the EU ( the revived Roman Empire) on the other hand may appear to be weak, but they may be the next great empire although they will not last that long. All they are waiting for is a new leader, some thought Macron, but perhaps not. The old roman empire was made up of roman catholic states and that is where the gathering together will come from. The Roman Church whose pontiff is the self appointed king maker would like to gather in all these nations and even absorb the orthodox churches of the east into this new empire. European history shows the attempts to restart this empire. The Roman church is above all a political entity which has its own ambassadors in most counties around the world. Everybody wants to rule the world.
    Notice that the word "China" does not appear in your post. An oversight? Or is this just "The Bible tells me so"?

  6. #20466
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,881

  7. #20467
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    1,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wal View Post
    This my opinion, I could be wrong, but I think the US is fading as a global power and Russia is spilling its guts in The Ukraine and in other skirmishes around the world, the EU ( the revived Roman Empire) on the other hand may appear to be weak, but they may be the next great empire although they will not last that long. All they are waiting for is a new leader, some thought Macron, but perhaps not. The old roman empire was made up of roman catholic states and that is where the gathering together will come from. The Roman Church whose pontiff is the self appointed king maker would like to gather in all these nations and even absorb the orthodox churches of the east into this new empire. European history shows the attempts to restart this empire. The Roman church is above all a political entity which has its own ambassadors in most counties around the world. Everybody wants to rule the world.
    Hey, I am an end-of-times guy myself, but I think the eschatological stories are really stories about an internal struggle, not about real life events.

  8. #20468
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    1,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rkjohns1 View Post
    Can you please cite the specific promises broken by NATO? What treaties and/or formal, documented agreements did NATO break regarding enlargement and Kosovo intervention? Seems to me Putin's Kremlin, and those who sympathize with it, are the ones pushing this revisionist history.
    Here you go, straight from Wikipedia:
    NATO countries attempted to gain authorisation from the UN Security Council for military action, but were opposed by China and Russia, who indicated that they would veto such a measure. As a result, NATO launched its campaign without the UN's approval, stating that it was a humanitarian intervention. The UN Charter prohibits the use of force except in the case of a decision by the Security Council under Chapter VII, or self-defence against an armed attack – neither of which were present in this case.
    But really, nobody serious anywhere is trying to claim that the Kosovo “intervention” was in accordance with international law. The Serbs are pussies, they hold way too much of a grudge over a little bit of bombing, but the illegality of the Kosovo thing is not even remotely questionable.

  9. #20469
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    50,056

    Default

    We haven't looked at this in a while, because it's not really worth discussing, except to demonstrate the perfidy of the Media: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOOaSeWW...jpg&name=small

    Lia Thomas, before and after "enhancement by NBC News. There is no defense for the Media.

  10. #20470
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    754

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    I am not saying this, you are interpreting what I said from the London School of Economics faulty perspective. QE is an accounting maneuver, yes. QE is not increasing the money supply. In the monetary system that we have, central banks do not create money, private banks do. They do it by lending money to customers. What QE does is increase the bank reserves, but bank reserves are not money, they are one of the assets on a bank's balance sheet. It also enables the central banks to "buy" government debt, but they are not really buying anything, they are swapping bank reserves for government debt. This is somewhat useful for governments, because they can then issue debt and use it to meet their obligations. Some of this goes back into the economy in terms of governments paying employees or running infrastructure projects, but since the whole thing encourages further conservative behavior by the banks, any money that manages to make its way into the economy is offset by constantly contracting bank lending. Japan is the best example of this, they have had outright price deflation for two thirds of the time in which they have been running the so called inflationary QE. Europe is a good example too, bank lending has been contracting for most of the ten years of QE.

    You can call what we have been seeing for the past two years inflation, since prices are rising. This is the standard London School of Economics (neoclassical) bullshit. The problem is that prices are rising in an environment in which bank lending (actual money creation) has been on the decline. There are many reasons for price increases, they are all connected to government actions, and in China and Russia's case this might be belligerent action, but since this is happening in an era of contracting money supply (so actual deflation), we are in for a very interesting ride. I can't really explain this much better, since I am not a professor. In case you are interested in how money and the economy really work, I suggest you stop reading the news and the financial analysts right now and get your hands on Milton Friedman and Anna Schwarz's A Monetary History of the United States and Keynes's General Theory.
    Whatever little I know about the economy and money, I read from austrian economists and libertarians, definetely not the news.
    But isn't inflation simply the increase of supply? Independent of the goods prices?
    If you go from 1 trillion dollars to 5 trillion dollars, dollars just lost a whole bunch of value. No matter what happens to prices, which might be influenced and manipulated by something else, momentarily. But is there any time in the past where most goods, services or commodities cost more than they do now?
    Mabye I should say currency devaluation instead of inflation?

    Do you have sources that show how the money supply has decreased? Or some kind of appreciation of any currency since its introduction? For example you said Japan experienced price deflation.

    Anyway, thanks for the explanation!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •