Oh I thought that's what the Clinton's were doing (cough, cough, gaag) On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 8:54:47 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote: > > 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.
