Actually we might do an analysis of what the Lord has provided and put some 
faith into nurturing and distributing it.

On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 12:44:59 AM UTC+1, Molly wrote:
>
> Thanks, Francis. We have been watching with anticipation of positive 
> change, although not counting on it. I know not to believe the talking 
> heads, but was interested to see them even acknowledging the occurrence. 
> Not sure I trust the Zero Hedge or mainstream media perspectives either. 
> Always wondering what is really occurring. Neil is right in that in the 
> end, as implausible as it sounds, "the Lord provides" may be the most 
> reasonable perspective, since the rest is dog eat dog lunacy.
>
> On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 6:51:49 PM UTC-4, frantheman wrote:
>>
>> For years I have regarded that strange subject called "economics" as 
>> being somewhere on a par with that other strange subject known as 
>> "theology," and tend to see economists as belonging to the same general 
>> group as bishops, witch-doctors, mullahs and snake-oil salesmen. In their 
>> areas of so-called expertise, they regularly get things wrong - and then go 
>> on to earn vast amounts as talking heads, retrospectively explaining what 
>> they failed to see coming. Carnival fortune-tellers probably have a better 
>> record of accuracy.
>>
>> The ghastly thing is that these high priests of mumbo-jumbo have such 
>> power and influence.
>>
>> I have some (a very small amount) of sympathy for the Chinese leadership 
>> elite - they're riding a very powerful, unpredictable, and very dangerous 
>> tiger; trying to modernise and stabilize a population four times the size 
>> of the USA, most of whom are still leading a pre-modern peasant existence, 
>> the rest of whom are trying to gallop into a materialistic hyper-capitalism 
>> as fast as they can. The whole country seems to be living in a state of 
>> perpetual high tension. Whether they will succeed without the whole thing 
>> exploding around their ears remains an open question. Let's hope they do, 
>> for the alternative - China unravelling - would lead to the kind of 
>> geo-political instability which would make the Middle East look like a 
>> kindergarten squabble.
>>
>> I see the latest moves as part of a long, ongoing process leading to full 
>> convertability of the yuan/renminbi. Within the current (lunatic) models 
>> which economists and economic commentators use, this can only be seen 
>> globally as something positive. While it may have been very convenient for 
>> the US to have the dollar as *the *global reserve currency, this has not 
>> necessarily been good for the rest of the world. China owns a massive 
>> amount of US debt (owing the the trade imbalance between both countries) 
>> and are thus terribly vulnerable to changes in US fiscal policy. For the 
>> world generally, a basket of around half a dozen reserve currencies 
>> (dollar, euro, yuan, Swiss franc, pound sterling, yen) is a much more 
>> stable proposition. It would force the major powers to cooperate at a 
>> deeper level than they currently do. It would also reduce US hegemony 
>> globally, which might just help provide a reality check for the US 
>> political elites (particularly those on the right) - though I'm not holding 
>> my breath about that.
>>
>> Am Sonntag, 29. März 2015 15:28:24 UTC+2 schrieb Molly:
>>>
>>> The new Chinese bank established with a gold standard is gaining 
>>> momentum on the international stage. How will this effect the world 
>>> economy? These quotes from Bloomberg:
>>>
>>> *China’s clout has been expanding for decades, as its rapid growth 
>>> allowed it to snap up a rising share of the world’s resources, its exports 
>>> penetrated global markets, and its bulging financial assets gave it power 
>>> to make big individual loans and purchases. Now, the creation of 
>>> international lending institutions is leveraging that economic influence 
>>> closer to the political and diplomatic arenas, as U.S. allies defy America 
>>> to back China’s initiative.*
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> *“This is the beginning of a bigger role for China in global affairs,” 
>>> said Jim O’Neill, U.K.-based former chief economist at Goldman Sachs Group 
>>> Inc., who coined the term BRICs in 2001 to highlight the rising economic 
>>> power of Brazil, Russia, India and China…*
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> *Chinese President Xi Jinping’s vision of achieving the same great-power 
>>> status enjoyed by the U.S. received a major boost this month when the U.K., 
>>> Germany, France and Italy signed on to the Asian Infrastructure Investment 
>>> Bank. The AIIB will have authorized capital of $100 billion and starting 
>>> funds of about $50 billion.*
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> *Canada is considering joining, which would leave the U.S. and Japan as 
>>> the only Group of Seven holdouts as they question the institution’s 
>>> governance and environmental standards.*
>>>
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> *China, flush with the world’s biggest foreign-exchange reserves and 
>>> anxious to convert them into “soft power”, is building an alternative 
>>> architecture. It has proposed not just the AIIB, but a New Development Bank 
>>> with its “BRICS” partners—Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa—and a Silk 
>>> Road development fund to boost “connectivity” with its Central Asian 
>>> neighbours…*
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to