tale KondaU pa ni več klasičen "borzni komentator" , pohvalno :)

"Pred vrati ZDA nova nepremičninska kriza."

Napihovanje balonov na ( delniških, nepremičninskih, ... ) trgih, pred izbruhom krize ( 2007 ), so po mojem omogočala predvsem poceni in dostopna posojila. Bi rekel, da je določenim v interesu, namerno liberalna bančna zakonodaja podpihovala pohlep tako na strani bankirjev, kot kreditojemalcev. Morebitnim posvečenim je to gotovo lahko samo koristilo. Tako pripravljene krize smatram za rop stoletja. Državam, razen morda redkih izjem ni preostalo drugega, kot močno dodatno zadolževanje, s figo v žepu za prihodnost. ( Dolgovi naraščajo eksponentno in vemo, kaj to pomeni ). Kapitalizacija dobičkov in socializacija izgub = socializem/komunizem ! Elite si želijo monopol, raja pa se naj kar zafrkava in živi v kapitalizmu.

Ljudi je treba usmeriti k industriji in trgovini. Tako se bodo narodi izgubili v neprestanem pehanju za dobičkom in v tej tekmi za dobrinami prezrli skupnega sovražnika. A ponovno: da svoboda ne bi za vselej razkrojila in uničila človeških skupnosti, moramo industrijo zasnovati na špekulacijah. Tako bodo vsi njeni izdelki prišli v naše roke.

1sandi je napisal(a):
 Kapitalizacija dobičkov in socializacija izgub = socializem/komunizem !

 To je fašizem, ne komunizem. Profiti so osebni in zasebni, izgube so javne in socialne.
 
 Ne vem, kaj še vedno vsi serjejo s komunizmom. Komunizem, oziroma socializem so bailauti za rajo, fašizem so bailouti za velekapital.

mataj je napisal(a):

 To je fašizem, ne komunizem. Profiti so osebni in zasebni, izgube so javne in socialne.
 
 Ne vem, kaj še vedno vsi serjejo s komunizmom. Komunizem, oziroma socializem so bailauti za rajo, fašizem so bailouti za velekapital.

 
Se strinjam, pravzaprav je fašizem res dosti boljša oznaka.

Za vse, ki ste imeli (STM= samoupravljanje z temelji marksizma) in ste vse to seveda pozabili, predvsem pa za »mladino«, ki se ji tudi sanja ne kdo je Marx!!!!

Lastniki kapitala in biznisa bodo pri delavcih spodbujali in stimulirali kupovanje njihovih dragih artiklov: stanovanja, hise, tehnologijo, s tem da se bodo delavci obvezali najeti drage kredite in dajati hipoteke do nevzdrznega nivoja. Na koncu bodo neplacani dolgovi povzrocili bankrot bank, ki bodo nacionalizirane in drzava bo sla po poti, ki vodi v komunizem.

ampak :) drznil si bom napovedati, da bo ZDA prva država na tem svetu, ki bo od IMF-a najela posojilo....posojilu se bo reklo "special drawing right" :) mogoč je to prvi priklop cele države na globalno monetarno oblast.....pa da weed-mo :)

evo pa še maldaljši transcript pogovora med Bernankejem in Ron Paulom....kot zanimivost

Ben Bernanke: (smiles) Well, I can’t say I agree with that last statement, Congressman, but I agree on the previous point you made, we cannot be sure of anything, however, there is a need for macroeconomic stability. One has to try to balance the markets when they are in turbulence, as they were from early 2007, and I will not concede to the argument that doing nothing is better than doing something. Obviously, no one could have predicted the bailout collapse, but, umm..

Ron Paul: Mr. Chariman, I, and several other people, uh, Mr. Roubini, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Taleb, and of course, the great Austrian economists, predicted that this disaster would occur. The Fed socialized the losses, provided stimulus after stimulus to the big banks, manipulated the economic data, and resorted to inflation to fix a crisis cause by too much inflation, which eventually devalued the dollar completely.

Ben Bernanke: .As to our authority, umm, of course the Constitution permits us the right to coin money and regulate they money thereof..

Ron Paul: (loudly) Coins..

* A d v e r t i s e m e n t
* efoods

Ben Bernanke: (Continues from original point, with an amusing look on his face), and that has been delegated to the Federal Reserve Act, and everything we’ve done is directly based on that act. You can disagree with the act..the Congress could have repealed it..

Ron Paul: Oh I’ve disagreed with the Act for my entire time in Congress, Mr. Chairman. I noticed you smiled a bit when I said ‘coins’, because you know just as well as I know, that money that is not redeemable in gold is not money at all. So let’s stop kidding around. And regarding the Federal Reserve Act, I don’t know if you realize, but, do you know what year that was passed?

Ben Bernanke: I believe it was 1914.

Ron Paul: 1913. I’m puzzled that you don’t know the founding of the institution you work for, but anyways, that’s beside the point. The more revealing thing is that the Act was passed in the dead of night on Christmas eve in 1913, when most congressmen were absent. And, of course, cell phones and tweeting were not available then so most of the lawmakers didn’t receive any word, they were essentially kept in the dark about the progress and meaning of the Act. Many, in fact, never knew it was passed until they returned to session and by then the newspapers lauded the move by Congress as extremely popular so they had no incentive to remove the Act. But I find the fact that the Act was passed during the time of least scrutiny incredibly suspicious, Mr. Chairman. In our time, things are not too different; the trick is to make the bill as large as possible. Do you have anything to add about what I said, Mr. Chairman?

Ben Bernanke: About what, congressman?

Ron Paul: About the creation of the Fed. I thought that since you are so familiar with the principles of creation, you would be interested with the creation of the system that you operated in for over eight years.

Ben Bernanke: What do you want me to say congressman? I was born in 1953, and had little to do with the creation of the Fed. I was given this hand, I didn’t make it, so uhh, I was simply following procedure and the law on the books. From my understanding, Congressman, for most of Fed’s existence, the US economy has grown, consumer productivity reached historical heights in that time, and the wealth our country produced rebuilt half of Europe after WWII.

Ron Paul: Yes, but printing money can only take you so far. After WWII, when the dollar essentially became the world reserve currency, replacing gold, its value dropped tremendously. And of course after 2009, it was completely destroyed. But my question is, where do you get the authority to make dramatic economic decisions out of thin air? When the economic weather is thick, that is, when things are generally stable, and the markets are up, the Fed falsely advertises itself as an umbrella in a storm, but when the storm comes you come to the rescue of the storm makers, and not the people out in the rain. And even in sunny days you stand in the wind, trying to stimulate the economy, which shows that you’re original guarantee, was false. And you are not here to save the day. Some claim you save those who’ve paid, but the taxpayers who put up all of the money in 2008 and 2009 were thrown to the woods, so it’s truer to say that you save only those who have their way. I am just completely dumbfoundead, Mr. Chairman, how can still you justify the Fed’s response?

Ben Bernanke: It was the American government policy to stabilize the banks, twist the numbers to keep from paying its debt and bringing back price fixing to rehabilitate the domestic markets, and all this was done in the effort of keeping the country from going bankrupt.

Ron Paul: I have trouble buying that, because even if the Fed had noble intentions, it still failed, so as an institution it’s a failure. It didn’t offer the required correction, the problem of debt wasn’t addressed. It continued loose monetary policy instead of doing what I and other prominent economists suggest, which was to bascially liquate the debt.

But it’s interesting that you should say that because I personally think you don’t bear much of the responsibility since it is the entire system that I and others have had a problem with and not any particular person, but, to look at it from a different perspective, any system wouldn’t be maintainable if not for minds like yours who are willing to provide their prestige and background, and the system you lend your hand to was predicated on a very destructive monetary philosophy. Actually, it’s not even a philosophy, it’s a junk science, backed by military might, and that is why it so irresponsible. But I am a little reluctant to say you are totally innocent, and weren’t aware of the massive damage your policies were having on people. But I must submit my reservations to that higher law, and abstain from any over the top judgment, because responsibility as not a cut and dry thing. I can no more blame you then I can blame Greenspan, because you were both played the hand you were given, it’s true. Granted, though, you share some of the guilt, especially since the system failed so dramatically, and didn’t live up to any of its promises.

My personal feeling on this matter is that, I’d like you to be forgiven. Of course, that is up to the independent citizen tribunal to decide in the weeks to come, but I don’t see why judgment day and forgiveness day cannot both fall on the same day. It would be miraculous, I know, given the destruction your house of paper has caused, and the angry backlash from the people. Anyways, I like to know what you have to say about this, and also to answer what Napoleon once said, about how politics is your destiny. From my perspective, to follow on what Napoleon said, you supported the course that has put this country in such a catastrophic situation, and it seems you were locked into that course the day you took that job, as was the former chairman, and you weren’t able to retreat from your position, to come to the right side of history, so to speak, so I sometimes wonder if you deserve any sympathy.

As a doctor, the first rule I am obliged to is do no harm, and it was very clear the Fed Reserve was doing harm by creating money endlessly, not liquating the debt, so on and so on. And that whole cyclone of debt financing created the hyperinflation that has left this country so incredibly miserable. We were spinning in a cyclone of debt and the Fed said, well, if we keep spinning ourselves we won’t reach the bottom, but you can’t spin your way out of debt, and when you do finally hit the bottom you are way too dizzy to think and react rationally. All central banks end up creating these cyclones of debt, and to get back to my original point, individuals are powerless in this type of system, so it was nothing you could do to reverse the madness of debt financing. It was clear all the way through that without the force of the military, the Federal Reserve couldn’t acted so irresponsibly

Ben Bernanke: You’re right about the no harm principle, but the economy was not in the most pristine condition when I got to the Fed. The harm was already there in the economy and we had to something to stop the bleeding.

Ron Paul: And what was that bleeding?

Ben Bernanke: The tremendous burden of debt and future obligations on the system, Congressman.

Ron Paul: But the Fed created that bleeding, it created that debt. It created the bubbles in the 90’s, and the housing bubble in the last decade. You can’t get rid of debt by creating more debt. Spending had to be cut, and that was the biggest problem.

Ben Bernanke: The spending balloon was in no way the Fed’s fault, Congressman Paul. We at the Fed followed the guidelines set out by Congress and the White House. It was the Congress that failed to bring down both domestic and foreign spending.

Ron Paul: But you’re not getting my point. You provided the alcohol to the party and then complained because you also got busted when the cops showed up. Without the Fed’s ability to perpetually create money, our government could not have started wars that seemed to last forever. So your excuse, in my honest judgment, is unsound. That’s like the black cat of debt calling the kettle broke.

Ben Bernanke: umm, I don’t like to think of my role as having anything to do with politics, Congressman. I am an economist and a policy maker, as I’ve said, not a politician. And..

Ron Paul: But you make political decisions, do you not, Mr. Chairman? And your appointment and reappointment are based on a political decision. You are given incentives to use the Fed’s power to administer capital, which is really the monopolistic power of usury, to various special interests, and to government policy favored by the elite. Believe me, if you had raised interest rates in 2007 when the first signs of the housing bubbles were visible, back before we reached the point of no return, you would not have been reappointed by any President, republican or democrat, believe me, you would’ve been shortchanged in no time. So I think that argument belongs in the ditch.

Ben Bernanke: I disagree with that, Mr. Paul. There are occasions when it is appropriate to raise interests rates, as Chairman Volcker did in the 1980’s under the Reagan administration, but back in late 2009 inflation was still low, unemployment numbers weren’t that drastic, and we did not want to make any quick decision to spike the federal funds rate, knowing for certain that would have caused even more disastrous consequences….

Ron Paul: (infuriated) Worse than hyperinflation and the destruction of the dollar? Worse than 35% unemployment?

Ben Bernanke: Well, the dollar was still strong in 2009, but we had to adjust to keep the banks from going down under. And at that time, if I remember correctly, when changing to a new currency was still a political problem at the time, I, uh..

Ron Paul: (in a harsh voice) Now, wait a minute, are you implying that the destruction of the dollar was Fed policy, to bring in a world currency?

Ben Bernanke: No. What I said was, the viability of the dollar was not our most important concern, and no one could have foreseen the tremendous fallout of the attack on Iran on the dollar, so, our main focus was on keeping the banks stable, maintaining the inflationary rates, and preparing for the future.

Ron Paul: I find it a little hard believing the fall of the dollar wasn’t foreseeable, Mr. Chairman. You may have turned a blind eye to the dollar, but so many people, me in particular, warned you about the disaster looming and offered the prescription. My bill HR 1207 was shot down in late 2009, and we know what happened after that, so, and I know not your fault, I know. The dollar crisis was inevitable once it was taken off the gold standard by Roosevelt in 1933, and then later by Nixon in August of 7′1. So that argument of yours might hold in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion, it’s a different matter. And it’s funny you should mention former chairman Paul Volcker, because he criticized the direction the Fed took back in 2008, after it gave a loan of twenty-nine billion to Bear Sterns in April of that year. I have the quote here, he said: "The Federal Reserve has judged it necessary to take actions that extend to the very edge of its lawful and implied powers, transcending in the process certain long-embedded central banking principles and practices." So he understood that the unprecedented power given to the Fed to mediate the crisis was not necessary, even in those circumstances, and he was the former chairman!

Ben Bernanke: To be fair, Congressman, when Congress passed the bailout bail in 2008, we thought it would be a passing phase, but it became a way of life. And that is not the Fed’s fault. We intervened to save the banks because it was necessary.

Ron Paul: Describe exactly, what were the options?

Ben Bernanke: Let the system fail, or provide capital to the banks.

Ron Paul: So, in your estimation, if the Fed allowed the system to fail, the American people would have suffered even more.

Ben Bernanke: Yes.

Ron Paul: But, the system failed anyway, and if it had failed sooner, people would have suffered a lot less.

Ben Bernanke: Well, we believed at the time that the Fed was indispensable to the economic structure of the country. Ever since the Great Depression, there was a need to intervene into the markets and maintain long term stability.

Ron Paul: But you failed in carrying out those almighty objectives. You were not on the ball. In September 2009 you declared the recession over, when it was clearly not the case. Unemployment numbers were above fifteen percent, the dollar’s value was falling every day.

Ben Bernanke: Congressman, the Fed’s success rate proves it was an invaluable institution. The Fed forecasted economic downturns..

Ron Paul: That It created.

Ben Bernanke: Not exactly, Congressman,

Ron Paul: Frankly, Mr. Chairman, you lie!

Ben Bernanke: That’s not true, Congressman.

Ron Paul: Then what are you saying? That you didn’t declare the recession over in 2009? Your defense is completely out of the water. How is not the Fed’s fault?Are you reading off a script? Please explain your actions to me, so I can understand.

Ben Bernanke: Well, we weren’t reading off a physical script. But don’t you feel, Congressmen, that there is a spiritual script that we are all playing out?

Ron Paul: Well, I’m a Christian, and according to Christianity, Mr. Chairman, we choose what course we want to take in the end. But your words reminds me of an exchange I once had with former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan shortly after my reelection in 1996, and I presented him with a copy of an article he wrote in 1966, called Gold and Economic Freedom, where he espouses the virtues of a gold-based system, against the dangers of a paper money system. One of my favorite quotes from the piece is where he says, "In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation." And he was very proud of the piece, not expressing any regrets when he signed my copy. But surprisingly, or maybe not so surprisingly, he changed his tune when I brought up the same article in the House Banking Committee. I guess contradictory statements just go with your profession, Mr. Chairman, or your script, as you suggested.

Ben Bernanke: Congressman, you asked me earlier what my job was, and one way you can view me, is as a dealer who has to work a hand he’s be given by the House.

Ron Paul: But what role did you play? Remember, a casino is not a casino without its dealers, so to assume innocence because it was your job strikes me of the most murderous kind of immaturity.

Ben Bernanke: silent

Ben Bernanke: (in a somber voice) Congressman, there are things that can be said for public discussion, and things that are best left under the table.

Ron Paul: (chuckles a little) That explains it all, doesn’t it? I mean, what else is there to say? The Fed needles its own thread.

(shakes head disapprovingly ) The problem is with any central authority that thinks it can decide what is best for the rest of society. Central banks are dead institutions. In our exchanges, Mr. Chairman, I sometimes felt like you were the Pope of the economy, and I was Bruno. The critics called me crazy because I said you can’t create credit out of the sky, which is like me saying I can create a baby out of the womb. It is preposterous. I am simply the deliverer. I deliver the baby, and then my job is done. In the economy, only the market can correctly dictate how much credit there should be in the society. And there must be some type of standard, the supply of credit must be based on a physical substance with weight, which gold has historically been, and it has to be recognizable throughout the world. But before I conclude my remarks, do you have anything else to add, Mr. Chairman.

Ben Bernanke: No, Mr. Paul.

Ron Paul: Very well, then. I am not at liberty to discuss your innocence or guilt, but I can honestly say that you showed ill judgment. Your assessment of the origin of the crisis, and the Fed’s manipulation which escalated the crisis to a much higher degree, were ethically and empirically wrong. The dilemma facing all of us is how do we attribute responsibility to certain individuals, in light of all that has happened in the past couple of years, and even, much farther back, back to the time when the Fed was established, and when the CIA was established. It is my view that we should act with compassion and strive for prudence and moderation in the times ahead. But we should not tolerate excuses.

In all of history powerful men have conspired to gain wealth and power, without reflecting on their injustice or cruelty towards their fellow men. The modern State, a leviathan of man’s own making, must be denounced because its fruits are pure evil, whether in Nazi Germany or in our own time. The State’s destructiveness lies in the citizen’s refusal to take up the labor of civilization onto his individual Self. If Man is to move forward justly in this century, he must refuse the total machinery of the State, and keep the fruits of his own labor. The State, despite its intentions and the promises it makes, is always dangerous, regardless if it is in the hands of a powerful elite or crowd. That is why the Founders advised to limit the power and reach of the government. In our time, the rise of corporations would not have been possible if not for the power of government. One of biggest myth of our age has been that we live under a free market system. It is, rather, a corporatist system, where in the government is used for and by the special interests. It is my wish that we strip corporations the right of personhood. But even in the most perfect of situations, Justice does not flourish automatically; each individual must view and treat his neighbor as an original individual, and nothing besides. Without the Golden Rule, there can’t be a Golden Age.

Statists of all political stripes, claim that their leevers of power are endowed with special intellectual abilities with which to control the society and the market and that they magically know what the society needs. We should just trust them or their bad ideas. This is patently ridiculous. Modern markets are complex, subject to changes, innovations, and all types of cultural and social transformations. Trust is the most valuable resource we have, to place it in the hands of central bankers, religious tyrants, or any other, is the gravest of mistakes. It is regrettable that it took a crisis of a magnitude the world has never seen before to get us to understand the deeper truths about world, and ourselves. We do ourselves a great disservice by putting any authority above the truth, and it is my hope that we never make this error again.

Amy Goodman: That was Ron Paul addressing the nation and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke in the first of these historical preliminary hearings, involving former high government officials. This is Democracy Now! Democracy Now.org. We’ll be back in a minute.

Amy Goodman: Disconnect the Transmitter – Arcade Fire, here on Democracy Now! Democracy Now.org, the War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan Gonzalez, and here are some of today’s headlines.

Juan Gonzalez: The nation’s top military officer, a member of the Citizen Councils, advised Congress yesterday to rethink the need for the US Military. Admiral James Strickland made the comments in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Admiral James Strickland: Without a doubt, without security, freedom wouldn’t exist. But I doubt if the American people are not the best protectors of their lives and fortunes. The last few years have changed the character of this nation. We are no longer fearful of veiled threats, and have rediscovered the values of citizen militias. Fifty years ago, this proposal would have been unimaginable to make, but today I can approach with you certainty that the US military is no longer needed to provide the defense of this country. There are many fine men and women in our Armed Services, whose courage and bravery have made them loyal patriots and our most valuable citizens, but possessing a State military after their misuse by powerful men behind the scenes seems incredibly stupid. If we have learned anything from these past years, it is that Men’s minds are easily impassioned, and also very fragile, making the use of judgment an individual affair. Our US Military has brainwashed men to kill foreigners, or anyone who is not them. I see no value for our society to hold onto to such a killing machine.

Juan Gonzalez: The Admiral’s remarks were highly lauded by Americans Veterans For Peace, calling them "the last nail into the coffins of war."

Amy Goodman: The trial of Chris Kramler, the man who murdered Glenn Beck at a protest in San Antonia last fall, came to a conclusion yesterday. Kramler, 38, was found guilty on all charges and will serve life in prison.

Juan Gonzalez: The construction of the Victims Tower at Ground Zero is near completion and set to open in the fall. The new building, dedicated to the lives lost on 9/11, has been funded by the taxpayers of New York and took two years to build. Luke Rudowski, the youngest mayor of New York City, says the Victims Towers was the idea of the family members who lost their loved ones in what is now known as the most famous state-sponsored terrorist attack in human history.

Amy Goodman: The preliminary hearings of former high government officials have begun today in Washington D.C. The hearings, organized by Citizen Councils across America, are held in the Congress, and are being watched by the whole world. For more, we’re joined by blogger and activist, Truth Excavator in our firehouse studio. His writing can be found in Harpers, The Nation, The American Conservative, AntiWar.Com, The Independent, Tom Dispatch, The Guardian, and other publications. His blog is called disquietreservations.blogspot.com.

Welcome to Democracy Now!

Za vse tiste, ki mislijo, da "teoretiki zarote" mlatimo prazno slamo.....mate spodaj jasen transcript congressional hearing-a oziroma testimony-a ker Ron Paul je šef komisije za nadzor financ in se bori za zaprtje FED-a v taki obliki kot obstaja.....dragi verniki...

NavadniNimda je napisal(a):

 
Ron Paul je tudi rekel, da zdravstveno zavarovanje ni pravica, ki bi jo morali plačevati iz proračuna. FED je pa itak treba zapreti, kar velja za vse centralne banke. Banke na trgu naj same določajo obrestne mere, ne pa da jih diktira in regulira nek državni ali paradržavni organ.

Predlog: ne delat copy-paste unih dolgih klobas v prejšnjem sporočilu, ampak podaj link. Tako ne bodo mogli tožiti Finance zaradi kršenja copyright-a. ;)

 
hehehe :) ma boljš je tkole postat copy/paste ker folk linkov ne pogleda nič...če pa kle začne brat pa hitr notr pade.....

ampak....jaz sem vedno mislil oziroma še vedno mislim, da so centralne banke v privatnih rokah....oziroma je lastništvo na papirju napisano da je tako in tako....o obrestnih merah, količini monney supply-a pa te fore, ki imajo direkten vpliv na trg in "sistemski vsakdan", pa se odločajo na zasedanjih vsake tolk cajta......tko da če na zasedanjih pade iz Bildenburgov komanda, da se more money supply pripret recimo alpa ustavt kreditiranje, centralna banka zapre pipco komercialnim bankam in v trenutku je sistem brez kreditiranja.....če pa ni kreditiranja pa tudi ni gospodarske aktivnosti....žal.....zato dejansko zagovarjam tezo, da bi mogl poleg zakonodajne, izvršilne in sodne veje uvest tudi monetativno/monetarno vejo oblasti, ki je v pristojnosti države.

Infowarrior je napisal(a):
ampak :) drznil si bom napovedati, da bo ZDA prva država na tem svetu, ki bo od IMF-a najela posojilo....posojilu se bo reklo "special drawing right" :) mogoč je to prvi priklop cele države na globalno monetarno oblast.....pa da weed-mo :)

 
par uporabnih nalog.

- a opises na kratko s svojimi besedami zgodovino SDR. (hint: za pregledat je nekaj desetletij.)

- daj zgooglaj nekaj drzav, ki so doslej ze prejele posojilo imf (po tvoje nic), pa porocaj, koliko casa ti je vzelo. (hint: enak kot zgoraj.)

Čestitam za članek; lepo da ne pišete vsi po nareku višjih krogov.

Na tele nove resete sam opozarjam že nekaj časa, ne pozabimo pa seveda še na commercial realestate

Še bo pestro kot kaže...Kaj bo v tem primeru z našo preljubo Slovencljijo?

kzupanc je napisal(a):
Še bo pestro kot kaže...Kaj bo v tem primeru z našo preljubo Slovencljijo?

 ja to ej pravo vprašanje, ali kdo lahko predvidi kako bo drugi val nepreminčninske krize v ZDA (ki skoraj sigurno pride) uplival na Slovenijo?

kzupanc je napisal(a):
Še bo pestro kot kaže...Kaj bo v tem primeru z našo preljubo Slovencljijo?

 Vse bo v redu, ampak le pod pogojem, da se temeljito zlustriramo.