I was working with a guy from new england the other day.
He said he left to get away from the shitty weather and all the self important assholes.
Essential Economics for Politicians
- Thread starter Bruddah IZ
- Start date
-
- Tags
- finance too
He said he left to get away from the shitty weather and all the self important assholes.
Wez
DA
Lol, I'm sure Lion will be here to give you a crop duster comment any second...
Hüsker Dü
DA
. . . and he came all that way to end up with "THE" most self important . . . well, you know.
From colonial times until 1800 or so, most mills took advantage of falling water to cut timber, grind grain to flour, grind and polish stone, and run simple industrial processes like extracting starch from grains and vegetables. Towns grew up from New England to Georgia on the fall line, where upland rivers descended to the coastal plain with enough force to turn waterwheels. Some rivers were highly developed after textile spinning machines were invented, such as the Merrimack River that provided the power for the big mill towns of Lowell, Mass and Manchester, NH. The Amoskeag Falls in Manchester were high enough and powerful enough that two ranks of factories used water directed into canals above the falls, the water coming out of the upper rank directed to the mills on the lower rank, each paying the according to the amount of water they used.
As the iron industry grew, smelting furnaces were powered by wood and charcoal. Early steam engines, for steamboats, railroad engines, and stationary factory power where water power was not available, were powered by the wood that was everywhere, an advantage over England and Continental Europe where wood became so scarce that laws restricted the charcoal makers. When coal was first introduced to replace wood powering steam engines, they had to be redesigned to handle the hotter fires and increased steam pressure.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Snapshot according to your article with 8 of the 10 top causes of death trending down....in America
from the article :
"One year does not form a trend," said Dr. Jiaquan Xu, an epidemiologist with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics.
Hüsker Dü
DA
Talk about cherry picking something without context.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Thatʻs what your article did.
Thanks rat.
Wez
DA
Arrogant Elitist.
Bruddah IZ
DA
You know all about cherry picking...
Apparently you didn't entirely read or comprehend the article. The sky is not falling.
"One year does not form a trend," said Dr. Jiaquan Xu, an epidemiologist with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. "We need more data. If you look back to 1993, it decreased but hasn't decreased again (until now). Hopefully, that's what we're seeing here."
Xu, the report's lead author, said preliminary data from the second quarter of this year show further declines in eight of the top 10 causes of death, compared with the first quarter of 2016. He declined to recommend specific policy changes but said "everybody should do their part" to reverse this downturn.
The biggest takeaway: Heart disease and cancer are still far and away the top killers of both men and women. The good news is that there are three things you can do to drastically reduce your risk of developing both: eat right, exercise and don't smoke.
It sounds like simple advice, but it's easier said than done. Follow it, and you may exceed expectations when it comes to your projected lifespan.
Sounds like Boston, or anyplace in Connecticut except Groton and New London.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.
Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end
Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end
Bruddah IZ
DA
Six Things to Consider About Inflation
As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”
The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”
To address this conundrum, there are six related factors that are noteworthy:
https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation
As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”
The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”
To address this conundrum, there are six related factors that are noteworthy:
https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation
Bruddah IZ
DA
Number One: we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of currency debasement, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.
Number Two: the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when objectively measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.
Blowing Bubbles
Number Three: newly created fiat money must go somewhere — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.
Number Four: The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.
Number Five: In the same vein, you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.” This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)
Number Six: the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.
Number Two: the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when objectively measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.
Blowing Bubbles
Number Three: newly created fiat money must go somewhere — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.
Number Four: The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.
Number Five: In the same vein, you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.” This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)
Number Six: the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.