From Chris Martenson: Deflation

[phirang]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dare's to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar thing, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job."
"If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalist is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell the country for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press. We are the tools and vassals of the rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."
– John Swinton, the former Chief of Staff at the NEW YORK TIMES, speaking at the New York Press Club in 1953.

[don]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

I don't think the individuals who pushed for our invasion of Iraq are either that smart or that foresighted.

Declaring them strategic geniuses ex post facto is a bit generous.

Nothing ex post facto about it. I thought this for years. Wasn't Saddam's last independent declaration was Iraqi oil would no longer be sold in dollars?

I don't think this alone was enough. What would be enough is the shredding of the oil-for-dollars consensus. Ash, isn't that a keystone of current dollar reserve status? Not the only prop but a big one. Take it away and it becomes easier to negotiate the dollar.

[friendly_jacek]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

Nothing ex post facto about it. I thought this for years. Wasn't Saddam's last independent declaration was Iraqi oil would no longer be sold in dollars?

I don't think this alone was enough. What would be enough is the shredding of the oil-for-dollars consensus. Ash, isn't that a keystone of current dollar reserve status? Not the only prop but a big one. Take it away and it becomes easier to negotiate the dollar.

Lets not forget the "bush is criminal" floor in Bagdad Al-Rashid Hotel:

[don]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

Lets not forget the "bush is criminal" floor in Bagdad Al-Rashid Hotel:

The relevance escapes me. It was personal?
So it was his father!

[rj1]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

Nothing ex post facto about it. I thought this for years. Wasn't Saddam's last independent declaration was Iraqi oil would no longer be sold in dollars?

I don't think this alone was enough. What would be enough is the shredding of the oil-for-dollars consensus. Ash, isn't that a keystone of current dollar reserve status? Not the only prop but a big one. Take it away and it becomes easier to negotiate the dollar.

You have the same opinion as this British stand-up comedian. The U.S. is the biggest crack-dealing mafia don on the block in a Bronx housing project.

(and ironically his analogy applies even more in this financial crisis, he did this a few years ago)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o-G_s_uKlo

My personal opinion is the invasion was not done for oil, but the oil was a nice side effect.

[don]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

You have the same opinion as this British stand-up comedian. The U.S. is the biggest crack-dealing mafia don on the block in a Bronx housing project.

(and ironically his analogy applies even more in this financial crisis, he did this a few years ago)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o-G_s_uKlo

My personal opinion is the invasion was not done for oil, but the oil was a nice side effect.

Thanks for the Robert Newman tip. This is much closer to how major powers operate. It's not a moral question, whatever that means in geopolitics.

Your personal opinion was it was not done for oil but for....?

[rj1]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

Thanks for the Robert Newman tip. This is much closer to how major powers operate. It's not a moral question, whatever that means in geopolitics.

Your personal opinion was it was not done for oil but for....?

Not sure. I think there was just a rational "let's do it" thing going on instead of just letting Saddam fester as a toothless tiger.

It's never been expounded on sufficiently, and I'm not a retard so I don't buy the democracy argument.

My dad went there for two tours and he thinks it was oil.

[phirang]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

My friend was with a MTT in fallujah... he said Iraq is total ass, and he was almost killed by a jundi when he tried to stop him from stealing from a local.

we went to iraq for seignorage. USA is a bank, and iraq has excellent collateral.

[ASH]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

Nothing ex post facto about it. I thought this for years.

Sorry -- it didn't occur to me that you have long held this belief. So far, the invasion of Iraq appears to have been a singularly dumb move, so rehabilitation of the Bush administration's reputation for strategic smarts on the basis of their purported economic sophistication and foresight seemed dubious to me. It seemed ex post facto in the context of what I think the war motives were, but I should have considered that you might have a different theory about the war.

What other observations of Bush Administration policy make you think preserving the reserve status of the currency is a top priority? From Cheney's claim that deficits don't matter, to Bush's introduction of Medicare Part D, to the fiscal impact of the war and tax cuts, to the weaker dollar policy pursued through most of Bush's Presidency, I see no reason to think that defense of the currency figured highly in his policy calculations.

Here's where I'm coming from. My mental model of the American government is that policy sophistication resides in the federal bureaucracies, yet policy formation is the purvue of politicians. In policy areas of relatively little domestic political importance, the bureaucrats have considerable license. They develop strategies and a certain institutional inertia, which can influence both how policy is originated (through expert advise given to politicians) or the manner in which policy is implemented. If the war had been driven by bureaucrats rather than politicians -- for instance, the Pentagon, State Department, or intelligence services, etc. -- then I'd think a more sophisticated strategy might underly the stated goals. However, everything I saw suggested that the politicians of the administration (and their political appointees) were firmly in the driver's seat -- to the point of being selective with the use of input from the bureaucracies. With politicians, I don't expect long-range strategies or much policy sophistication. I expect their goals to be short-term and ideological, and their grasp of policy superficial.

Why do I expect different things of politicians and bureaucrats? It's partly a question of tenure, but mainly it is insulation from the political cycle -- the top officials at the bureaucracies are political appointees, but often their deputies and below are career bureaucrats who persist between administrations. Because most bureaucrats are insulated from the political cycle -- and because they can cultivate subject matter expertise rather than personal appeal -- they are more apt to long-term strategic thinking. Politicians, on the other hand, are always thinking about the next election -- and success in politics has more to do with personal appeal rather than intellectual rigor.

What would be enough is the shredding of the oil-for-dollars consensus. Ash, isn't that a keystone of current dollar reserve status? Not the only prop but a big one. Take it away and it becomes easier to negotiate the dollar.

I agree with your assessment of the importance of the oil-for-dollars concensus. I just have my doubts that the architects of the war are as smart as you.

[FRED]

From Chris Martenson: Deflation cancelled. Hyperinflation!

LINK:
http://www.chrismartenson.com/files/...%2010-3-08.pdf

It’s Here And It’s Now

ChrisMartenson.com © 2006 - 2008 Page 1

Everything that I have been writing about, everything
that I have been lecturing about, and everything
that I made the Crash Course about is now in motion.
It is here, and it is happening right now.
The purpose of this Martenson Report is to nudge you
further and further toward taking any remaining actions
that can help shield you from what is coming. I want
you to understand that my advice and my voice are just
one of many, and that your job is to listen to everything
and make up your own mind.
Between now and “then,” with “then” being up to 10
years from now, most of the wealth of all overly-
indebted nations will be destroyed.
The debt-based fiat money system of our past is
drawing to a close. The extent to which your money is
locked within that system is the extent to which you risk
losing it all. Not (necessarily) because it will be stolen
with malicious intent by your leaders, but rather by
their benign ignorance.
There are simply too many claims on a future that is too
small. Those claims - debts and money - have to be
reduced. Whether that is accomplished by a process of
inflation or by one of deflation is the only question left
to resolve.
MEA CULPA
[snip]
But right now? The data says that you need to begin
preparing for a nasty deflationary crunch.
Your faithful information scout,
Chris Martenson

Today Chris writes:

The Fed - Picture of the Day
Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 3:56 pm, by cmartenson

In 1998 "the worst financial crisis of all time", the Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) blow-up happened. To fight the pernicious effects of this crisis the Fed expanded its asset base which is a fancy way of saying they pushed a bunch of cash out into the banking system

Well, that crisis passed and the Fed slowly re-absorbed that excess cash and returned to a more normal rate of exponential money expansion.

Then the Y2K 'crisis' came along and the Fed shoved tons of money into the banking system in anticipation of a crisis that never was. Hey, they didn't know that. Unfortunately all this hot money poured onto an already raging stock market mania and served to fuel the final blow off that finally burst in the spring of 2000.

Then 9/11 came along and this was by far a larger shock to the system than either of the prior crises. Again money was shoved into the system and then reeled back in later.

Well, then this picture will help you put this current crisis into context.

The opportunity for this level of monetary monkeying to end up in the hyperinflationary ditch is very, very high.

[phirang]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation

BRIC's are buy treasuries from the US... the increase in money supply is sterilized. The shitty BRIC's and GCC will bail out the US economy.

I see it as inflationary, but far from hyper-inflationary... at least at the yields they're getting!

[metalman]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation cancelled. Hyperinflation!

too bad. liked chris. scratching him off my list. getting short.

[phirang]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation cancelled. Hyperinflation!

too bad. liked chris. scratching him off my list. getting short.

Definitely not deflation when China and OPEC are about to refinance the US banks...

[GRG55]

Re: From Chris Martenson: Deflation cancelled. Hyperinflation!

too bad. liked chris. scratching him off my list. getting short.

OK. Martenson had a one-night-stand with deflation and now regrets it. And Mega sez he gives up. Must be pretty close to time when its safe to get back in the water...;)