Global economic situation for liveaboard cruising yachties

http://www.moneymorning.com.au/subscribe for this type of content and more in a free service by email...""" What Shakespeare's Father Knew About Economics - - - Monday, 12 October 2009 - Melbourne Australia - - - By Kris Sayce
* What Shakespeare's Father Knew About Economics
* Other Stuff on the Markets
Over the past week or so your editor has been reading a book. - - Yes, perhaps contrary to the opinion of some, we can read. - - Actually, it's taken us about two weeks to read it.
- You may recall that several weeks ago we admitted not knowing nearly as much as we should about the Great Depression of the 1930s.
- We realized we needed to brush up on it. After all, seeing as we've spent the last year spouting off about how government intervention making things worse, it's might be a good idea to draw some comparisons.
- I mean, it's not that we doubted government interference is bad. We can see that with our own eyes. It's plain - or it should be - for all to see that a government can't solve problems.
- All it can do is to make existing problems worse, and then create new problems. The effects of which it will try and postpone for as long as possible.
- After all, why experience today what you can put off and make even worse next month, next year, or the year after?
- It's the "Delayed Depression" I alluded to last week.
- So, after finishing off the book over this past glorious Melbourne weekend, your editor is in no doubt at all that governments here and overseas are making the same mistakes from the 1920s and 1930s they claim they were trying to avoid.
- Look, I won't go into a full review of the book, that's not what this newsletter is about. My tip is you should read it yourself and form your own opinion.
- If you're interested, the book I'm referring to is "America's Great Depression" by Murray N. Rothbard.
- The similarities between what happened then and what's happening now is remarkable. Of course, there's the potential that your editor is 'seeing' more similarities than there are, and ignoring things that are different.
- But there's always a risk of that. That's why I won't spend the next seven minutes of your day giving you a book review.
- What I will say is that whether you see similarities or not, there is one thing that is undeniable. And that is confirmation of what we've written in Money Morning during the past year.
- That government does not and cannot "step in" to "help" an economy.
- The experiences of the 1920s and 1930s illustrate that it was not only government intervention that helped to cause the problem, but it was government intervention that helped to prolong the problem.
- And today we're seeing exactly the same mistakes being made. Governments and central banks encouraging cheap money and excessive risk taking...
- Yes, that's right, it's not all the capitalists, entrepreneurs or individuals who are necessarily at fault. It's the government that has manipulated the markets for its own ends and for the benefit of its favoured special interest groups.
- Once that happens, the rest of the players in the economy are forced to play by the distorted rules set by the government and its pals.
- Naturally these rules lead to disaster, as we've seen. The response from government? Well, it denies any blame and so creates a whole bunch of new rules to make matters worse.
- This is the process we're going through now. And just like the 1930s, the initial reaction is that "it's working."
- And that reader, is where everyone is in danger of being sucked in.
- The government, having stepped in to "save" the economy, and save the "free market" gets a taste for it. It likes intervening. Ministers and public servants believe their own spin.
- Actually, it's likely they truly believe they've helped out. And like anyone who thinks they've helped, they're keen to help some more.
- The problem is they haven't helped.
- They've merely spent and borrowed in your name, without your permission. When you stopped spending because you thought your job could be at risk, the government continued to spend on your behalf.
- When you decided to pay off a bit more debt because you were worried about having too much debt, the government borrowed more money - on your behalf.
- And guess what? The government will continue to borrow and spend. And it will spend more than the money it steals from taxpayers. That means it will have lumped more debt on your shoulders.
- Which brings us to another point. After polishing off "America's Great Depression" we moved straight along to the next book on the shelf, "In Search of Shakespeare" by Michael Wood.
- Tell you what, it would be nice to pick up a book and just read it for what it is. Unfortunately, almost everything we read at the moment draws parallels to what's happening in the economy.
- It's a terrible burden!
- And you can imagine how much the Sayce kids enjoy bedtime reading at the moment, "Don't you see? Goldilocks is a squatter, she's getting subsidized meals and accommodation from the Three Bears... They had no say in it... and because she was squatting she didn't care about other people's private property, etc..."
- Anyway, before we even made it past the first chapter of Wood's book, we found a parallel. He was explaining how the good people of Warwickshire, including Shakespeare's father, would make goods and then send them once a week in a cart to London to be sold.
- On the return journey, the cart would come back with fancy goods from London.
- It's a micro example of an import/export economy. If the folk of Warwickshire hadn't produced any goods they couldn't have 'imported' the products from London.
- It puts to death the idea that consumption drives today's economy. It doesn't. It's production that drives the economy. The only way the people of Warwickshire could have obtained the goods from London without producing anything is if they had bought them on credit.
- But of course, as is obvious, even if you buy something on credit it has to be paid off at some point. And in order to pay it off there needs to be a productive, not a consumption economy.
- Mainstream economists, commentators and the government don't see it that way. They see consumption as the driver of the economy rather than production.
- So it hardly seems likely that the government will cut back on expenditure. More likely is that it will continue to spend which will lead to more borrowings?
- Especially now it has the taste for it. And besides, what will happen if it stops spending? What will happen to all those people employed in the construction industry? You know the ones, the guys that are building all those school rooms and hospital wings, etc...
- It's an industry that's been propped up by the coercive theft of money from your pockets.
- Well, there's little doubt what will happen to the construction industry. It will collapse in a heap. Of course, that's something which should have happened last year. That would have been bad enough, but when the collapse eventually happens it will be even worse.
- Now that more money, more resources and more people have been suckered into this "booming" sector and away from other sectors of the economy there are even more people that will suffer.
- "But hang on a minute" you may say, "The government has said the debt will be smaller than projected, it isn't going to borrow as much."
- If only that was the case. Daily Reckoning editor and the publisher of this newsletter, Dan Denning sent us a link to a story from the Dow Jones Newswires yesterday:

- - - "The Australian government said Sunday it will expand a government lifeline for residential mortgage-backed securities by up to $8 billion, in a move designed to further revive competition in the country's moribund securitization market."
- It went on...
- - - "The Australian Office of Financial Management, to provide up to a further $8 billion of support to new issuances of high quality RMBS... Only a handful of RMBS transactions have taken place without government support..."
- In other words, that's about $800 every taxpayer is guaranteeing to prop up the Australian property market.
- Only you haven't been asked whether you'd like to participate, you're just told that this is what's happening.
- It just shows you the depths that thieving politicians will go to in order to save their own bacon. In every way possible, cash is being ripped from your pocket in order to distort the economy.
- In this case it's the usual suspects - the banks and the housing market...
- And boy, are the mainstream newspapers making hay with that story: "House prices hotting up" and that "The price of your home is rising, and it's going to keep rising - by at least 5 per cent a year - for the next five years."
- "At least..." Wow! Guaranteed returns from an investment. All aboard!
- But we suppose that $8 billion worth of residential mortgage backed securities should help to keep prices propped up. If you take the median house price of $500,000 then that's 16,000 mortgages for the taxpayer to guarantee.
- Not bad eh!
- It's not surprising the ANZ Bank is so keen to spruik the wonderful housing market.
- A market that would be flat dead on its back if it wasn't for you, the taxpayer keeping it alive.
- In our opinion it's all one big stinking corrupt mess. And you're paying for it.
- We'll have more on the housing market and ANZ Bank's spruiking later in the week.. """...

 

I think most historians agree that the Germans made a big mistake in opening up the eastern front before the defeat of Brittan
if you remember Brittan was considering surrender when the Germans redirected there attacks based on two events
opporation Barborasa which was the first push into Russia
and an accidental air raid against German civilian targets which pissed off Hitler
who then wanted London bombed in retaliation unwittingly taking pressure off the RAF
which was just about spent at the time
american arms or no

as for D day
most certainly had the Germans not opened up the eastern front earlier than specified in Min Compf ( Im bound to have spelled that wrong ) they battle would have been short and ugly for the usa

as it was things were exactly as you suggested bntii
the Germans at that point in the war were in sorry shape to stand and fight on the western defenses
the germans were spent on all fronts and the Luftwaffa was in shambles
although the ME262 or 626 or something like that
had it been used to advantage might have made a difference
although I think they were out of fuel as well
what was it
hydrogen peroxide and something else to get off the ground with rocket assist and kerosene for the jets one in the air
I might be thinking of a different plane on the rocket assist though

basically Stalin had been hounding the allies to open up the western front and take some of the pressure off the Russians who up until then had been doing almost all of the trench work
how long was the siege of Stalingrad
three years or something like that

the only point that Im trying to make is that the american role in ww2 is a bit overblown in american history

I think the Germans had about 4 million men in on the Russian invasion and dedicated even more as time went on
I think
its been a long time since I studied ww2 history
compared to the western defenses which were made up of guys on leave from the eastern front and some second rate troops of the regular army
almost no elite divisions were dedicated to the western defenses

Hitler at the time was after fuel in Russia as a priority

not trying to hurt anyone's feelings but its a fact that German air power had been whittled down by fighting on both eastern and western fronts
and at the time of the invasions the allies pretty much ruled the sky's
exactly as you suggest
except again for the ME 262 or whatever
that thing had it been used correctly might have at least given the German tanks some cover and given the bombers something to think about
as it was the bombers went unopposed near the end
Dresden for instance
1,000 or so planes in the first wave I think and not one lost

 

http://www.gata.org/node/7893 "Chris Powell: Remarks to the 2009 New Orleans Investment Conference"
http://www.gata.org/node/7895 "'Gold, peace, and prosperity,' Paul tells New Orleans conference" - - The short grabs seemed to have a good and sensible message... He may not be the next leader, but his ideas need to be adopted and used as a guide to recovery by the leaders 'America' elects...
http://www.gata.org/node/7894 "Chris Powell: Remarks to the 2009 New Orleans Investment Conference" This is an important timeline of unfolding events condemning the FED to its 'delayed' demise.... Do not prolong the disease of corruption, clear the decks NOW...

 

Agree on Osama part, but to say that we had a hand in your wallets, after 70 years of continuous military juntas and stealings our natural resources, a bit subjective, aren't we?

Pinochet the poofter kept 25 milllions usa dollars in Boston and some other big (state connected) usa banks. Sanchez Losada, last usanian puppet in Bolivia was installed by the usanian embassy's dirty and quite faul play. When thrown out, run away to his masters in the usa with 300 millions of usa dollars taken shamelessly from Bolivian National Bank on the day he ran away. Did usa extradite him and returned the money?

Nah...The money is now building usa roads and infrastructure. Although it belongs to Bolivian people and government.

How about Noriega, faithful usanian servant in Panama? His prison is more like a holiday. Two bedroom apartment with every comfort you can imagine. He is paying for that, apparently, but where the money came from? His cocaine trade he was doing on a side behind CIA's back. CIA did not like the fact that he was cutting into their profits and moved him away. The court process was a farce even Mugabe would be proud of.

Which drug dealer ends up in a 7 star accomodation serving 25 years for drug trafficking?

Then endless banana plantations throughout the Central America, making the usanian exploiters rich, yet the local working class working for 50 centavos a day?

Is that how "we" stole the money from "you"?

Hmmmm...

Argentina was the richest and best country in the world until usanians came and screwed them up so good, they are still trying to understand what the **** happened.

Yeah, "we" stole from "you". Big time. Only thing I do not understand how come the money is still in "your" hands...?

I'd say "you" are still better thieves than "us".

If you are refering to the immigrants, these people are the idiots who would lick the **** off of a white usanian arse just for a "good boy" comment. These losers you please keep. Consider them a gift for your past services.

But, the part I agree with you is on Osama. The second time we agree. Another small step in the right direction.

 

Exactly. The highest elite, the Prince Eugen Division was stuck in Yugoslavia, losing a battle after a battle. They were said to be sent to Russian front to rest from the onslaught in Yugoslavia. Many were looking forward to being wounded because that meant recovery in Germany and then permanent posting in Italy or France.

Yes usa army participated in the war, but it played minute role in it. Many a good men died in it, but the liberation did not come from the western front. Western front was a small front compared to the east and south. Brits and usanians were fighting german invalids on the western front and almost lost that battle too. Not particularly bright generals, despite the propaganda.

I personally like the part where Yugoslavs stopped russians in their chase after the retreating Germans, and made agreement first, then escorted them through the country, from Romania to Hungary, so that Russians cannot claim what usanians today claim on the west.

That they, the Russians, liberated Yugoslavia. That is the spine and the courage. Unlike the French Ressistance...

 

Guantanamo is a holiday place for CIA operatives employed by local Afghani branch called Taliban, I imagine?

As for the iron curtain, the first barbed wires were actually put up by the usanians and brits. Thought you should know that...

Russians built the wall around Berlin as a response to the "allies" barbed wire. That is another historical fact that is repeatedly being lied about. Just as NATO was formed first as a rapid response unit to attack the "reds" before they attack "us". Warsaw pact then appeared, again, as a responsed to the agressive bolstering of ex "allies" on the west. Stalin, being a schizofrenic paranoid, and with already one bad experience from a supposed "ally" (Hitler), reacted knee-jerk fast.

Do you people read only history books made in usa? It would pay to read books written on the other sid of the wire, you know? To gain some perspective on events. Hear the other side of the story. Something usanians know nothing about - learning from the "other side" in order to understand better.

 

Good leaders return money to U.S.A.

You hate American dollars, so why would you not give Pinochet a medal for returning them. It is not as though anyone down there did anything to earn them, anyway.

Pinochet was a great leader.

Southern governments could legislate increase in pay for banana pickers, but less would be sold. Competition drives the economy, and he who charges the least sells the most.
Price is low because everyone wants to sell more bananas, not because U.S.A. set the price. I am not an economist but even I know that much.

Pinochet was a great leader.

 

In all respect Masrapido- check your assumptions before you come to these conclusions.

ANY student of the history of this period understands full well the roles played by each participant during this war.

The fact that Hitler's failed "summer campaign" directly led to his defeat is known by school children in the US. The horrific cost to the Russian people as Hitler invaded is understood, the reality of fleeing before the Nazi's with munitions factories carried on their backs known, the importance of the defense of Stalingrad known, the cost to the forces of the Nazi's as the battle turned, on and on.

How can one think that it could have escaped notice that the Russians lost over 20 million lives in this war which killed 60 million?

A laughably poor summary.

Tell me what does "minute" mean in Chile? A country which had Nazi sympathies, was neutral and only symbolically declared resistance to the Axis when persuaded to by the US and so late in the war that participation was non-existent?

How did you put it:

Boston- I think perhaps their were two 'decisive' battles in WWII Europe: The Battle of Britain, and Stalingrad. Thoughts? Perhaps add the sea component as this is a boat forum... Battle of the Atlantic as third..?

 

Well, timespan here.... ?
Obama has been in action for 100 days? So how much of the downfall can be his responsibility?

"you sorry people who have had your hands inside our wallets "
ehhm well;

Could you pls define "you sorry people" and the location of "our wallets"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptzml1qQvZE

 

Battle of Brittan was an interesting turning point
definitely screwed up the German plan
I guess I would have to give it major status
if only because England survived the onslaught

who was it said
the aggressor must be vanquished but the defender need only survive
Tsu I think

battle in the north sea
I dont remember much about that part of the war
I recall the U boat threat and how it was combated
and the massive loss of allied shipping
but the only major naval engagement of the pacific I think was some gigantic German battle ship
thing demolished the British Navy flag ship if I remember and went on to have its rudder disabled
making it an easy target for the RAF dive bombers
but thats about all I remember about anything in the pacific

I do have a partial set of plans for one of the old elco ML's used in ww1
same for the old PT boats

the war in the pacific I got down pretty well
even read both Suburu Sakii's books
dam interesting reading

talk about getting a view of the war from the Japanese side
you would probably love it

cheers
B

Obumer had one huge pile of **** to work with when he got in office
only thing I really blame him for is wasted stimulus money
which isnt entirely his fault either
and health care
which is entirely his fault no mater how you slice it
on the health care issue I went from
give the man a chance
to
throw the bum out

force everyone to buy there own or face
what was it
3800 in additional taxed income and 1800 in direct penalties
great plan eh
only person who benefits from that plan is the insurance companies

I predict a spike in foreclosures as the taxes are fazed in
which by the way is planned to happen long before the health care plan is enacted
thats right
they are going to start charging the tax asap ( this year if they can ) but the health care plan wont come into effect until four years from now
you pay on about four years of health care
your not going to be getting

how many of you would agree to pay $500~600~1000 a month for four years
for nothing

brilliant plan
what a crock of ****

anyone else notice that the exact cost of this health bill ( for the entire country; which we're not actually getting by the way ) per year just happens to match what they used to bail out twenty or thirty banks with
hmmmmmmm
sounds a little fishy to me

 

"I think they were out of fuel as well"
"Hitler at the time was after fuel in Russia as a priority"
Remember why Hitler had to go to Russia - to get the tankers, the terminus, The FUEL. The same reason Japan awoke the sleeping giant - desperation. Hitler (like Barack in more ways than one!), felt that his strategic ability, tho good, was better than it was. He felt he could walk on water (History repeating?..), in this instance, needing eventually to get to the caucasus, dividing his invading force between the terminus and Stalingrad was perhaps his undoing there - that and Chuikov being willing to throw every body at all cost into the battle.
Yes, it was painful for Russia. And all of Europe was worn down by the time the US got involved - the isolationists that dumbasses who don't know what they are talking about or have no empathy for human suffering want.
I honestly don't know much about tanks other than that I know that we were "pretty" successful with Sherman tanks when used in the Patton model and in Kuwait and Iraq.
I wonder why the Doradito hates Obama so much. I suppose that he hasn't gone far enough in emulating Chavez and De Silva.

 

And the world sat on their hands while Belgium was sacked. Twice.

 

As much as we all would like the US to keep its influence within its borders, Just as in the past, it is going to be too horrific to just watch.

 

My take- without the Lend Lease Act and the ability of the US to keep war materials flowing to GB, the war would have been lost. Keeping the sea supply to GB was critical. Without aid, GB would have fallen. Without GB- no western front. Lacking the diversion of German resources to combat the Allies on these fronts, and lacking the direct aid given to the Soviets in way of war materials (more Lend Lease), the Germans could have prevailed in the Soviet Union.

By the time we had entered the shooting war I believe it was a forgone conclusion that Germany would fall. Our support via lend lease has assured it. At this point it was just a matter of pouring water on the fire. There was plenty of water- we were supplying it. It was just going to take time- and lives.

That's why I am interested in the 'decisive' battle question. I do not specifically understand the really critical tipping points in the European theater. I believe I would weigh in for the Battle of the Atlantic- If we (the allies), had failed to keep the sea lanes open in the Atlantic, I think all would have been lost.

The ship you refer to is the Bismark- she destroyed the Hood (GB's flagship) in ship on ship battle in the Denmark Straights. By lucky chance she was sighted by a recon plane and received the damage to the rudder you mention- then destroyed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck

 

Decisive? Trusting Hitler when he signed treaties and said whatever anyone wanted to hear right up to and including guiding people into showers. This is happening now and the charismatic leader is Obama. He is prodding capitalism and freedom into showers.