<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
			<rss version="2.0">
				<channel>
					
								<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:16:57 GMT</lastBuildDate>
							
								<title><![CDATA[EdgyInChina.org]]></title>
							
								<generator><![CDATA[Doteasy Hosted Blogs - Powered By Doteasy.com]]></generator>
							
								<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/]]></link>
							
								<ttl><![CDATA[60]]></ttl>
							
								<description><![CDATA[Edgy's Blog]]></description>
							
								<docs><![CDATA[http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss]]></docs>
							
								<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:16:57 GMT</pubDate>
							
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>In reading the economic news of late, and trying to stay 
up-to-date on the debt talks in Washington via VOA, I am so 
amazed at the lack of institutional knowledge, both in the 
media, and in the responder’s/commentor’s to these news 
stories. Is this just another disconnect, or is it truly a 
lack of education, and understanding of institutional 
knowledge?
<br>
There is so much Republican talk about losing jobs because of 
potential tax increases, yet as an economist, I have never 
seen any empirical data that demonstrates this thesis (high 
taxes means fewer jobs? – show me the hard evidence that 
supports this). Additionally, I am reminded of the higher tax 
rates when Bill Clinton was president, and we only had 2% 
unemployment, and a booming economy that handed GW a $4 
trillion dollar government surplus. 
So is this a disconnect? ? And if it is, why aren’t more 
people seeing it? Is the nation that lacking in education?
<br>
<br>                                     
Here’s the scenario: A story is written by some wannabe 
journalist, quoting some wannabe lawmakers, during this 
current debt debate. Regardless of how ignorant either the 
lawmaker or the journalist is, there is always some 
poster/commentor who states that they are a business owner, 
and taxes have nothing to do with their decision to hire 
people. Which of course is followed by several other 
posters/commentors saying how stupid this person 
must be, and that of course taxes mean a lot to businesses. 
And they expound endlessly about how taxes reduce their 
income, and therefore their ability to hire new workers…. This 
disconnect is so obvious, at least to me as a trained 
economist and accountant, that I laugh at first, only to cry 
later at the bigger problem going on here….
<br>
<br>
In Blog entries before now, I have given what I called 
Economics 101 lessons, and Business 101 lessons. Yet I guess 
it’s time for another.            
Business does not pay taxes. Let’s say this again – BUSINESS 
DOES NOT PAY TAXES…. Want proof? Sure …. Look at any (ANY) 
income statement from ANY company in the US (world maybe). 
What is covered in an Income Statement? It’s a report of 
Income and Expenses, with the result to have NET Income at the 
end…. So, companies make income from sales, subtract expenses 
they have in the operation of their company, and then pay 
taxes on the NET, or the remainder. Which is called income….
But let’s look closely at those expenses…. Yep, there it is. 
Inside these expensed items is one called TAXES, and after 
all, taxes are a cost of doing business, and should be 
expensed.<br>                           
But if they have subtracted the expense of the taxes they have 
paid, then essentially they are in fact, NOT PAYING THEM… They 
are merely collecting them from their customers, and passing 
it along to the government. ANY economist will tell you that 
business is the biggest tax collector for the government, not 
the IRS.
<br>           
Is this such a difficult concept to understand that neither 
lawmakers nor the public understands it? Not for the pols…. 
Many (not all) lawmakers know it, but want to keep the myth 
alive so that they can attack big business on certain issues, 
and look good to the (uneducated and uniformed) public. <br>
<br>
It's one of our nations biggest disconnects, and the 
public buys into it.
<br>
<br>                         
Our nation has become disconnected from the TRUTH.]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Another Disconnect]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=68130&d=07/11/2011&s=Another%20Disconnect]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=68130&d=07/11/2011&s=Another%20Disconnect]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 07:21:42 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>Here's an example of the kind of dichotomy, or 'disconnect' that I see with how the Tea Party is portrayed, and how it acts. First, please read this story:<br />
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/06/us-usa-fed-diamond-idUSTRE75500120110606<br />
<br />
Here is a Nobel Prize winning economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Yet somehow, for some reason, he is not 'good enough' to be on the Federal Reserve's Board of Governor's. Why? Because Republican Senator Richard Shelby, one of the most 'partisan' GOP Senator's in government has blocked his nomination. <br />
Why? Is this a case of Republican score settling as suggested in the article.<br />
&quot;Diamond's nomination fell victim to Republican score settling -- under Democratic control, the Senate in 2008 blocked a nominee of Republican President George W. Bush.&quot; <br />
Or is this perhaps a more sinister problem happening within the US today.<br />
<br />
Here is the disconnect I see (that apparently no one else does), when it comes to the GOP and the Tea Party members. The Tea Party says they want 'less government', but having political sway with how the Fed is run would be 'more government' not less. Additionally, having political sway over Fed policy would be more akin to the way in which the People's Republic of China operates its monetary policy, than the way in which America operates. Yet who screams the loudest when it comes to railing against China's policies than the GOP? Are we to emulate the actions of a 'one-man-rule' system? Is the GOP ultimately saying that they don't want a 'two-party' system? That they want politicians to govern how the US economy will be run?&nbsp; Doesn't anyone else see this as a disconnect? How can this NOT be a disconnect?<br />
I have for many years now, been afraid that the political turn that America has taken in the last 20 years is truly troubling. Our elected leaders no longer want to work for the 'people' but rather for their own perceived advantage. This ultimately leads to a one party system, and to dictatorship. Sooner, rather than later, we will elect a leader who will grab power (perhaps in the name of security and safety) and this grand 230 (plus) year experiment of democratically elected leadership will come to an end.<br />
Which it seems to me is exactly what the Tea Party says they are against. After all, they took their name after those patriots (or terrorists depending upon which side of the fence you were on) who dumped the tea in Boston harbor, and aided in the move towards revolution against one man, or 'one party' rule. Does anyone else see this as a disconnect? How can this NOT be a disconnect?<br />
The Tea Party says they want 'less government', and I believe this to be a laudible goal, and generally a good thing. But it seems to me that inside this Tea Party goal, there is a huge disconnect..... Doesn't anyone else see this as a disconnect? How can this NOT be a disconnect?</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Dangerous Disconnect ?]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=66597&d=06/05/2011&s=Dangerous%20Disconnect%20%3F]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=66597&d=06/05/2011&s=Dangerous%20Disconnect%20%3F]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jun 2011 09:22:36 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p><span class="comment-body"><br />
The announcement yesterday (Thu Sep 9, 2010 7:57pm EDT) of new trade data showed the U.S. trade deficit with China fell almost 1 percent in July. But it was still nearly 18 percent higher for the first seven months of the year, at $145.4 billion, compared to the same period in 2009.<br />
One of my aquaintances wrote me: &quot;Sen. Schumer will go nuts&quot;.<br />
My answer was quite clear to be sure... There are plenty of things to go nuts about, but Sen Schumer, and the other protectionist congressmen are going nuts for the wrong reason. Of course the Chinese have little motive to end their currency manipulation. Its to their advantage.<br />
<u>Think - THINK:</u> How can you demand that someone end a practice that has been (and continues to be) so profitable? One that you encouraged in the first place? Every time some 'other' country makes a run economically, we (<strong>who invented the game</strong>) demand that the rules (<em><strong>that we made</strong></em>) be changed so that only <u><strong>WE</strong></u> can profit... Just as the US has manipulated its currency at the expense of other countries for the past 50-60 years, the Chinese have learned from our play-book, and are now emulating us more than we do..... And we don't like it.<br />
The US can't print more and more money - which has the effect of lowering its value - then cry out that the value of other currencies is too <strong>LOW</strong>... It makes for great sound bites in an America that is frustrated, unemployed and generally lacks self confidence, but its bad politics forcing bad economic decision making.<br />
A 10% gain in the value of the Yuan will not create a single job in the US. NOT ONE. US businesses are sitting on hordes of cash (according to news analysts) why aren't they spending this capital by investing in new plant and equipment or by hiring new employees? And why is it that what little they do spend is not within the USA. Why is that ??????<br />
25-30 years ago, China began its 'opening up'... at that very moment, it effectively doubled the available workforce of the world. DOUBLED... Now its people have tasted the fruits of labor and wages and they want MORE... and they are not afraid to work and to save for their future, and their children's future. When I taught economics here, I used to tell my Chinese students that I felt that they(China) is in about the same position as the US was in the 1920's. Just coming into its own. Now I'm just hoping we can avoid the disasterous decade and a half that followed that...<br />
To better understand why currency revaluations are sticky and tricky, see The Plaza Accord of 1985. A negotiated revaluation of the dollar - and consequently an upward revaluation of the Yen and the Mark, sent Japan into a 20 year cycle of deflation. Is this what Washington really wants for China? It certainly is NOT what the Chinese want for themselves. Can you blame them? Or do you really believe that people from <em>certain countries</em> want to be poor forever???<br />
Also see: The Smoot&ndash;Hawley Tariff or Hawley&ndash;Smoot Tariff (P.L. 71-361, officially named, the Tariff Act of 1930)[1] was signed into law on June 17, 1930, to protect American jobs and farmers from foreign competition. Does anyone remember what that action led to???? While unemployment was bad in 1930 (6.2%), as a direct result of S-H it significantly changed to a whopping 25% by 1932. Is this what Washington really wants for America? <u><em>AGAIN</em></u>?....<br />
The problem in the US is not fiscal or monetary policy per se, although the policy makers for the past 25 years have made serious and significant errors. Its structural. The structural make-up of the US has changed, and we (who don't like change, particularly when its not in our favor) don't like it.</span></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><span class="comment-body">Get schooled. It's educational....<br />
<br />
</span></p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Blame Game Economics]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=53950&d=09/09/2010&s=Blame%20Game%20Economics]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=53950&d=09/09/2010&s=Blame%20Game%20Economics]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:18:58 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>People like Sen. Schumer make it <u><strong>ALL</strong></u> sound so simple. Let the renminbi appreciate and the world's economic problems will be solved, and unemployment in America will fall. Yet, if you would stop and think about it, this is a distinctly implausible claim. The idea that an adjustment in one relative price in the entire global economy will rid the world of imbalances and lead to a new economic nirvana doesn't really make sense. When the Japanese tried to do in the late-1980s exactly what is now being asked of China (shift away from export-led to a domestic demand-led growth) it all ended in tears.<br />
It is wrong to insist that China&rsquo;s global rebalancing imperatives should be addressed by a realignment in a bi-lateral exchange rate with the dollar. What matters most insofar as global imbalances are concerned is China&rsquo;s broad multilateral exchange rate. On that basis, China can hardly be accused of manipulation vis-a-vis the rest of the world. In real terms, the trade-weighted renminbi is up 7.5% over the past six months and fully 20% over the past five years.</p>
<p><br />
<em>Without a fix to America&rsquo;s saving problem (highly unlikely in an era of trillion dollar federal budget deficits) forcing the Chinese to appreciate the RMB versus the dollar, or imposing trade sanctions on them if they don&rsquo;t, is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. It would only shift the Chinese piece of the US trade deficit to someone else &mdash; most likely to a higher cost producer. That would be the functional equivalent of imposing a tax hike on already hard-pressed middle class workers. Washington needs to rethink a flawed strategy of attempting to fix America&rsquo;s multilateral international imbalance through a bi-lateral currency adjustment. It is bad politics driving bad economics</em>....&nbsp; <strong><em>Stephen Roach, Chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia</em></strong></p>
<p><br />
China was cut off from the rest of the world for nearly 500 years. The very day that it began opening up, the world's available workforce was essentially doubled. Let me say that again &quot;The world&rsquo;s available workforce DOUBLED&quot;. It basically flooded the world with workers who are prepared to accept wages a tiny fraction of those being paid in the West. Western powers knew this when they approved China's entry into the WTO.... Big corporations not only knew this, but lobbied heavily for it. Why? Because they were drooling over the possibility of employing these low-cost workers in their factories - which is exactly (<strong>EXACTLY</strong>) what has happened.<br />
All during most of the 20th century, Western workers enjoyed a &quot;monopoly&quot; on access to global capital, rewarding themselves with wages well above the market-clearing price. <br />
That's now beginning to change. Nominal exchange rate adjustment won't prevent Chinese workers from undercutting their Western equivalents. To think otherwise, is unwise....</p>
<p><br />
My advice is to leave China alone. They have navigated high and low seas with admirable dexterity. Instead, all of these pols and their elitist economist's should strain to find ways to redirect the declining fiscal firepower of the west to reactivate domestic credit. Domestic credit is the major channel for ensuring that the necessary fiscal adjustment does not end up in even more tears.</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[US - Bad Politics driving Bad Economics]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=50613&d=06/22/2010&s=US%20%2D%20Bad%20Politics%20driving%20Bad%20Economics]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=50613&d=06/22/2010&s=US%20%2D%20Bad%20Politics%20driving%20Bad%20Economics]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:05:05 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>I can't understand how people can be so ignorant. And I can't understand how people in positions of authority can be so. . .</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Here's an example from todays (4/4/2010) Reuters news:</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Reuters News story: U.S. delays China yuan ruling ahead of Hu visit, by Glenn Somerville (Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Xavier Briand)<br />
<br />
Here are the pieces that I believe are mis-information passing as news...<br />
<br />
<em>The U.S. Business and Industry Council, a trade group, said &quot;for three more months, more American factories will close or cut back production and more of their employees will lose their jobs&quot; because unilateral U.S. tariffs are needed to combat &quot;predatory trade practices.&quot;</em><br />
<br />
Instead, the U.S. Business and Industry Council should have said, &quot;Why did all of those American companies move their factories to China in the first place. Those companies are the ones who caused these problems.... It's called cause and effect people.... <br />
<br />
<em>&quot;If we want the Chinese to take us seriously, we need to be willing to say so in public,&quot; Grassley said in a statement.<br />
Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said Geithner should take a hard look at whether China is a currency manipulator and work with it and other trade partners to address Beijing's currency practices. &quot;For years, Treasury has given China's currency practices a free pass, but it's time to re-evaluate,&quot; Baucus said. &quot;For too long, the United States has pursued diplomacy at the expense of American jobs and exports. Further delay is not the answer.&quot;</em><br />
<br />
I wish Republican Senator Charles Grassley would stop acting like its 1920, and that the US can just send its gunboats into China to solve their problems. If Americans want the Chinese to take them seriously, then they (US) needs to stop acting like the emperor of the world. Stop creating financial meltdowns which ruin the entire world economy, and stop with the idea that they are the only ones with answers to problems.... America is in fact NOT a part of the solution anymore, they are the problem.....<br />
<br />
I just wish more people would think things out to their final conclusion before engaging their mouths...l.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[This BS is getting me down....]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=46897&d=04/03/2010&s=This%20BS%20is%20getting%20me%20down%2E%2E%2E%2E]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=46897&d=04/03/2010&s=This%20BS%20is%20getting%20me%20down%2E%2E%2E%2E]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Sat, 03 Apr 2010 09:10:21 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>I&rsquo;ve been in a real funk lately and unwilling or maybe uninterested in writing. So I&rsquo;m trying to work my way out of it.... The funk, that is....<br />
<br />
Here&rsquo;s an example of what I mean. A recent story on <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1419042320091214?feedType=RSS&amp;feedName=everything&amp;virtualBrandChannel=11563">Reuters.com by Andy Sullivan</a>.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Now, let&rsquo;s be clear. I don&rsquo;t know Andy, or have any particular opinion about him. What I am doing is using his story as an example of what I feel is why many people are so unhappy with the media. Not just with the news itself, but with the way that &lsquo;News&rsquo; is presented these days..... I mean does anybody &lsquo;think&rsquo; any more, or have we become that dumbed down.<br />
<br />
Here&rsquo;s some examples of what I mean - from the article:<br />
&ldquo;The U.S. government must craft a plan next year to get its ballooning debt under control or face possible panic in financial markets, a bipartisan panel of budget experts said in a report on Monday.&rdquo; <br />
Q: What bipartisan panel? consisting of what experts? Experts by whose opinion? <br />
<br />
&ldquo;Without action, investors could lose confidence in the United States, driving down the dollar and forcing up interest rates, said the former lawmakers and budget officials who crafted the report. That could cause a sharp decrease in the country's standard of living.&rdquo;<br />
Q: 'lose confidence in the United States'... These kinds of comments are so fraught with politics and bs that they would be funny in a different context.... Think about it... If people lose confidence in the US, where will they turn to invest their funds???? England, France or Germany, Russia, Japan or China, or some place we've never heard of before..... Where, exactly....????? There isn&rsquo;t any other place.....<br />
<br />
&ldquo;We will be less free if we don't tackle this,&quot; said Jim Nussle, a Republican member of the commission who earlier served as a White House budget director and chairman of the budget committee in the U.S. House of Representatives.<br />
Q: Less Free ? ?&nbsp; Is this the same Jim Nussle who served under GW, who helped pass the Patriot Act... Which nearly negated the entire Constitution of the United States.... Less Free, are you joking ? ? ? How stupid do these pols think we are ? ? WE are already 'less free... the real question should be: What will you do about it ? ? ?<br />
<br />
Then there is my favorite:<br />
&ldquo;The commission did not issue specific prescriptions but said tax increases and spending cuts would probably be needed.<br />
Q: This means that they really had no idea on how to FIX this mess, only that it's a problem..... so my comment is: 'Do Ya Think'..... Any monkey could have done as much as these people did... (NOTE: when you look at news stories, ask yourself this question: Does this news story state a situation or problem and then offer answers or at least a suggestion on how to fix the problem that is being discussed. If not, then don&rsquo;t tell me that the sky is falling, that a commission of experts (experts in whose opinion?) says so, and that they have no answer to the problem.... Just tell me the facts, and let ME (I&rsquo;m an expert) decide what course of action should be taken...<br />
<br />
Otherwise it should be in the Opinion pages... Where everyone with a nose (or opinion) can post whatever they want.....<br />
<br />
Is that too difficult for the media to understand?</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Media Stories - Fact or Opinion.....]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=41536&d=12/16/2009&s=Media%20Stories%20%2D%20Fact%20or%20Opinion%2E%2E%2E%2E%2E]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=41536&d=12/16/2009&s=Media%20Stories%20%2D%20Fact%20or%20Opinion%2E%2E%2E%2E%2E]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:27:45 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>ALL countries manipulate their currency to their perceived advantage. ALL COUNTRIES. End Of Story.....<br />
<br />
Many elitist economists, with far too many initials behind their name, are using the same old, tired excuse that some emerging countries (namely China) are manipulating their currency, and should allow it to &lsquo;float&rsquo; in the open market.</p>
<p><br />
They want China to allow their currency to rise, just as they insisted Japan do under the Plaza Accord in the 1990's. However, Chinese citizens (not just the government) have suffered enough under western mandates, and are tired of &lsquo;kowtowing&rsquo; to western demands.<br />
<br />
Yet the bigger truth is, the US is the one who has always manipulated their currency. It is the US who wrote the book on manipulating currency that everyone on the planet has read and now follows.... When the Fed raises or lowers interest rates, either to control inflation or to encourage more borrowing to stimulate the economy, it is in fact manipulating the currency. (See Economics 101 blog entry). When banks are allowed to create money (see Banking 101 blog entry), they are manipulating the currency.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>See also a great article by Robert McTeer, published in Forbes: http://bx.businessweek.com/manipulation-of-currency/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fc.moreover.com%2Fclick%2Fhere.pl%3Fr2679046982%26f%3D9791 (just copy and paste into your browser).<br />
<br />
In a recent Reuters story Glenn Somerville and Simon Rabinovitch ask:<br />
&ldquo;WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF CHINA LET ITS CURRENCY APPRECIATE?&rdquo;<br />
&ldquo;Theoretically, the cost of Chinese-made products would rise for consumers around the world. If prices rise sufficiently, other countries' goods might be substituted for those China now makes.... If Chinese consumers were empowered with a stronger currency, they might become more aggressive importers, perhaps even swinging China's trade surplus to deficit.&rdquo; (emphasis added)<br />
<br />
These writers, who have probably never been to China, ask &ldquo;What would happen if China let its currency appreciate? I&rsquo;ll tell you.... There would be massive unemployment, that would surpass even the Great Depression. With the US Labor Force, estimated at 153.7 million in 2007, an unemployment rate of 10% equals 15 - 16 million unemployed. A 10% unemployment figure in China equates to nearly 100 million unemployed. Lets all say that number again. 100 MILLION.<br />
<br />
What these writers, and many other so called China experts fail to recognize is that the spending habits of Chinese citizens were formed thousands of years ago, not by the current regime in Beijing. When the ancestors of these authors were guarding against demons by wearing a garlic necklace and still hiding out in caves, Chinese traders were already practicing their economics along the original 'silk road', and these johnny-come-lately Keynesian's (and/or supply-siders also) don't have a clue.... <br />
Additionally, the Chinese are not stupid, and they have witnessed the economic problems that occurred in Japan since BOJ allowed its currency to appreciate, and as mentioned they really aren&rsquo;t interested in reliving these same disastrous problems.<br />
<br />
Everyone wants the Chinese consumer to increase their consumption rate, including the bosses in Beijing, but allowing the RMB to appreciate overnight would cause much more harm than any perceived good that may come in 30 years.<br />
Many people in China want to be more like the west. Many elitist US economists want China to be more like the west.... I ask &ldquo;why?&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp; Is it so that China can experience all the same economic problems that prevail in the west. Which currently include financial meltdowns, high unemployment (which BTW is going to get much, much higher in the US) with the long term potential for growth gloomy at best.<br />
<br />
So who manipulates their currency? Every country.... and frankly, this is one time I am hoping the Chinese do NOT &quot;want to be like Mike&quot;....</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Currency Manipulaton 101]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=39534&d=11/02/2009&s=Currency%20Manipulaton%20101]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=39534&d=11/02/2009&s=Currency%20Manipulaton%20101]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:27:13 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>In October, 1929, the New York Stock Market collapsed, which was then repeated in markets around the world, in what became the foremost financial crisis in history. However, it wasn't until late 1930 or early 1931 when the real damage began to happen. During that year (15 months), governments enacted lots of stupid laws meant to mollify the general population, (which was generally under-educated) with the thinking that by saving a job here at home, saves the country. Which of course it did NOT do. The unemployment numbers began to grow, and grow.....<br />
<br />
People with bad agenda's led the fight for these laws in the 1930's and they are out front again in 2009, with their no-win strategies. Because much worse than the prolonged economic crisis that was fed by these bad policies, is the political upheavel that occurs in unstable regions. So it will be this year and into the next couple of years, as it was in the early 1930's, that bad politicians everywhere will try to protect their hides and mollify their scared and ignorant constituencies. The unemployment numbers continued to grow, and grow....<br />
<br />
In times of fear and uncertainty, men (and women), do terrible things to each other, and unfortunately we are now in possession of this double edged sword that has NO good side. If politicians don't 'play' to these uneducated masses, then those masses rise up and throw off these very pols and install a fanatic dictator who promises to save the jobs at home, and purge those who caused their problems (See history of Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust 1932-1945, and history of rise of Japanese Militarists and conquest of China and the Pacific Rim 1930-1945).<br />
If the pols do pass laws to protect workers and groups in their own areas, they not only give a greater purpose to the dictators mentioned above, but also suppress their own work force for longer periods by keeping prices artifically high and wages artifically low (see US history of the Great Depression, and the rise of labor unions 1930-1950). In 1937 the unemployment figure reached 25% of the workforce......<br />
<br />
So here we are again, left with the damage to be repaired, and the confidence and jobs to be regained. The last time, it took a decade of being poor and a world war to pull the US out of a depression, and a horn-locking cold-war of nearly three decades before world trade truly started to flow again. Is this the near term future you want for your family ? Yet unemployment is growing to near 10%....<br />
<br />
I don't pretend to have the answers, but I'm confident that in today's world, a replay will prove neither 'instant' nor necessarily provide us with the same winner. In the words of Edward R. Morrow: &quot;Good Night, and Good Luck.&quot;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Next up: Who is really manipulating their currency ? ?</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Financial Meltdowns don't end overnight.....]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=38988&d=10/21/2009&s=Financial%20Meltdowns%20don%27t%20end%20overnight%2E%2E%2E%2E%2E]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=38988&d=10/21/2009&s=Financial%20Meltdowns%20don%27t%20end%20overnight%2E%2E%2E%2E%2E]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:21:58 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>'What!' said the master at length, in a faint voice.<br />
<br />
'Please, sir,' replied Oliver, 'I want some more.' <br />
<br />
Over simplification? ? ? Perhaps, but I believe it&rsquo;s really just that simple.... Whether your name is Oliver Twist, or Oliver Barrett III (the rich son in the movie &lsquo;Love Story&rsquo;), <strong>you want more</strong>. This is true if you live in the London&rsquo;s Brixton ghetto, the Barrio in New York or East LA, or along the railroad tracks leading into Mumbai or some not-so-nice neighborhoods in Chongqing, or Shanghai. This is also true if you live on Park Avenue in New York, or Hillsborough Hills, California, or the French Concession area of Shanghai.<br />
<br />
How many ways do I have to say it ? We ALL want more... It&rsquo;s in our DNA.<br />
<br />
Also, don&rsquo;t confuse &lsquo;more&rsquo; with always meaning &lsquo;money&rsquo;..... While money is certainly a big part of the equation, sometimes prestige, influence, and/or power (things that money &lsquo;can&rsquo; buy) are bigger factors. Sometimes we seek respect - it&rsquo;s certainly arguable if money can actually buy this or not.... Yet, no matter what language, or how it&rsquo;s translated, we all want to get &lsquo;ahead&rsquo;.... We all have &lsquo;greed&rsquo; within us.<br />
<br />
If we didn&rsquo;t want to get ahead, there would be no gambling - farewell Las Vegas. No stock markets - do I really expect or care if company X is going to sell more widgets in the future? I wouldn&rsquo;t be looking for a better job - along with about 6.5 billion other people, and I certainly wouldn&rsquo;t need a bank to keep my money safe. In short, if we didn&rsquo;t want to &lsquo;get ahead&rsquo;, we would all still be living in caves, cowering from our predators and wondering about the movement of the sun, moon and the stars in the night sky.<br />
Sometimes getting ahead just means getting a minimum wage job. Sometimes it means getting a million dollar bonus, and sometimes it means pooling the resources of an entire village to send one of their smartest youngsters to medical school, so that they will return home and provide much needed medical care for those villagers. So let us not forget that there are certainly differing degrees of greed. Yet again, we all have some form of greed within us.<br />
<br />
At no time in this dissertation have I said that greed was &lsquo;bad&rsquo;.... Au Contraire, mon ami. <br />
Greed is in fact a major driver of social advancement, and has greatly contributed to the advancement of mankind as a whole. But my father used to say that extremism in anything is bad, and that moderation in nearly everything was acceptable.<br />
So while I admit to being somewhat &lsquo;greedy,&rsquo; I also work hard to limit my greed to acceptable norms. I don&rsquo;t have to have more money than Bill Gates, or Warren Buffett, nor do I want the power of a Barrack Obama or Hu Jingtao. Some clean air to breathe and clean water to drink would be nice though.....<br />
<br />
<br />
Next up, lets go back and add a few more Economics 101 items.<br />
&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Greed 101]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=38127&d=10/05/2009&s=Greed%20101]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=38127&d=10/05/2009&s=Greed%20101]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:02:16 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
						<item>
							
											<description><![CDATA[<p>What is the reason and purpose of banks? It&rsquo;s an easy question really....<br />
<br />
Banks have several reasons to exist, and they all have to do with the government wherein the bank resides. Banks fill a vital economic role, which explains why they are either government regulated or government owned in every country. In every country on this planet there is one immutable fact: banks exist at the pleasure of the government. While some countries regulate banks more heavily than others, NONE (I repeat, NONE) allow their banks to be &lsquo;un-regulated&rsquo;. . . End of story.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
OK - so banks are regulated by their governments.... So what is the purpose of these regulations? Chiefly they fall into three categories. One, they allow the government to control the supply of money in the economy - by creating money and keeping it safe (notice I said &lsquo;create money&rsquo; - I didn&rsquo;t say &lsquo;print money&rsquo;). Two, they control the &lsquo;source&rsquo; of their citizens money by acting as &lsquo;clearing-house&rsquo; for financial transactions between parties. And finally three, they control the flow of the respective currency in and out of the country. I&rsquo;ll expand on all of these categories later, but our object for now is to keep it simple. <br />
Now if you &lsquo;google&rsquo; banks, you&rsquo;ll find a whole lot of propaganda about an array of &lsquo;services&rsquo; that banks provide. But you shouldn&rsquo;t confuse &lsquo;services&rsquo; with &lsquo;purpose&rsquo; or &lsquo;function&rsquo;. So if you boil all the noise away, you&rsquo;ll find that their basic &lsquo;function&rsquo; is to fulfill these roles in any country&rsquo;s economy.<br />
<br />
Looking at Wikipedia, it says that a main function of banks is to loan and borrow money. Well this leads us into my first category. What happens when a bank &lsquo;loans&rsquo; money to someone (business or people). The bank doesn&rsquo;t give you the currency (cash) when they loan money. They create an account (at their bank obviously) that makes some money available for you to buy something - the purpose of the loan. Even when you complete your purchase, that currency may not even leave the bank. An amount of money is transferred into the account of the entity from which you purchased the item - allowing them to pay their bills, etc., etc...<br />
<br />
The result is that the economy has grown (by the amount of the transaction) and the supply of money in the country has increased. That bank just &lsquo;created&rsquo; money..... Now this is normal operations and not something illegal or unethical. It&rsquo;s all apart of Economics 101.<br />
In this example, if the amount is to be paid to someone who has an account in a different bank, the two banks get together and clear this transaction between themselves. As I indicated in category 2, banks &lsquo;clear&rsquo; transactions between themselves on a daily basis, and this is also nothing new or extraordinary. However, take some &lsquo;cash&rsquo; into a bank and try to open a new account. If the amount is over $1000 or so, you&rsquo;ll be required to prove where it came from, and if any further deposits are to be made, where they come from as well....<br />
In category 3, where do you go when you are about to travel overseas? You go to the bank to get your money exchanged..... The alternative is illegal and I don&rsquo;t encourage you to participate in anything like that..... Yet, the &lsquo;rate&rsquo; at which your money is exchanged into the foreign currency, is &lsquo;set&rsquo; by your bank. Plus any amount you &lsquo;exchange&rsquo; is reported to the government, and you are only allowed to &lsquo;exchange&rsquo; so much. So much for &lsquo;free trade&rsquo; huh....<br />
<br />
Next up... Let&rsquo;s add a pinch of human nature to this soup.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
										
											<title><![CDATA[Banking 101 . . . The "reason' for banks]]></title>
										
											<link><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=36732&d=09/10/2009&s=Banking%20101%20%2E%20%2E%20%2E%20The%20%22reason%27%20for%20banks]]></link>
										
											<guid><![CDATA[http://apps.edgyinchina.org/Blog/?e=36732&d=09/10/2009&s=Banking%20101%20%2E%20%2E%20%2E%20The%20%22reason%27%20for%20banks]]></guid>
										
											<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:15:53 GMT</pubDate>
										
						</item>
					
				</channel>
			</rss>
		
