The value of money has dropped by two thirds in 30 years

[Brian d marge]

heh... PTO does not mean please turn off.

I shall get my shitteth together and fashion something simple for ye.

thanks

I couldnt reorganise it so I gave up , then lost the original bit of paper

Stephen

[mashman]

The theory behind austerity is wrong?... that'll not sit well with right whinge ideology. Ironically it makes them redundant.

[blue rider]

The shrill one,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/op...=tw-share&_r=0

So we are indeed creating a permanent class of jobless Americans.

And let’s be clear: this is a policy decision. The main reason our economic recovery has been so weak is that, spooked by fear-mongering over debt, we’ve been doing exactly what basic macroeconomics says you shouldn’t do — cutting government spending in the face of a depressed economy.

It’s hard to overstate how self-destructive this policy is. Indeed, the shadow of long-term unemployment means that austerity policies are counterproductive even in purely fiscal terms. Workers, after all, are taxpayers too; if our debt obsession exiles millions of Americans from productive employment, it will cut into future revenues and raise future deficits.

[mashman]

The shrill one,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/op...=tw-share&_r=0

Nah mate... they're just a bunch of lazy fucks, that researcher that sent out CV's is full of shit and skewed his figures to get the results he wanted, just like Reinhart and Rogoff.

Fackin banch o useless mankeys, the fackin lot of 'em.

[Brian d marge]

Reinhart and Rogoff.

.

nah they just missed the last few lines of the spreadsheet then tried to justify it ,,,,

Stephen

[Winston001]

The shrill one,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/op...=tw-share&_r=0

Paul Krugman has a Nobel Prize in economics so whether I like it or not, I take notice of what he says.

[oneofsix]

Paul Krugman has a Nobel Prize in economics so whether I like it or not, I take notice of what he says.

Does that mean anything? They used to but the ground has shifted slightly and now their choices seem more populist, like Obama getting the peace prize because he talked a good talk but hadn't done anything at that stage. I could imagine them choosing an economics winner because they put forward a theory they liked rather than it necessarily having any proven merit. Yeah, take note of what he says, just don't swallow it hook, line and sinker.

[Brian d marge]

Nashes game theory won a nobel prize , but was proved to flawed when tested at RIM ?

one wonders if it had anything top do with him hearing voice and being a cnt

not that anything is based on game theory !

stephen

[blue rider]

Paul Krugman has a Nobel Prize in economics so whether I like it or not, I take notice of what he says.

He is the one economist who has called out the powers that are as being incorrect. He is the one economist who has continuously advocated that the austerity measures and the deficit hawks are wrong....and he is right.

His nick name 'the shrill one' he has earned over the last 6 years.

[husaberg]

He is the one economist who has called out the powers that are as being incorrect. He is the one economist who has continuously advocated that the austerity measures and the deficit hawks are wrong....and he is right.

His nick name 'the shrill one' he has earned over the last 6 years.

Talking about inflation causes inflation. Talking about recession can lead to recession. In every recession (and crash) there is a lot of money to be accumulated from the less prosperous.

[Winston001]

In every recession (and crash) there is a lot of money to be accumulated from the less prosperous.

Or...there is money to be made by people who have saved in the good times so they have the cash to buy in times of gloom. Our scottish ancestors who emigrated to NZ did exactly that. Use debt but pay it off as fast as you can, cash is king. This has nothing to do with millionaires, just ordinary people living modest lives with long term hopes.

[Ocean1]

In every recession (and crash) there is a lot of money to be accumulated from the less prosperous.

Strange place to be looking to accumulate money from, unless you're a govt.nz.

[mashman]

Strange place to be looking to accumulate money from, unless you're a govt.nz.

Some places in the UK are selling houses for 1 pound. Yes they need work done, but they're not falling down. If you've got a cool million to spare you could likely get yourself a decent ROI. That wouldn't have happened had it not bee for the recession. Shame they don't offer to give them to the unemployed and whilst doing them up, train the soon to be owner and when they save it they can pay the cash back. Training and a foot on the property ladder in 1.

[husaberg]

Strange place to be looking to accumulate money from, unless you're a govt.nz.

No its just there is a lot more of them.
Estimates are that 2% of world population own around 50% of world wealth, and around 8% of world population owns more than 85% of world wealth.

This percentage is is rising.

Tax is just for those that can't afford to avoid it.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10850796

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10873068

SOE's are not immune from doing Caymen island deals either.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/bus...id-are-history

Explain that one to me a tax payer owned company avoids paying tax to post a higher profit who suffers but who gains (the people whose remuneration is tied to profit)

Why we are on SOE there is an elphant in the Solid energy room. why is there no mention of the extra 120 million they had to stump up with for the Carbon tax?
Where does that go.....
If you look at the books they lost most of their money by a reevaluating the value of the coal reserves (paper loss)
Nearly all the office staff are still on the payroll just the miners they sacked (the union members)
Seems it might make it a better sale propect by just selling the coal reserves.

[Ocean1]

Some places in the UK are selling houses for 1 pound. Yes they need work done, but they're not falling down. If you've got a cool million to spare you could likely get yourself a decent ROI. That wouldn't have happened had it not bee for the recession. Shame they don't offer to give them to the unemployed and whilst doing them up, train the soon to be owner and when they save it they can pay the cash back. Training and a foot on the property ladder in 1.

Why would you need a cool million to buy a 1 pound house?

Seems to me that at that price you're already perilously close to giving a house to the unemployed, why aren't they buying them, are they waiting for someone to give them the pound?