You can’t give it away~!

Here is a rough transcription of the presentation for people who are hard of hearing. Apologies for the lack of grammar, I am working to improve the automated transcriptions -
hello whenever you are hardest to video think your axle start with Axel yes I think two things coming from Accel one is that rich people are basically educated into being rich and powerful and poor people are educated into being and poor car mechanics obviously that’s a big black-and-white that the ring is at that sort of thing that exists in how the Western world education system especially in the UK and the US not so much in Europe but am basically money still buys you your children the chance the best chance the much better chance of I getting in and having more money and keeping it in the future and power from that lets have a quick go at redistribution again any redistribution-is just because because the thing is so obvious it’s its own are just run it through certain let’s say we have a redistribution we know that these tax things on income are pretty useless because Han the wealthy have already got their wealth and power so taxing just a bit of turnaround of money isn’t going to make any inroads into it at all estate taxes and I’ll just say one thing that if it ever came to it besides the other thing and, besides the fact that the people do as a commentor said think for themselves as in I would like to pass on I don’t have a house but I’ve saved up 20,000 monies I’d like to give that to my children or the other person has got a house and 200,000 monies wants to give that everybody will always vote for it and will understand that the person has 10 houses and to billion dollars of money and three yachts and they want to do it as well and everybody will appreciate that this is how I feel about my money and I’m sure that’s how they feel about their money and will always be chary Charlie as they will not be coming forward to is demand that the wealthy even very hyper wealthy do give over and should be heavily heavily taxed on their estate tax that obviously the rich you get more people will vote for the rich to be clouted the Euros be struggling to get the mass population behind huge estate taxes when talking what we talk about is getting into the great big and suede loads of wealth and power that their wealth and powerful have got so taxes are no good and lunch pretty sure that estate taxes aren’t going to be away into it and it worked to a certain extent in Han 18th and 19th-century Britain specially 19th-century Britain to Bill pulled down the arm that the royalty basically at the Dukes and all that sort of thing they did put huge estate taxes on and it did break up the estates so it it is It can be ago if it is seen only if it’s been seen as a punishment for the rich and powerful pop over playing their hand as long as the rich and powerful just are rich and powerful and aren’t seen to run slaves and basically be exceptionally naughty I don’t think estate taxes will ever get mass support enough mass support to push it through against the wishes of the rich and powerful in similar mean he needs huge mass support from them major mass of the population to move against the small amount of people with huge amounts of voting money so another way would be well you can’t get them year by year you can’t get them the end of their life how about just going in one lot and all our whole lot of money out of them obviously this won’t work either because it it would have to be a one-hit wonder if it was then you can’t ever convince you never convince the world that it’s a one-hit wonder because if it was ever imagined that it was going to happen again well what what would happen was okay just like did happen Indian and in the in USSR when they distributed the state and ownership of the state owned companies to the people that before you know few years was out all of those tickets were owned by 50 oligarchs and it would happen again but only if it is the oligarchs or the harm disinherited rich thought it would be worth buying them again the be no doubt about it that Paul would sell them they would be selling them because the stock market that seven were giving away stock tickets the stock market would be absolutely tumbling because everybody would know that the hard of thinking when given stock tickets that are going down I don’t sell them the make and go down further or they just sell them because they just wanted the cash they don’t understand or trust these little bits of paper they want Walmart money to be selling them stock market the prices of all this stuff could be going down now if you wanted it to go back up again to give the people the value for the money the tickets that they’re being given and the fuss that been caused in the country you’d want us have that value kept up and the only way to be kept up if there were major buyers and the only major buyers would be the look that the people you taken the money from the people are due to trust those tickets so you need those rich people to be wanting to buy them back again even if they had to borrow money to buy them back again without that’s without the tickets going back to the rich in creating the demand will you do is get your stock market level all the way down to effectively not zero but very very small amount and you’ve wasted in complete picked up wasted that the faith that I am the world has in your effect effective ways of running the country because just to rip me money off people and give it to people and then that money the the the the tickets to fall to 0 value so it’s done nobody any good it’s just done a load of harm I’ll would just be a pathetic arm thing to do okay now I’m going to in this harm video but Barnes might give it a bit of a different way now if you wanted stripped the rich personal owners of bonds that might be different but actually equity stop stock tickets it is just be ludicrous because you give away nothing new just ruin things for no reason at all he wouldn’t be giving away anything because those stock tickets only have value if they have demand for them no demand for them you wouldn’t be giving anything away or you’d be doing is taking from the the the rich for the fear of it at all it would be absolutely be okay once we could talk about over in Europe are just read the denial by the ECB the European Central bank’s morning denying that they will bark and they will And let’s say Spain’s bonds by anybody’s bonds that come under what could happen is a can of an ABC a country like Spain has to write a letter to Brussels and say we are in serious trouble we need to borrow money we need to come under the protection program then the protection program says right out arm will put a program together for you where you must do posterity you must do austerity here here here at this much next year that that that of this much and the year after bending demo in much okay that’s paper is must be then signed by say example Spain Italy whoever Portugal again whoever it might be and then without being signed and as long as they stick to whatever’s been signed the EEC Bay will come along and buy that all by enough of their higher bonds in the secondary market in the natural selling stock market for bonds you could call it in the in the external bond market and Those rates say it, 5% on the ten-year etc etc whatever they would which would be making solid targets and market participants to Weymouth but that’s a technical point but it looks like that is with the way Europe has moved because Europe is arm 17 countries/80 and they got voting rights so Italy and Spain Greece Portugal Ireland and France have much more voting power than Germany and Holland and Austria put together a laptop and basically that’s the court understand that push comes to shove their outvoted so that’s what both people want that means that the arm the countries would have their bonds And they would not be forced into posterity and by their bonds that they they don’t like the idea that their bonds will be going up and down and it’d be a rapper not irrational to be volatile for them and they wouldn’t know what to do so the countries would be happy in their bonds would be capped the armed the corner would be happy that they could tell the peripheral countries exactly what to do which would be austerity austerity posterity to try and get in line with what they think that they’d be getting the periphery in line with what they do which is absolute nonsense that’s where it all falls down and the ECB doesn’t want to do this buying but would at least know that they would be keeping up the value of the bonds in the banks of the member countries and would effectively chip and if I all the banks in Europe but it’s better having in Japan if I’d and just held arm solvent than it would be to have an insolvent and have huge bank runs in Europe to everybody would be unhappy but happy enough to sign up for something like that help would that make the Euro currency strong like the Japanese yen no great ideas come to me but maybe you can think that far ahead into fudge but of course this have to be a fudge would it would cause what we what people call inflation near the would-be fuss that it would but it wouldn’t because deflation it could well might and that could be what actually breaks it but that’s another story but the market would be temporarily happy with it because the thing that worries the market so much is the solvency of the banks and it would temporarily guarantee the solvency of the banks and their asset side stuffed full of sovereign bonds the rest of the stuff will go bad slowly but at least one major asset class is saved by

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.richnewbold.co.uk/ Richard

    If I think about the problem of all the consolidated wealth as just a math problem that needs balancing out I can think of all kinds of weird and wacky schemes to redistribute the wealth, but none of them would be workable or practical when I factor in the way humans actually behave – if such a thing is possible. When individuals act in their immediate self-interest, the collective needs of society go right out of the window, so planning for fairness or a rebalancing of the wealth is near on impossible. One might even conclude that what we see with all the consolidated wealth is just the natural outcome and not something that needs to be fixed, rather it’s something that as individuals acting in our own self-interest we need to accept, adapt to, and work around. Maybe the periodic over-throwing of kings, nobility, dictators and governments is all just part of a predictable cycle that temporarily redresses the issue and that this time / next time it will be the turn of the oligarchs and bankers to lose their heads? Which sounds drastic and scary, but like a wildfire that clears the forest of dead wood and makes way for new growth this just a part of the natural cycle? Or maybe that’s bollocks too? What if, after a lot of head scratching, the only logical / realistic conclusion one can come to is that as individuals were are powerless to shape, control, or plan a course for society or economy because there are just too many variables and competing / conflicting individual interests?

    • http://overthepeak.com/wordpress/ Mystic

       Probably all of that (and more~!).

      I’m glad I don’t particularly care one way or the other.

  • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

    What is real wealth? If the system implodes bonds would not be worth a farthing. Much of the accumulated wealth may be an illusion. Perhaps that is where the real bubble lies?

    On taxing property if you set the lower limit well above what Middle England would see as their expectations there would be little political fall out. We care about our property, not that of the Sheriff of Nottingham. The real problem is that the rich just move and unless their wealth is tied to something tangible in your country, like Siberian forests, then you lose.

    Inflation is a useful tool, much maligned. It corrects many imbalances.

    History seems to indicate that when wealth becomes over concentrated then the civilisation tends to go into decline. I suppose when a small group own virtually everything retaining becomes the prime objective and opportunities for others close down.

    We are currently looking at a fundamental change in the balance of power and the full reality of decline has as yet to be  fully felt? Could several families (generations) living in the same house become the norm in Europe, class sizes increase in schools? Perhaps with so many educated young with less prospects we are in for political unrest?

    • http://overthepeak.com/wordpress/ Mystic

       ”Could several families (generations) living in the same house become the norm in Europe…”

      Who would be living next door~?

      • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

        Mr. & Mrs Brown, their parents, children and grand children? 

        Population growing, not even building enough houses to replace those going into dereliction, Planning lagging in how to build more and zoning space needed means overall shortage helping to  uphold price of existing. So the alternatives; build more including social housing, tent cities, or higher occupancy density through sharing.

        There is talk of building more housing in the UK, but it all takes time and money and there seems an utter lack of coherent thinking and vision. Political jargon about liberalising planning laws, guaranteeing more housebuilding and boosting infrastructure projects mean little if there is no money allocated, and also no real idea of overall strategy. Political fire fighting with sound bites. Where I am there is a housing shortage, but you would be a brave person to build as you have no certain selling price. (if indeed you can sell) Making a loss is a very high probability.

        Could be that one of the consequences of the relative economic decline is that many won’t have a house of their own. Similarily we may find that the standard of many services decline.

        http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/aug/22/economic-pressures-young-adults-home-to-roost

         http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/planning-housing

        • windslice

          If there is a housing shortage and nobody will build because they would make a loss, then there must be a massive imbalance in the local economy. This has to be sorted. The root cause has to be determined and fixed.

          You have hit the nail on the head. 

          Modern politicians in the UK are unable to make a decision based on the economic prosperity of the nation. Oh no, they have to pander to the minority groups, the poor families, the jobless, the aimless, the useless, the benefit collectors etc. Because all of the votes that this lot have outweigh the votes of the workers. This is democracy at work. 

          The politicians have to listen to what their voters say. Otherwise they will join the ranks of the jobless, as most of them could not hold a normal job down.

          • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

            We take for granted that democracy as it currently stands is a good idea, I am not so sure. It all depends on having an electorate that is both informed and responsible. I doubt if we have that. A high percentage of those voting do not know the policies of those they are voting for.

            It also depends on us having a fair system where all people can stand for election on a equal footing, we definitely don’t have that. 

            And it would seem important to have elected representatives who represent the better interests of those who elect them. Many who are elected do not do that.

            It also depends on Governments taking responsibility and setting standards for conduct and accountability. Generally not happening.

    • windslice

      I cannot define wealth. There are too many objective and subjective views placed on it.

      Government bonds will be worth their face value whatever happens.

      Inflation screws things up.

      The imbalances would not occur if the people were not led to believe that inflation is inevitable. Inflation creates the imbalances, dammit. If that quid your grandfather earned 60 years ago still had the same purchasing power today, we would be far better off with far far fewer debts. it would not be necessary for the humongous pile of debt to grow every blasted year.

      It is the illusion of increasing prosperity through inflation that is sucking us into the black hole of debt.

      “My house price is increasing”, “my wages are increasing’; “I AM becoming WEALTHY and I can BORROW MORE to get a BIGGER DEBT”.

      Whereas the grim reality is that you are becoming POORER.

      As I keep on saying, the balance of economic prosperity is moving

      1. From the West to the East.

      2. From the countries with a net current account deficit.

      The UK => DOWN

      Greece => DOWN

      Australia => UP

      Cambodia => UP

      China => UP

      Germany => UP but with issues about wealth transfer to the so-called peripheral parasites.

      It would indeed seem logical that the brats will stay longer in the parental home (as indeed we are seeing, my brother was well over thirty before he decided to leave, there were three empty bedrooms and he never left the area). For some reason the “downsizing” that the boomers were expected to make has not really materialised. I guess they have enough cash to keep on the three bedroom properties so that the brats and grandbrats can come and stay. Selfish bastards some might say.

      I doubt whether there is any gumption left in the new generations to cause unrest. They are being brought up to expect a life of slavery until they die, as the retirement age gets pushed out further and further.

      • Bigcollapso

        In a full fiat system, “wealth” is anything that is desired by someone, and traded for fiat currency.
        Ie, it is the “thing” that flows in the opposite direction of the fiat currency. In non collapse economic transactions, the fiat money flows in one direction, and the wealth in the opposite.
        Due to the way that our economy is failing, for a quick understanding of what is happening for instance with the debt, you can substitute “wealth” for labor output of humans or machines in the economy.
        That is what is in short supply (and will remain that way for the foreseeable future) and making the debt fail.

        • windslice

          You are well ahead of me on this BC.

          Please slow down and make it clear for us simple folks.

          • Bigcollapso

             Perhaps the easy way to begin to understand the monetary system, which is an accounting system to account for the wealth transfers of society, is to make a chart that includes the following for EACH financial transaction.
            1. What is the source of the number? Ie who created the original number entry?
            2. What is the first wealth transfer? Ie goods or labor (usually opposite of money flow) from first use?
            3. Who is now obligated to create and transfer the exponential increasing service wealth transfers as a result of the debt based system?
            4. What part of the ongoing transfers can be terminated?

            If you truly understand that not only are wealth and money totally different things, but they are usually flowing in opposite directions, you are off to a good start.

      • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

         Face value on government bonds depends on the currency holding real value.

        I {sort of} disagree regarding inflation, if you expect to be paid interest then there are several options for the borrower;

        borrower grows to repay;
        borrower  reduces his assets by selling to repay;
        devalue the real value of the loan with inflation; or
        default.

        I am increasingly of the opinion that interest is a problem. It enables the accumulation of greater wealth based only on existing wealth, and no other factor. It allows parasitic behaviour. So a system where inflation is 5% and interest is 5% would seem to me one that penalises those that do not make use of their money or make it available.

        Inflation helps reduce the accumulation of some types of wealth, but aids in other sectors.

        As for Germany, if they had their own strong currency I wonder how buoyant their industrial sector would be?

        Money that holds value would be interesting, but it would require an entirely different system to current, and from where we stand now, what we need is the economic equivalent of syrup of figs. In the short term we need a way to write of debts by fair means or foul, and at the same time set up a system that is less likely to be abused. We seem set to enter limbo for a decade and that could have dire political consequences.

        • windslice

          “Face value on government bonds depends on the currency holding real value.”

          No it doesn’t. Face value is face value. If it says GBP 1 then GBP 1 is what you’ll get, regardless if GBP 1 now only buys you half of a toilet roll sheet whereas once you could buy 10 complete rolls.

          “borrower grows to repay;”

          Yep, we’re on the growth wagon again. As long as his economic contribution grows as well, OK, I’ll agree. But if his salary has only increased through inflation then that is not real growth.

          “borrower  reduces his assets by selling to repay”

          Can’t see how that works. Why borrow if you are not going to make a profit?

          “devalue the real value of the loan with inflation”
          That is the the currency debauchery bullshit.See above.

          “default”

          Yeah, well, the bugger runs away without paying. So we all loose.
          “Inflation helps reduce the accumulation of some types of wealth, but aids in other sectors”

          I cannot think of any instance where inflation is beneficial to the accumulation of wealth.

          “As for Germany, if they had their own strong currency I wonder how buoyant their industrial sector would be?”

          Somewhat less, but they do produce very high quality stuff that even Asia wants to buy. So I am not convinced they would loose out immensely. They have the work and quality ethic that a lot of other countries simply do not have.

          “We seem set to enter limbo for a decade and that could have dire political consequences.”

          Yep, that is very true for the UK and any other country that is not “world class” and producing stuff that other countries want to fill the gap created by the importing of stuff from abroad. I am utterly amazed that the UK is still going so strong based on the accumulated wealth stolen through the years. This will surely change.

          “I am increasingly of the opinion that interest is a problem. It enables the accumulation of greater wealth based only on existing wealth, and no other factor. It allows parasitic behaviour. So a system where inflation is 5% and interest is 5% would seem to me one that penalises those that do not make use of their money or make it available.”

          This is a difficult topic.

          You are surely referring to the rentier class, the landlords, the owners of assets that derive an income solely from possession? Yes, these guys will take as much rent as possible out of the productive economy so they can expand their little empires. The banks extract as much as possible, and these bastards do not even own what they rent out. It is all created out of thin air.

          I have no answer, I find it verydifficult to believe we have a system so biased towards the creation of money through debt in the hands of private banks.

          The UK has now the Japanese disease. But without the exports and savings.

          There will have to be a lot of expectations reset.

          And I even believe the government realises this, so there will be an ever increasing amount of debt taken on by Mervyn, and a lot of propaganda slowly lowering expectations.

          The GBP in your pocket will be worth less and less and you salary will not increase to compensate.

          • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

              “If it says GBP 1 then GBP 1 is what you’ll get, regardless if GBP 1 now
            only buys you half of a toilet roll sheet whereas once you could buy 10
            complete rolls.”

            That is exactly the point I was clumsily trying to make, the wealth associated is dependant on the currency holding value.

            “Can’t see how that works. Why borrow if you are not going to make a profit?”

            Say I own a farm and borrow to invest in a milking. I hope to make profit, but chain store cartel forces down the price of milk, no profit, possible loss, so either less earnings or if that is not possible forced to sell a field. Can’t expand to pay interest therefore have to contract assets.

            “I cannot think of any instance where inflation is beneficial to the accumulation of wealth.”

            In the overall agree but it reduces the value of loans. So if the rate of interest is less than the rate of inflation borrower gains if he has purchased a tangible asset that does not depreciate with time. Biggest borrowers seem to be governments so we know whose interests they will have at heart when planning a way forward.

            I shall keep quiet on Landlords, amateur property developers, God help them. I see why many do it, no other avenue open, but how some get by, beyond me! There is a tragedy in all this. The person from an ordinary background, with average savings, has very few ways to invest his savings in ways that he can maintain control and some involvement.  

            “There will have to be a lot of expectations reset.”

            Agree, major readjustment coming unless someone brilliant comes up with a game changer.

            • Bigcollapso

              There is no game changer. It is simple math. It is the reason that so many religions ban usury and some require jubilees. etc.
              In a full fiat system, the debt grows exponentially until the point of collapse. But since the debt is not backed by anything, the debt holders are not “wealthy” in the physical world, but rather they have infinite political power from being owed an existence that is many times what is possible to create.
              In the end. it’s just a smoking crater of madness that a church or other paradigm begins the reboot.

              • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

                Question is how will they chose to collapse? Looks like slow suffocation.

                • Bigcollapso

                   I agree, it looks that way. What I don’t know is if they will change course as things play out.

            • windslice

              Mortgages only become “more affordable” if the salaries increase. This is unlikely to be the case for the next decade. 

              I also cannot see the situation returning where house prices were climbing more rapidly than the interest rate and inflation rate.

              Regarding government borrowing, this is an interesting topic. I think that it is necessary for governments to borrow in order to create an instrument such a bonds where all the cash lying around in the finance sector can be parked risk-free. But maybe they could simply issue bonds anyway and do some accounting fiddle with the money raised.

              • joebhed
                • windslice

                  404 – That Blip has sailed.

                • joebhed

                  thanks.
                  clicking the link changes the address for some reason.
                  when I revised the address back to what was in the link – it brought to proper place.
                  Sorry bout this, all.

                   http://blip.tv/quorum/bernd-senf-deeper-roots-of-world-financial-crisis-part-1-of-3-4130447

                  • http://overthepeak.com/wordpress/ Mystic

                     That has got it this time.
                    Thanks Joe~!

              • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

                 Sorry re delay up to my eyes with work. Interesting view on bonds, never really thought of it like that.

                On wage inflation I think in the next year or two you are right. Beyond that I am not so sure.  Politically difficult to maintain current course. Mystic is right about needing someone to blame, but politicians also need to be seen to be addressing the problem and that is where it will get interesting. Prudence and sack cloth is a difficult one to sell to the electorate, declining living standards, though almost inevitable, also difficult to sell. Germany strength relies on people being able to buy their products as that declines then expect change in attitude there as well. Seems likely that they will print and print, or inject money in by whatever means. They need inflation, but need to pay lip service to prudence!

                Of course someone may come up with a more novel approach to kick start the economy and unite the nation.

        • http://www.economicstability.org/ Joebhed

           Alan,
          If you have the time.
          On the interest factor in wealth-accumulation.

          http://bli­p.tv/file/­4111596It's a learning experience.If you have the time.

          • http://www.economicstability.org/ Joebhed

             http://bli­p.tv/file/­4111596Sorry

            • joebhed

               WTF is up here.

              It joins three lines separating the text???

              • http://overthepeak.com/wordpress/ Mystic

                 No, still no joy with that link Joe~!?

        • joebhed
  • http://www.alda-architects.co.uk/ Alan

    This may be of interest and touches on some previous comments about upbringing.

     http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/community/among-equals/august-2012

  • windslice

    But’cha gotta keep on producin’ them there brats,

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-21/americans-having-fewer-babies-crimping-consumer-spending.html 

    Yep, it’ll cost…

    “A middle-income family having a baby in 2011 will spend about $234,900 over 17 years for things like food, shelter, transportation and child care, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said in June.”

    But think of the poor banks, you’ve gotta keep on a borrowin’

    ““To the degree that family formation is being suppressed, we should be concerned,” said Neal Soss, chief economist at Credit Suisse in New York. “That holds back housing. It holds back all the spending associated with housing. Family formation is a very important motivator of economic growth.””

    So it’s either YOU or the BRATS and the ECONOMY.

    “Debra Mollen, 41, a psychology professor in Denton, Texas, said she and her husband don’t plan to have children as they strive to pay down their mortgage and save for retirement.”

    I choose the PLANET. Fewer brats, fewer humans and just maybe we can get out of the growth bullshit and stabilise somewhere.