Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is There a Limit to Financialization?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Is There a Limit to Financialization?

    Originally posted by EJ View Post
    If Schiff spent more time with Fed economists and spoke with Yellen himself he'd come to a different conclusion.

    The USD is not going to collapse. Forget "currency wars."

    With respect to US vs China, Dynamic Cooperation (a broad policy band) is replacing Economic MAD.

    The euro is now taking its turn on the currency depreciation merry-go-round after the yen.

    The USD will be next in 2017 or after.

    Oil is a dead cat bounce. Once the worse-than-expected winter ends and heating fuel oil demand declines we'll see oil supply chain distress. $20 oil this summer is not out of the question.

    The central banks of U.S. and anglo-saxon economies are adopting some of the micro-management policies that China has used for decades.

    The post-market economy is unpredictable but in one respect: Politicians want to stay in power.
    FIRE. With Chinese characteristics.

    Should be entertaining to witness...the endemic corruption of global FIRE married to the endemic corruption of Chinese leadership.


    China's new investment bank already paying diplomatic dividend to Beijing



    The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is a rival to the United States-led World Bank and the Asian Development Bank

    Beijing: As the list of traditional United States allies signing on to the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank continues to swell – despite direct pleas from the Obama administration – the reaction among Western analysts has been all but universal.







    Beijing has won this round, and convincingly, and Washington needs to reassess its game plan as China looks to assert its influence on the international stage with greater frequency, intensity and nuance.


    Gideon Rachman, writing in the Financial Times, describes Washington's handling of the AIIB issue as a "diplomatic debacle" that has made it look "isolated and petulant". Robert Zoellick, a former World Bank president, said the Obama administration was "mistaken both on policy and on execution"...

    ...China is no stranger to using "chequebook diplomacy as a way to buy friends, having already lent billions, particularly to African and Latin American nations. But a downturn in the global economy, and political instability in other instances, have seen the likes of the Ukraine, Zimbabwe and Venezuela struggle to meet their repayments.


    Highlighting the risk of unpredictable changes in political winds, the shock defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka's presidential elections has seen a once-friendly investment destination turn nasty. New leader Maithripala Sirisena has since told Beijing Sri Lankawas reviewing the terms of its loans, and suspended work on a key $US1.5 billion port project being funded by a Chinese state-owned enterprise.


    Deals with a multilateral institutions like the AIIB have less propensity to unravel.


    Chinese lending to developing nations is not entirely altruistic. As well as gains in commercial advantage and strategic influence, it provides a diversifying outlet for its $US3.8 trillion of foreign currency reserves.


    It provides an outlet for its steel industry, suffering from chronic overcapacity, and buttresses employment. China has pledged to create 10 million jobs to keep unemployment in check, in an environment where its economy is slowing and house prices are cooling...

    ...By its own design, the AIIB propels China into a leadership role in the world's financial affairs for the first time, and puts it at the helm of a multilateral institution which counts major Western economies and countries it has diplomatic and territorial disputes with among its core members – providing another intriguing test case of how it navigates inevitable conflicts that arise while continuing on its ultimate goal of amassing international influence.

    Comment


    • #17
      China's supposed corruption

      Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
      FIRE. With Chinese characteristics.

      Should be entertaining to witness...the endemic corruption of global FIRE married to the endemic corruption of Chinese leadership.


      Haven't you heard the news?

      China's top dog is cracking down on government corruption. People are doing jail time. Unlike in this country.

      Comment


      • #18
        is there a limit to oil?

        Originally posted by EJ View Post
        We will always need oil. Over the past five years or so here in the U.S. we've mined it faster than we've burned it up. The popular media are mistakenly making a logical leap in promoting this temporary imbalance between supply and demand as evidence that there is somehow more oil in the ground now than there was five years ago. . .
        There is no specific quantity of "oil" in the ground, and hence no absolute way to measure how much remains. What counts is what can be extracted economically to be used for liquid fuel. As technology changes, different types of reserves become economical, possibly including those under the deep sea.

        I have to agree with your conclusion, though, that "oil" or better yet "liquid fuel used for cars" will gradually get more expensive. I'd like to see some numbers on this fuel cell car, and whether you put in hydrogen or natural gas.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Is There a Limit to Financialization?

          "Oil is a dead cat bounce. Once the worse-than-expected winter ends and heating fuel oil demand declines we'll see oil supply chain distress. $20 oil this summer is not out of the question." EJ, 3/20/15

          Article on gasoline to dropping below $2 this summer:

          http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/gas-p...6pLid%3D634608

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Is There a Limit to Financialization?

            Limits? try Limitless

            New Metric Aids Weak Credit Risks
            The new score is largely a response to banks’ desire to boost lending volumes by increasing loan originations to borrowers who otherwise wouldn’t qualify, many of whom tend to be charged more for loans. But the new yardstick will also throw a spotlight on consumers who often are deemed riskier than the rest of the population and could saddle banks with losses if they fail to make good on their loans.
            What could possibly go wrong?

            Comment

            Working...
            X