Defensive Interpretation on GD?

[malleni]

> Whole Planet are aware that the Tibet 'uprising' was CIA financed
> i.e. USA is deeply involved in this event. You need not a PHD in
> "generational dynamics" to understand it. It is quite enough with
> little - logic.

I've admonished you several times in the past that ephemeral political
events are not relevant to long-term generational trend predictions,
except to narrow the time window.

I do not expected anything else.
Each time when you putting one event from news - and if somebody on this forum dare to say - "sorry John. what it... I do not agreed...".
... than you coming to your old and famous phrases: "...that is "irrelevant for long-term generational trend predictions"... or simply - "it is irrelevant"

Of course - JUST your "political" links and comments - are always relevant for long-term generational trend predictions!

With simple words - just them "are predictions"!

Sorry John, but this is exactly what Gordo, me and Mos-fried said to you couple times:
- you using absolutely minor events (strong influent of daily politics) and than you try to make "a prediction".
Definitely - NOT a bigger picture of one event.
(Adn even if somebody giving you additional information - you just simply dismissed it as "irrelevant")

That is not strange that your "prediction" are never true.

Moreover, you are very critical to any different opinion from yours - especially if facts are NOT on your side.
That is more than obvious - from your article about Tibet (which looks exactly as written in British foreign ministry.)

Now when you getting another link from (Asian based) with commentary of professional political journalist - your answer is:

...
I have no idea whether the CIA was
involved in Tibet or not, but a few CIA operatives will not change
the attitudes and behaviors of the great masses of Han Chinese or the
attitudes and behaviors of the great masses of Tibetans. Those
attitudes are caused by events that occurred decades, or possibly
even centuries ago, and no political event can have an effect today.

I agree only about "masses".
And here are little bit more about "masses" (Demographics in Tibet year 2000):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet

It is obviously that now amount of Han Chinese and Tibetans are almost on the same level.
Conflict was always there and the myths about Tibet are also propagandistic presented. Here little bit more about Tibet history:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... .htm#notes
Secondly (quite in detailed explained in my previous ASIAN link) - the Western powers (particularly) USA - worked and "STILL working" on Chinas destabilization.
It is probably "very great prediction" - to say the "possibility that these two groups coming in conflict - increase"...
Especially now - when it is more than obvious that Western intelligence (CIA) "working hard" - to get out this conflict.
Now - you simply dismissed more relevant information, deeply historical underspending of conflict, situation in the "modern World" and on the end different view - with just YOUR "explanation" - "that is irrelevant".

Sorry John - in the future I will first check on your site - what YOU saying that is "relevant" - and than we need not to discuss.
You are going to teach me and other stupid and uneducated people from all countries of the World - the "real and relevant prediction technique"!.
Thank you very much.

You claim to be using "logic," but you're not using logic at all.
You're pulling random ephemeral events out of the air -- events that
just happen to match your own ideology -- and drawing illogical
conclusions from them.

You might as well say that "All the world knows that it rained last
March, and that caused the Tibetan uprising." That's how logical you
are.

You claim to be an engineer, but I don't see many engineering skills
here, just the usual fatuous ideological nonsense, disguised as
"logic."

Sincerely,

John

John,

Thank you that you took time to comment - ME.

But finally, I believed that forum or this topic was not about me (actually you moved it from your topic with "forecasts")
(Of course you or anyone else on Forum can open one - but be sure that I do not participate on this topic.)

I understand that first link you do not like, because it opposes your Western link which supporting your "predictions".
If that is illogical or not (or even "fatuous ideological nonsense") - I do not know.
I did not write this Asian story - but the professional for this paper.

As said before - I do understand that here on this forum is just ONE man, ONE logic, ONE truth...
We all know that as you have "the power" to switch off me - as Administrator - you can also do it.
It is OK.

But I can not understand how it can help anybody?

Of course - in case that people would like to read just ONE link, ONE story and ONE "prediction" -
... and anybody who opposed should be dismissed directly as:
- illogical
- irrelevant
- "fatuous ideological nonsense" speaker
- bad professional (unskilled engineer) - (I really believed that this Forum was not an engineering site)
- probably stupid too (because English is NOT my mother tongue - and this is either irrelevant or "inexcusable")

.... than is this move quite logical and on the end - correct.

Thank you John.

Kind regards
malleni

[malleni]

John,

BTW - since Higgenbotham is not your another nick - and he is just reader from your site:

It would be nice to to see your answer on all those discussion (or at least some of them) questions we appointed earlier on this topic - and just Higgenbotham dare to discuss.

I supposed - that discussion about them - even in case that you as Admin removed me from Forum - would be appreciated.
Because, if you like open discussions about themes - we (Forum) need not discussions about members.

So even without nick "malleni" - some answers from you regarding this topic - would be appreciated.

Thank you

Kind regards
malleni

[Higgenbotham]

http://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/coin/

Currency
Federal Reserve notes comprise more than 99 percent of all U.S. currency in circulation; the remainder includes United States notes, national bank notes, and silver certificates, all of which remain legal tender.


These definitions are basics. If people don't know the proper definitions, there can't really be a coherent discussion.

To say that, "Remove the panic tomorrow, and you will discover suddenly that the world is drowning in US currency, repeat, DROWNING." is simply not true by definition. There are approximately 7 billion people in the world, and there are approximately $800 billion in Federal Reserve notes in existence (as also noted in the link above), or $100 for every person in the world.

If making a statement like that isn't equivalent to throwing garbage at the wall, then I don't know what is.

Thank you Higgenbotham for the link.

Personally I think, that FED "definition" of "what currency is" - "is irrelevant" (as John like to say - but he of course has no exclusive right on this phrases).

What is in my opinion important - is what the currency is in reality?

... and we already talked about it.

Best regards
malleni

malleni,

The Fed definition of currency is very relevant and the reason it is relevant is because the Fed has the power to make the rules. As much as you and I (especially you, I think) would like to have a say in that, we don't. On the currency, the Federal Reserve Note, it says, "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." What you are really saying is, "What is money in reality?" Now that is a very good question! And you can pick up a few books or whatever that will help you contemplate that question.

But that takes us a bit off the track from where we started in analyzing the response to mosullivan.

First, we started with a discussion of the claim the author of the response made about how there was a panic flight to Treasuries. I defined Treasuries and showed that this claim was mostly false, but not entirely, because there has been a flight to certain kinds of Treasuries (bills), which constitute approximately 20% of the marketable Treasury debt outstanding.

Second, we showed that this author's claim that the world is DROWNING in US currency is false. The world may be drowning in dollar denominated money, but he didn't say that. Do you think he really went to Yale? I hope not.

Third, we talked about why someone may invest in Treasury Bills and I explained why I am doing it. The main point there being that nobody has any idea why someone else is doing what they are doing, counter to the author's claim. For example, why did you punch the wall last night? It must be that you are a very angry man, right? Well, no, you may have been doing a martial arts exercise for all I know.

And fourth, I talked about the idea the author put forth that the Fed could resurrect a debt bubble through immediate hyperinflation. First, I said that, historically speaking, no central bank has ever been able to resurrect a debt bubble despite heroic attempts to do so. Second, I said we could take another approach and examine whether the Fed might be able to do so this time by looking at all the relevant parameters that exist today within the confines of policy and legal contraints. And third, I mentioned the possibility that the Fed could try to violate all of its contraints in a desperate attempt to create an immediate hyperinflation.

So I think that pretty well sums it up. At this point, we probably both have better things to do than continue to discuss what was written at the beginning of the thread. If you want to bone up on what money is and then some specific questions come up that you would like answered, I would be more than happy to try to answer them if I can. There are a lot of smart people on this Forum who I'm sure can help you out too.

[John]

> BTW - since Higgenbotham is not your another nick - and he is just
> reader from your site:

I've known Higgenbotham for several years, and he's helped me out
several times with questions.

Higgenbotham is not only a very sophisticated investor, but he's also
done original research in generational theory as it applies to
historical financial crises, especially in Middle Ages Europe.

Many people who come to the Generational Dynamics web site and forum
do so because they're suffering extreme distress in their lives,
thanks to the current financial crisis.

By playing your silly games, you're being disrespectful not only to
Higgenbotham, but also to those many people, many of whom are probably
worse off than you are.

You should be thanking your lucky stars that he's willing to take the
time to answer your questions. His responses could be extremely
valuable to many people, even if you appear not to be intelligent
enough to appreciate them.

Sincerely,

John

[The Grey Badger]

John - I don't think English is malleni's native tongue, from some of the way he phrases things. So a language barrier may be part of the problem. But also I notice he seems to believe things, as fact, that I'd class with conspiracy theories. But they may be common currency in his native land. Do you happen to know where he's from, or any background on him?

Pat

[malleni]

...

Higgenbotham,

I really do not know why you repeating "with your words" now - discussion from before?

I anybody is interested - it is there and can be read.

I know that we are agreed at least at one point:

...
malleni,

I agree with that statement. We will not have a pure deflation and are not having one now.
...

Regarding the "The Fed definition of currency" and its "relevance" - I did not want to discuss it...
My comment was just short point of view. Simply - "the definition" is just death letters on piece of paper.
Even if that is not so important.
The Austrian definition of money is something other.


We can for sure also said that there is USA Constitution.
(not just a peace of paper with "definition").
But as we see those days, with all bail outs, many people who know more about US Constitution saying that this move is - unconstitutional!
Namely, there is no constitutional authority for the US Government or the Federal Reserve to use public (taxpayer) money for what is definitely a private purpose (bailing out Wall Street).

And now - how we can believe in simple "definition" - when on the other side the authorities braking the Constitution?

BTW - my comment about this issue was just formal.
So I do not see reason to discuss it deeper.

Anyway, thank you for discussion.

Kind regards
malleni

[ojavaid]

November 1, 2008
Fear of Deflation Lurks as Global Demand Drops

By PETER S. GOODMAN
As dozens of countries slip deeper into financial distress, a new threat may be gathering force within the American economy — the prospect that goods will pile up waiting for buyers and prices will fall, suffocating fresh investment and worsening joblessness for months or even years.

The word for this is deflation, or declining prices, a term that gives economists chills.

Deflation accompanied the Depression of the 1930s. Persistently falling prices also were at the heart of Japan’s so-called lost decade after the catastrophic collapse of its real estate bubble at the end of the 1980s — a period in which some experts now find parallels to the American predicament.

“That certainly is the snapshot of the risk I see,” said Robert J. Barbera, chief economist at the research and trading firm ITG. “It is the crisis we face.”

With economies around the globe weakening, demand for oil, copper, grains and other commodities has diminished, bringing down prices of these raw materials. But prices have yet to decline noticeably for most goods and services, with one conspicuous exception — houses. Still, reduced demand is beginning to soften prices for a few products, like furniture and bedding, which are down slightly since the beginning of 2007, according to government data. Prices are also falling for some appliances, tools and hardware.

Only a few months ago, American policy makers were worried about the reverse problem — rising prices, or inflation — as then-soaring costs for oil and food filtered through the economy. In July, average prices were 5.6 percent higher than a year earlier — the fastest pace of inflation since 1991. But by the end of September, annual inflation had dipped to 4.9 percent and was widely expected to go lower.

The new worry is that in the worst case, the end of inflation may be the beginning of something malevolent: a long, slow retrenchment in which consumers and businesses worldwide lose the wherewithal to buy, sending prices down for many goods. Though still considered unlikely, that would prompt businesses to slow production and accelerate layoffs, taking more paychecks out of the economy and further weakening demand.

The danger of this is the difficulty of a cure. Policy makers can generally choke off inflation by raising interest rates, dampening economic activity and reducing demand for goods. But as Japan discovered, an economy may remain ensnared by deflation for many years, even when interest rates are dropped to zero: falling prices make companies reluctant to invest even when credit is free.

Through much of the 1990s, prices for property and many goods kept falling in Japan. As layoffs increased and purchasing power declined, prices fell lower still, in a downward spiral of diminishing fortunes. Some fear the American economy could be sinking toward a similar fate, if a recession is deep and prolonged, as consumers lose spending power just as much of Europe, Asia and Latin America succumb to a slowdown.

“That’s a meaningful risk at this point,” said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University’s Stern School of Business, who forecast the financial crisis well in advance and has been warning of deflation for months. “We could get into a vicious circle of deepening malaise.”

Most economists — Mr. Roubini and Mr. Barbera included — say American policy makers have tools to avert the sort of deflationary black hole that captured Japan. Deflation fears last broke out in the United States in 2003, but the Federal Reserve defeated the menace with low interest rates that kept the economy growing. This time, the Fed is again being aggressive, dropping its target rate to 1 percent this week. And the government’s various bailout plans have also pumped money into the economy.

“If you print enough money, you can create inflation,” said Kenneth S. Rogoff, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund and now a professor at Harvard.

But even as American authorities unleash credit, the threat has intensified. Not since the Depression have so many countries faced so much trouble at once. The financial crisis has gone global, like a virus mutating in the face of every experimental cure. From South Korea to Iceland to Brazil, the pandemic has spread, bringing with it a tightening of credit that has starved even healthy companies of finance.

“We’re entering a really fierce global recession,” Mr. Rogoff said. “A significant financial crisis has been allowed to morph into a full-fledged global panic. It’s a very dangerous situation. The danger is that instead of having a few bad years, we’ll have another lost decade.”

Global economic growth has flourished in recent years, much of it fertilized with borrowed investment. This raised kingdoms of houses in Florida and California, steel mills in Ukraine, slaughterhouses in Brazil and shopping malls in Turkey.

That tide is now moving in reverse. Banks and other financial institutions are reckoning with hundreds of billions of dollars worth of disastrous investments. As they struggle to rebuild their capital, they are halting loans to many customers, demanding swift repayment from others and dumping assets — homes sold out of foreclosure, investments linked to mortgages and corporate loans. Selling is pushing prices down further, making the assets left on balance sheets worth less, in some cases prompting another round of sales.

“You get this adverse feedback loop where assets keep falling in value,” Mr. Barbera said. “You’re essentially putting big downward pressure on the global economy.”

In past crises, like those that devastated Mexico in 1994 and much of Asia in 1997 and 1998, weak economies managed to recover by exporting aggressively, not least to the United States. But American consumers are battered this time. After years of borrowing against homes and tapping credit cards, consumers are pulling back.

From Asia to Latin America, exports are slowing and should continue to do so as the global appetite shrinks. This is spawning fears that major producers like China and India — which vastly expanded production capacity in recent years — will have to dump products on world markets to keep factories running and stave off unemployment, pressing prices lower.

Earlier this year, some analysts suggested that American businesses might continue to prosper, even as consumers pulled back at home, by selling into foreign markets. Caterpillar, the construction equipment manufacturer, might suffer declining sales in the United States, the argument went, but huge projects from Russia to Dubai required front-end loaders. Australia and Brazil needed earth-movers to expand mining operations as they sent iron ore toward smelters in Northeast Asia.

But as much of the planet now struggles, Caterpillar is worried. “Next year, no doubt, will be a challenge,” Caterpillar’s chief executive, James W. Owens, recently warned.

China has long been at the center of claims that the world could keep growing regardless of American troubles. China has been importing cotton from India and the United States; electronics components from South Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan; timber from Russia and Africa; and oil from the Middle East.

But many of the finished goods China produces with these materials have ultimately landed in the United States, Europe and Japan. When consumers pull back in those countries, Chinese factories feel the impact, along with their suppliers around the globe.

Fewer laptop computers shipped from China spells less demand for chips. Last week, Toshiba — Japan’s largest chip maker — said it lost $275 million from July to September, blaming its troubles on a world glut.

Lower demand for flat-screen televisions means less need for flat-panel glass displays. This month, Samsung, the Korean electronics giant, said a global oversupply in that item caused its biggest dip in quarterly profits in three years.

Now, a glut of products may be building in the United States. Orders for trucks used by business have plummeted. Investments in industrial equipment are declining. Yet inventories have grown.

“I worry about an economy that looks like Japan,” said Barry P. Bosworth, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “We’re going to be struggling with how to put this back together again for several more years.”


Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[malleni]

...
Many people who come to the Generational Dynamics web site and forum
do so because they're suffering extreme distress in their lives,
thanks to the current financial crisis.

Dear John,

Is this really everything what you can say about this TOPIC?

This is THE forum.
I have NOT any ideas - why people coming and discuss here?
Somebody perhaps would like to see different views and aspect.
Somebody is perhaps "distress in their lives" as you saying.
Somebody perhaps would like to read something different.
Somebody perhaps coming because he/she believe that - you are a Prophet.
Somebody is perhaps - just bored.

...
By playing your silly games, you're being disrespectful not only to
Higgenbotham, but also to those many people, many of whom are probably
worse off than you are.

I did NOT "playing my silly games".
Obviously - everybody who DO NOT agreed with you "play silly games"!
Again - this is a Forum (or I just believe it.... perhaps I am wrong)
You can discuss - if you want or if you can.
If you do not feel for discussion - DO NOT discuss.
So simple it is.

I really do not understand what you would like to say with this:
those many people, many of whom are probably worse off than you are.

Am I "a bad man" because I do not agreed in something you presented?
Unbelievable!
And THAT should be a "theorist" whose aim is "to save a World"?
Unbelievable!

You should be thanking your lucky stars that he's willing to take the
time to answer your questions. His responses could be extremely
valuable to many people, even if you appear not to be intelligent
enough to appreciate them.

Sincerely,

John

Again,
John - THIS looks like Forum!
(I thought so ...? Perhaps I am wrong?)
People use to discuss different topics on forums - you know?

I DO NOT see reason to thanks ANYBODY for simple response!!!
Especially - "lucky stars"!!!
If Higgenbotham felt that he would like to response - that is HIS thing!!! (NOT yours!)
Besides - I am also loosing time trying to discuss here!

I think that I was NOT impolitely or uncultivated to anybody on the forum.
If that is the case - and somebody feel affected with my discussions - I am sorry.

On the other side, John, I see that you are very politely, cultivated, informed and intelligent.
Even if I kindly ask you to NOT comment ME - in order to prevent discussion about forum member in stead of TOPIC - you still like to comment ME...
This time - "my intelligence"...
Thank you for nice words.


I was obviously wrong.
I do NOT think that this Forum is just place where everybody MUST agree with Admin or his friends.
In best case - all Forum members has to glorify Admin and his view of life, his theory, as well as his "predictions"?

Sorry.
It will NOT happened anymore.

[malleni]

John - I don't think English is malleni's native tongue, from some of the way he phrases things. So a language barrier may be part of the problem. But also I notice he seems to believe things, as fact, that I'd class with conspiracy theories. But they may be common currency in his native land. Do you happen to know where he's from, or any background on him?

Pat

Pat,
I already said that English is NOT my mother tongue.
You can find it in presentation too.
BUT, I think - in case that you would like to discuss ME (even if I do not see the reason...) - you need to open another TOPIC.
Please.

Thank you.
malleni

[Higgenbotham]

I do NOT think that this Forum is just place where everybody MUST agree with Admin or his friends.

malleni,

John and I have disagreed many times in the past and there are still points of disagreement today. But the fact that we have disagreed is not important--disagreement is part of doing work that is new and difficult. John studied the derivatives problem, combined it with generational theory, and presented it to the public in a way that was accessible, understandable, and useful to the average person. I asked him to do that over 3 years ago because that kind of information couldn't be found anywhere else on the Internet, especially at that time, and felt his site could help the public understand what was coming when the derivatives mess unwound within the generational time frames. Previous to that, I had studied this financial situation for 3 years full time. We spent many hours reading and discussing the current situation and comparing and contrasting it to previous generational panics like the Panic of 1857.

I never knew John before I asked him to do this and I've never spoken with him. We are simply two people who combined our knowledge and resources to collaborate on a project.