Last time I had a killer headache and went to a conference I met my 
husband, so Cheers! Neil. And thanks for the link. Would very much like to 
see practical application come out of a moral-spiritual view. Freedom cost 
a buck two eighty (Team America) I hear, the price of policing.

On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 10:59:18 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote:
>
> Low LOL Moll - some of the modules at this conference in Manchester over 
> the next few days at least show some of us are taking a moral-spiritual 
> view on economics.  I've had to  pull out from some workshop involvement 
> because this flu is making my head pound.
>
> http://boombustboombust.com/programme/
>
> On the Chinese aspect we should be concerned that their central bank PBoC 
> is probably more corrupt than the FED and their system and shadow system 
> are full of bad loans, Ponzi properties, rehypothicated (ie stolen) 
> collateral and money-laundering.  On gold, we should remember the last big 
> gold standard was British and based on wars we fought in South Africa after 
> the big gold finds near Witwatersrand.  Everyone party to it cheated, not 
> least the BoE.
>
> Various attitudes in economic determinism make me sick to the boots, from 
> Marx on 'niggers and slavery'  (he thought the US was the 'great white 
> hope') to people who mouth "austerity" when it kills other people and makes 
> even Greek kids go hungry.  These are spiritual, human rights issues and 
> the kind of things I'd like Gabby turning her critical eye to.  I think 
> this is what Allan's sig line is about too.  And before dismissing American 
> power from any politically correct high ground, we also need to think 
> through how to cope without it as part of a positive Plan B.  Guns to 
> plough shares ain't it when Genghis is forming a plan and economics, bent 
> as it is, has been part of the West staying ahead.  The fascist right have 
> long known this and that various academics doing neo-classical economics 
> and monetarism are flunkies .Sooner or later you have to 'police' freedom.
>
>
> , March 30, 2015 at 2:02:24 AM UTC+1, Molly wrote:
>>
>> Oh I thought that's what the Clinton's were doing (cough, cough, gaag)
>> COn 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.

Reply via email to