 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
sustaining a growth rate of 8 to 9 percent
I have to confess to having confused terms in my last reply. When the term "undervalued" is used, as in "And from the US point of view, China has been undervaluing its currency", it seems, the meaning is such that the paper is worth less than it would be worth if the people who can undervalue it don't undervalue it.
That is even more of a side track issue than the drug dealer turf battle analogy intended to address. Why would anyone want to go down that rabbit hole?
Why speak in terms that cause more confusion, instead of speaking in terms that report common sense?
A. China supposedly wants to keep wages low and depend upon exporting wealth from China to America to keep their own economy growing at 8 to 9 percent.
B. China supposedly wants to do the opposite and invest in increased worker wages, to create consumption demand at home, and stop depending on exports to America.
What words were used in the report when the concept of increasing worker wages was reported? This is important. I will find those words and quote those words:
but they don't want to do the massive income redistribution required for that
I'm calling for a reality check.
My way of checking on that reality is to resubmit an easy method by which wealth is redistributed, it is not massive, it is common sense, it is easy, and it can be done very soon, without anyone being injured with only one exception whereby the people who earn their living through lawful fraud, or lawful violence, will no longer be able to earn their living through lawful fraud, or lawful violence, since the demand for such a thing will decrease.
A. Fix the problem (Reality Check) without harming anyone.
B. Exception to the "without harming anyone" is such that people who harm other people will feel injured when they can't harm other people, earning their living, with that method.
Reality Check:
Chinese government or U.S.A. Inc. LLC, or both, produce 2 new financial instruments and offer these instruments to any buyer, any consumer, any living, breathing, person on the planet Earth.
Product 1:
No interest home loan and/or a no interest business property loan, denominated in a new unit of legal currency, designed for these specific purchases, and the value of the currency is valuable as a means by which the holder of the currency after the sale of the home, or after the sale of the old mortgage, can pay tax debt once the receiver of the currency, in exchange for the home, or in exchange for the mortgage, has the currency to pay tax debt.
You, the reader, can't do two things at this point without lying to yourself. You can't believe that you have understood the report by REAL NEWS on China, and at the same time, you can't say that you don't understand the above offering as a reality check on that REAL NEWS report on China.
I'm offering a simple solution to the problems reported in that REAL NEWS report.
What could any reader possibly find at fault with Product number 1?
Product number 1 provides half of a reality check on the REAL NEWS report, for one thing.
The other half of the reality check is product number 2.
Product number 2, like product number 1, is a loan, this loan, however, earns the producer and seller of product number 1 and 2 (the bank), a means by which the cost of producing the product is recovered, and that means is an additional charge to the borrower of a 1% interest rate payment added to the loan; where the consumer of the loan has to pay back the whole amount borrowed, plus 1% simple annual interest. Product 2 is only offered for purchases of products that are proven to increase surplus wealth, more power, such as Solar Panels, Electric Cars, Home Vertical Farming Modular Units for inexpensive high quality food production or CO2 eating algae fuel production, and other proven economic wealth producing or wealth savings products.
This reality check cuts to the heart of the problem that the report by REAL NEWS reports; whereby one producer of legal financial instruments, a bank, in the U.S.A, and another producer of legal financial instruments, in China, are supposedly making deals as they meet and discuss current events.
Product 1 and product 2 above will fix all the supposed problems that are supposedly "on the table". The reality check is such that the supposed problems, such as climate control, national security, wages, economy, and whatever, are smoke and mirrors for the real power struggle. They are going to discuss who gets what, and how they can remain in control of their subjects, their real interests.
A. People in America (tax payers) the real interests
B. Controllers of the surplus wealth created by Americans (they have a real interest in maintaining control over the flow of excess wealth from A to B)
C. People in China (workers who create wealth)
D. Controllers of the surplus wealth created in China
B and D are meeting, and discussing, and planning on, and then are going to execute those plans, on what to do with A and C.
The interests of B and D are "on the table" and those interests are A and C.
A and C are on the table.
People in America and people in China are the interests of the people having the power over both the U.S. and the Chinese government.
The interests of the people in America and China would best be served, if that was the interest to be served, by creating more surplus wealth, and creating so much surplus wealth that everyone, everywhere, had more than enough, plenty, and even more than plenty, so much surplus wealth that very few people left on the planet had any interest at all in giving permission to anyone, ever, to conduct another aggressive war for profit, of any size whatsoever. Such things would actually be against the law if the real interests of the people who create wealth were served and the people who create wealth were allowed to produce abundant surplus wealth.
Product 1 and 2 offer that reality check on that supposed meeting between the supposed leader "of the free world" and the supposed communist leader of China - what a joke.
I think, and I may be wrong, that Paul Jay knows it is joke, and that his hands are tied. He has to report news in the fashionable language of our times - double speak.
I'll view the rest of the report.
Readers, if such a thing exists, can do so too, while they read my comments, and don't forget, discussion is against the law, so you can read, but you can't discuss the topic.
You can only read, pay taxes, and shut up.
government stimulus money
Reality check:
If a person borrows money and pays back all the money borrowed then a person borrows from himself and pays himself back, end of story.
The false story is:
government stimulus money
Where does "government" get money?
You are not supposed to know any of this stuff. You are supposed to listen to such things as "government stimulus money" and go along with the fraud - perpetuate victimization.
I thought Paul Jay knew better. It might be just me. I may be all confused. Paul Jay may have the answers, not me.
Seriously:
If you have earned a good credit rating, you have worked and produced wealth, you borrow money, you pay back every cent, then, truly, do you earn the power to purchase on your own good faith and credit?
Why would you ever assume to be required to pay someone else twice the value of your home for the privileged of borrowing money from bank A or bank B?
Where do you think bank A or bank B earns its power to offer good faith and credit?
When did the cart begin pulling the horse? You must read to find the truth, the answer has long past, ages ago, when the cart began pulling the horse.
Product 1, as I tried to convey to any reader, not just in this work, illuminates the falsehoods by way of offering a very easy to understand, simple, solution to the supposed problems that are supposedly "on the table" here in this report.
Product 2 suffices to finance any bank having a license to offer products 1 and 2.
No monopoly bank will offer such a deal, because they don't have to offer such a deal, because the definition of a monopoly bank is a bank that isn't forced by competition to increase quality and lower cost.
Quality of money is measurable as the power to purchase.
Cost of money is measurable as the price charged to the consumer - interest rate.
The controllers of surplus wealth collected from the people who create it in America have a monopoly bank.
The controllers of the wealth collected from the people in China have a competitive monopoly bank.
When the controllers of America meet the controllers of China the business they have involves their ability to compete as controllers of the wealth collected from their subjects or victims.
What would happen if only China or only America offered anyone on the planet the two products I explained above?
If China offered the product, then the U.S.A dollar would soon be worthless.
Suppose you, in America, could purchase product 1 and product 2 from a producer of that product in China, because you have earned your own good faith and credit?
Suppose that you are now upside down in your current house, your loan amount is twice what the sale price of an identical house next door is, you are still paying every payment on your upside down loan, your credit rating is good, you earn yourself to be a customer to purchase product 1 and product 2.
You submit all your information on-line. A check arrives from China. You know that you have to pay back every dime you borrow from the Chinese bank offering product 1 to you. You go to your bank, with your check, with the new money, the entire amount of the loan, and your bank says "no way Jose'" we are an America bank, we don't take that new Chinese money.
Now you have found out how stupid I am, and how stupid product 1 and 2 is - in reality?
The Chinese producer of product 1 stipulates the following:
If your current mortgage holder does not honor the new Chinese money, on face value, you are not charged with a lower credit rating for walking away from that house and that mortgage and using the new Chinese money to buy another house, the identical one next door for example, or build another house, and, furthermore, you can use product 2 to begin a home construction business that accepts new Chinese money.
they're pegging to the US dollar now
The reverse is true.
Suppose America produces this new money instead of China, and Chinese people begin signing up for, and receiving new American money, to build new Chinese homes, or pay off old Chinese mortgages, or buy existing Chinese homes that are up for sale?
1.
Paying no interest on the home mortgage; because the borrower, in effect, borrows from him or her self, based upon his, or her, earned credit, good faith, and good credit.
2.
Established business as usual.
Each person buying the new product 1 loan cuts their monthly mortgage payment roughly in half, thereby increasing their effective income by that exact amount.
Where does someone go to turn in their dollars earned at work for new, better, higher quality, and lower cost money, so as to pay off their new half price, no interest, mortgage loan?
Note:
but they don't want to do the massive income redistribution required for that
And note:
government stimulus money
Who is fooling who?
I'm going to view the rest of the REAL News report.
it will increase imports of raw materials, energy, from Latin America, from Middle East.
and
So that may contribute to a relatively rapid growth in the global economy for some years.
Power products, oil for example, flowing into China, booming it, 8 to 9% sustained growth, because power flows into China, like blood flowing into an anemic body, rather than having, for a prescribed treatment: blood letting, leaching, draining, eviscerating.
What do the "investments" purchase - exactly?
That is the key. They talk about "government stimulus" as if it is either turned on or off the entire body.
A. Stimulate China
B. Do not Stimulate China
Example:
and that, however, could lead to excess capacity in a few years.
Turn China on, add government stimulus, what happens?
"Excess capacity"
Turn China off.
Who is fooling who?
In reality there are specific people who get the money, and then specific people consume the money by some means, something does happen, something occurs in each case, where each person spends the money, or invests the money.
Look back at product 1 and 2 please.
In every single case where the mortgage is cut down from whatever it was to a no interest loan, each and every case, there will be the reverse of "excess capacity". When will all the people who prove that they can pay back every cent borrowed ever reach "excess capacity"?
Each case is a case of more power in the hands of a potential consumer to consume more, or save more, or invest more, or even loan more if the mortgage owner of product 1 wants to loan the savings earned by cutting the mortgage rate down, loan that extra cash instead of save it, even loan that extra money each month instead of spending it, loan it to a deadbeat relative, and hoping beyond hope that the deadbeat relative will use the money to pull himself out of trouble and into honest productive society.
More from the REAL NEWS:
So there are people who concerned about possible asset bubble in the real estate sector
If loans are pushed by people onto people, such as things known in America as Liar Loans, then people who can't pay back loans, their history proves that they can't pay back loans, will get loans, and then they will fail to pay them back, on schedule.
Who is worried about such a thing as that happening?
That would not happen in a case where the product for sale was a no interest mortgage loan offered to people with good credit ratings.
Another product could be a product offered to people who don't have good credit and the risk involved in such a deal is charged to that specific consumer as an interest rate charge calculated higher for one higher risk consumer, due to low credit rating, and a lower interest calculation is based on a history of less bad credit worthiness. No interest to those who earn no interest.
Confusion is caused by some people, complication is caused by other people. Who pays for having added confusion or complication?
The point here is to point out how the report fails to accurately identify the cause of the Real Estate Bubble, which was intentional, and facilitated by actual people actually producing and selling Liar Loans; whereby loan officers were actually threatened with job termination for failing to sell loans to people who prove that they cannot pay back the loan.
That type of behavior can only occur when banking monopolies exist; where competition is against the law, and where quality is not forced higher, and where price is not forced lower, by the force of competition.
The proof of the fact that a banking monopoly exists is easy to document, on the paper trail, because an actual competitive market would have forced the producers of Liar Loans out of business, rather than reward them, with more credit, for having planned and then executed those frauds known as Liar Loans, and other frauds.
In a monopoly the production of lower quality stuff at higher prices are rewarded. Low quality is rewarded. High prices are rewarded. Law rewards them. They own the law. The market is fixed.
In competition the producers of lower quality at higher prices lose market share while the producers of higher quality at lower prices gain market share. If true competition existed in the U.S.A banking business the producers of very low quality (Liar Loans) at any price (interest rate) would have gone out of business or would have gone into the Real Estate business once they had to sell all those homes defaulted by all those people who proved that they couldn't pay the mortgage payments even before they received their money based upon their proven lack of good credit (faith be damned).
In a monopoly banking system (The Federal Reserve "system" extortion racket) enormous rewards are stolen from the public accumulation of surplus wealth and transferred to the accounts of the planners and executioners of such things as Lair Loans and the sale of bundles of such mortgages by fraud to unsuspecting victims.
That case is closed in all but an actual legal court. The actual legal court actually enforces the existence and perpetuation of the banking monopoly - in fact.
And so if this fixed investment cannot be sustained, there will be real trouble.
What is fixed investment?
Product 2, in the hypothetical reality check, that would work, if the idea is to actually sustain the creation of greater and greater, supplies of surplus wealth would be Solar Panels fixed onto houses, Electric Cars, producers of Electric Cars as a result of the demand for them, Home Modular Green House Vertical Farming Units fixed to each home that wants to reduce their own cost of food and increase their own quality of food, etc.
What trouble?
When the investment, the government stimulus, is spent on an aggressive war for profit, what is the fixed investment in that case? A flow of oil from Iraq, or is it to fix the price of oil by cutting off that flow of oil from Iraq?
I see a real need to cut this effort off soon.
and also if China's rapid growth of energy demand cannot be met by the constrained world energy supply (especially there's a concern about the world oil production may have peaked), and then that may lead to the next crisis.
Product 2.
Anyone with good credit can purchase a 1% interest loan, simple annual interest, and buy only things proven to produce more wealth, more power, such as a Solar Panel, and such as an electric car.
As oil prices go up, a person with an electric car saves even more that 80%. Currently an electric car costs 2 cents per mile. An oil powered car costs about 10 cents per mile.
A person with a Solar Panel Power House makes his own motor fuel at home, saving even more, about 10% compared to current electric prices.
So what happens if electric prices and gasoline prices go up - crisis? Why?
Bad investments, failure to know things worth knowing, what?
What about things such as a Modular Vertical Farming Units that produces food or fuel? Fuel made from Algae, where the production of Algae consumes CO2. A bubble of power producers fixed to many homes across the land, more and more and more as that potential growth bubbles into a power producing bubble is one that won't burst. How could it burst? Energy is too abundant, prices are too low?
That is a potential exponential growth rate, comparable in total output to a much larger scale government or private or private/government or subsidized by government private business venture whereby a large scale algae fuel production farm is produced by such an investment of surplus wealth collected into one fund for such an investment. How much will someone charge everyone for that power per watt, like Hover Dam?
Is that fixed, or ignored?