Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (62621)	4/9/2010 6:16:22 AM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218197

TJ, that article you cited about supposed "currency controls" was over-hyped and misleading, as was your comment about the gate being installed. The gate already exists, and USA is just tightening up the financial reporting. The 30% withholding only applies in limited circumstances like moving money to a bank that doesn't report the transaction to the USA. There's nothing to stop US citizens from moving money around, unless they're involved in illegal activities they want to hide. BTW, I keep looking for those USA "food riots" predicted by Gerald Celente in the piece you cited earlier. Does this count? ;) Jamie Oliver and other celebrity chefs lead a 'Food Revolution' Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver is using fresh fruit and vegetables to try to win the hearts, or at least the fatty arteries, of a West Virginia city. The show "Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution" appears on Friday nights on ABC. seattletimes.nwsource.com

To: TobagoJack who wrote (62621)	4/9/2010 3:34:59 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 218197

Hello TJ are you "loading the truck"? Message 26450108

To: TobagoJack who wrote (62621)	4/9/2010 5:21:26 PM
From: carranza2	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218197

With a hat tip to Jesse, please take a look at this: bis.org Click at right of header for the pdf version of the entire document, read, get headache, then start thinking about what these stellar BIS economists mean by "non-linear effects." It sends shivers down me spine, mate. "Thus, in the absence of fiscal tightening, monetary policy may ultimately become impotent to control inflation, regardless of the fighting credentials of the central bank.23" The bottom line: "Our examination of the future of public debt leads us to several important conclusions. First, fiscal problems confronting industrial economies are bigger than suggested by official debt figures that show the implications of the financial crisis and recession for fiscal balances. As frightening as it is to consider public debt increasing to more than 100% of GDP, an even greater danger arises from a rapidly ageing population. The related unfunded liabilities are large and growing, and should be a central part of today’s long-term fiscal planning. It is essential that governments not be lulled into complacency by the ease with which they have financed their deficits thus far. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, the path of future output is likely to be permanently below where we thought it would be just several years ago. As a result, government revenues will be lower and expenditures higher, making consolidation even more difficult. But, unless action is taken to place fiscal policy on a sustainable footing, these costs could easily rise sharply and suddenly. Second, large public debts have significant financial and real consequences. The recent sharp rise in risk premia on long-term bonds issued by several industrial countries suggests that markets no longer consider sovereign debt low-risk. The limited evidence we have suggests default risk premia move up with debt levels and down with the revenue share of GDP as well as the availability of private saving. Countries with a relatively weak fiscal system and a high degree of dependence on foreign investors to finance their deficits generally face larger spreads on their debts. This market differentiation is a positive feature of the financial system, but it could force governments with weak fiscal systems to return to fiscal rectitude sooner than they might like or hope. Third, we note the risk that persistently high levels of public debt will drive down capital accumulation, productivity growth and long-term potential growth. Although we do not provide direct evidence of this, a recent study suggests that there may be non-linear effects of public debt on growth, with adverse output effects tending to rise as the debt/GDP ratio approaches the 100% limit (Reinhart and Rogoff (2009b)). 16 Finally, looming long-term fiscal imbalances pose significant risk to the prospects for future monetary stability. We describe two channels through which unstable debt dynamics could lead to higher inflation: direct debt monetisation, and the temptation to reduce the real value of government debt through higher inflation. Given the current institutional setting of monetary policy, both risks are clearly limited, at least for now. How to tackle these fiscal dangers without seriously jeopardising the incipient recovery is the key challenge facing policymakers today. Although we do not offer advice on how to go about this, we believe that any fiscal consolidation plan should include credible measures to reduce future unfunded liabilities. Announcements of changes in these programmes would allow authorities to wait until the recovery from the crisis is assured before reducing discretionary spending and improving the short-term fiscal position. An important aspect of measures to tackle future liabilities is that any potential adverse impact on today’s saving behaviour be minimised. From this point of view, a decision to raise the retirement age appears a better measure than a future cut in benefits or an increase in taxes. Indeed, it may even lead to an increase in consumption (see eg Barrell et al (2009) for an analysis applied to the United Kingdom)." 17