"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"
I was exceedingly disappointed when I discovered this was likely the case. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 6:51 PM, frantheman <[email protected]> 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. > -- --- 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.
