|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jan 22, 2009 2:54:35 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by agito on Jan 22, 2009 3:58:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jan 22, 2009 19:35:08 GMT -6
I like Denninger's militant and well-thought-out opposition to TARP, and all the other Fed and Treasury Dept. giveaways of taxpayers' money.
And on those issues, I agree with him 100%.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jan 25, 2009 14:42:09 GMT -6
Denninger has written another excellent piece on how to solve the financial crisis. Again, it involves exposing all the bad assets, and forcing the responsible parties to take the losses. It's titled: TARP Part Deux? Do It Right Or Don't Do ItIt's a little bit confusing if not read in its entirety, as Denninger refers to others' articles in the post, to show how things should not be done. --------- Denninger's signature on the Ticker Forum says it all: " No bailouts. Period. Unsupportable debt must be defaulted. Do it, get it out in the open, and get it over with. Yes, its going to suck, but its going to suck no matter what we do. We can either have it suck hard and short, or far worse and far longer. The more we screw around with this the worse it is going to be.
" Amen.
|
|
|
Post by grozny on Apr 17, 2009 14:45:14 GMT -6
Karl Denninger is SUCH an important person, I added an entire stanza to my gold poem, just for him: Gold! Gold! Gold! Gold! The yellow metal has intrinsic value, At least that’s what we are told.
Gary North says it’s so, and he would know. He’s the investment guru of LewRockwell.com, So it cannot – must not! – be a job of snow. No!
“A 50% drop in GDP during the first half of 2009. Gloom! Doom!” cries Karl Denninger. But why, Did he ban from Market Ticker this poem of mine?
“In coin shops all political truth can be found.” So says Jeffrey Tucker. But how does he explain, Why our golden investments have all run aground?
Zounds! $850, $250, $1000 and $700 in thirty years. Gold prices are volatile, at least that much is clear, I don’t get this dizzy after a whole case of beers!
Gold bugs claim: They’ve made millions since 1983. But they’re living in plywood shacks in northern Idaho. Should we believe what they tell us, or what we see?
In Moses’ time they danced around a golden calf, Now Paulistas say, “Gold is money made by God.” Not much has changed. What a laugh!In my opinion, Denninger is basically a nutcase. See, for instance, this quotation from his archives on 23 December 2008, marked in red text to draw attention to itself, even in the blizzard of boldface and underlining that marks Denninger’s rants: “WARNING TO BANKING EXECUTIVES: If you do not return the bonuses, stock options and country club memberships bought with taxpayer bailout money, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS will be made public in a manner designed to "incite" a reaction by the public. (Special emphasis on the word "incite!) “You have until Friday, December 26, 2008 to return the money. There will be no negotiating, no obeying of court orders of protection, no way to prevent being dealt with harshly. “I don't care about your employment contracts, I don't care about your civil rights and I sure as **** don't care about the law or the courts. “You guys have ****ed this country for the last time. It's time for you to be paid back and I intend to see that you receive your payback.” The day before that he sent a threatening letter to every member of Congress, apparently unaware that they were in recess. And, on 19 November 2008, he threatened to have an economist that he disagreed with "BBQd and eaten."
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Apr 17, 2009 16:42:32 GMT -6
In my opinion, Denninger is basically a nutcase. See, for instance, this quotation from his archives on 23 December 2008, marked in red text to draw attention to itself, even in the blizzard of boldface and underlining that marks Denninger’s rants: You're entitled to your opinion, as am I. And I disagree with you 100% on both Paul and Denninger. “WARNING TO BANKING EXECUTIVES: If you do not return the bonuses, stock options and country club memberships bought with taxpayer bailout money, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS will be made public in a manner designed to "incite" a reaction by the public. “You have until Friday, December 26, 2008 to return the money. There will be no negotiating, no obeying of court orders of protection, no way to prevent being dealt with harshly. “I don't care about your employment contracts, I don't care about your civil rights and I sure as **** don't care about the law or the courts. “You guys have ****ed this country for the last time. It's time for you to be paid back and I intend to see that you receive your payback.” I read that passage earlier, and I agree with Denninger on everything except saying he doesn't care about the law or the courts. However, in this context, I interpreted it to mean that he was going to publish their names and addresses, regardless of whether he received legal threats or not. But I don't see anything wrong with publishing their names and addresses on line anyway, since the names & addresses of doctors, such as mine, are posted online by law. If doctors can be forced by law to have their names and addresses online, so can bankers. Big deal. It was a joke and everyone knew it. In closing, I just want to add: Hooray for Karl Denninger!
|
|
|
Post by grozny on Apr 18, 2009 17:09:04 GMT -6
Hooray for Karl Denninger! If Denninger wants economists such as myself dead and he has our home addresses, then why doesn't he carry out the hits himself? Or, if he is planning a "night of the long knives" event where he kills dozens of people simultaniously, then why doesn't he use some of those millions that he claims to have made in the market to hire professional shooters? But, no, instead he threatens that "OUR NAMES AND ADDRESSES will be made public in a manner designed to 'incite' a reaction by the public." So he's going to incite his feeble-minded followers to morph into amateur hitmen and come after us? I'm shaking in my boots. _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Unlike Karl Denninger (and Gary North, while we are on the subject of nutcases), I see no evidence that Ron Paul is either a nutcase or a coward. Paul is a good man, but he is not a good economist. Guided by bumper-sticker slogans, he has no hope of gaining the confidence of people who have actually studied the subject. See my "tribute" to Ron Paul, War between the Mice and the Weasels.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Apr 19, 2009 12:49:48 GMT -6
I should point out that, though I like Ron Paul, I certainly don't agree with him on everything. I think the flat tax or the "fair tax" (or whatever it's called) is ludicrous. Since it's based on sales taxes, it would directly reduce consumer demand, which is the last thing in the world we need at present. And I don't believe in abolishing the income tax, either, or even decrease the progressive nature of it. (In fact, I think we should raise taxes on the upper brackets, and increase capital gains tax to even higher rates than those on wages.)
Sales taxes of any kind reduce consumer spending power, which reduces demand for production, which reduce demand for workers—suppressing both employment and wages—the last thing in the world we need to do right now.
But I do agree with Paul that the Federal Reserve is completely out of control and should be either audited and regulated, or completely abolished (I prefer the latter.) I do agree that they've manipulated the money supply and interest rates at behest of the rich, and to the detriment of the non-rich. I fully agree with Paul that this amounts to an upward transfer of wealth.
I agree completely with Paul that the US should get its troops and its butt-insky nose out of other countries' business.
One of the biggest paradoxes with Ron Paul is his stated position of free trade, vs. his actions (votes). I do NOT agree with Paul that foreign trade should be "free", unregulated, or uncontrolled.
But on trade, Paul's actions speak much louder than his words. He's voted 100% against ALL free trade agreements. And though I agree with his reasoning that it abrogates US sovereignty, to me the bigger issue is protecting Americans from the job losses and wage suppression from wage competition with 49cent-72cent/hour foreign labor.
Unlike Paul, I'm an unapologetic advocate of high TARIFFS on manufactured imports. Needless to say, this violates the "spirit" of Paul's emphasis of freedom, which also extends to free trade.
But once again, Paul has voted against every free trade agreement, and has sponsored legislation to withdraw from the WTO. Thus, despite Paul's seemingly contradictory statements on trade, he has voted "my" way every single time.
And that's what counts—not what he says on the issues--but what he actually does.
Paul is also a strong advocate of the Constitution, especially the 4th Amendment (which was functionally repealed under Bush.)
Paul always opposes wage-suppressing illegal immigration, which is another point I agree with him on.
So overall, I like Ron Paul. His votes and actions are more consistent with my beliefs than anyone else's, even if I don't exactly agree with his underlying motivation.
|
|
|
Post by grozny on Apr 19, 2009 14:31:47 GMT -6
I should point out that, though I like Ron Paul, I certainly don't agree with him on everything. I think the flat tax or the "fair tax" (or whatever it's called) is ludicrous. Since it's based on sales taxes, it would directly reduce consumer demand, which is the last thing in the world we need at present. And I don't believe in abolishing the income tax, either, or even decrease the progressive nature of it. (In fact, I think we should raise taxes on the upper brackets, and increase capital gains tax to even higher rates than those on wages.) Sales taxes of any kind reduce consumer spending power, which reduces demand for production, which reduce demand for workers—suppressing both employment and wages—the last thing in the world we need to do right now. But I do agree with Paul that the Federal Reserve is completely out of control and should be either audited and regulated, or completely abolished (I prefer the latter.) I do agree that they've manipulated the money supply and interest rates at behest of the rich, and to the detriment of the non-rich. I fully agree with Paul that this amounts to an upward transfer of wealth. I agree completely with Paul that the US should get its troops and its butt-insky nose out of other countries' business. I agree with everything you have said here. One of the biggest paradoxes with Ron Paul is his stated position of free trade, vs. his actions (votes). I do not know enough details of Paul's voting record to comment on his stated position of free trade vs. his actions. I disagree with your support of tariffs and other protectionist measures. Protectionism sounds like a fine plan until the other country retaliates with their own measures, e.g. Mexico's retaliation to our restrictions on their trucks. A trade war is a pissing match that neither country can win. Advocating tariffs is like advocating that one lead (in a boxing match) with a right cross. A fine plan against an inert punching bag but, against a thinking opponent, it does not work so well. If he dodges it, you have exposed your ribs to a counter-punch. This was made abundantly clear during the Great Depression yet, like a zombie that keeps climbing back out of its grave, economists just can't seem to stamp protectionism deeply enough into the ground. BTW This thread is about Karl Denninger and talking about Ron Paul here implicitly associates the two men. This is not fair - they are different people. I suggest that you make your last comment the OP of a new thread about Ron Paul and move this comment of mine to the new thread.
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Apr 19, 2009 23:29:36 GMT -6
We will lose less in any trade war than any other country, because our exports are tiny compared to our imports, which means we spend our dollars on US goods, and revive our economy.
Tariffs not only protect manufacturing jobs, they protect innovation. If you invent a new widget today, the Communist Chinese will copy it and some Benedict Arnold Corporation will import it, leaving you with the costs of development, and no income.
We need to start with 100% inspection of all imports, with the inspections paid by the importers.
GB
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Apr 20, 2009 1:40:04 GMT -6
I disagree with your support of tariffs and other protectionist measures. Protectionism sounds like a fine plan until the other country retaliates with their own measures, e.g. Mexico's retaliation to our restrictions on their trucks. A trade war is a pissing match that neither country can win. Advocating tariffs is like advocating that one lead (in a boxing match) with a right cross. A fine plan against an inert punching bag but, against a thinking opponent, it does not work so well. If he dodges it, you have exposed your ribs to a counter-punch. There is no counterpunch. That's the error in this line of thinking. . None of our trading partners have a significant "counter-punch." None of them have consumer markets that compare with the American consumer market. Cutting off export demand for American products is a strawman in the 1st place. 90% of American products are sold to Americans. Far better to save the US consumer market for US-produced goods, at the expense of losing the smaller foreign export markets. Clearly trade is hurting us overall, based on a -$700 billion trade deficit. If we cut off all foreign trade today, theoretically we'd gain +$700 billion in GDP. If we cut off non-energy related trade, of about -$400 billion, our GDP would increase by that amount. In the case of Mexico, we buy far more from them than we sell to them. If they close their markets to us, and we close ours to them, we gain $70-80 billion per year. No, it was not. In fact, the exact opposite is the case. It was made "abundantly clear" in the Great Depression that US tariffs had no effect on the Depression, or on our trade deficit. The proof of this is readily available from GDP numbers from the BEA from 1929 through 1940. I've described this in detail in my post; Tariffs, the Smoot Hawley Fairy Tale" — using the actual numbers by the BEA. Wrong again. It's the illogical anti-protectionist sentiment that keeps being regurgitated by economists who should know better. But, in all fairness to economists, many economists do know that this anti-protectionist hyperbole is nonsense—such as Paul Craig Roberts, Peter Morici, Pat Choate, Michael Hudson, and Ravi Batra. There is no case against protectionism—other than that free trade serves the unpatriotic self-interests of rich American-owned multinational Corporations—who are trying to cut labor costs by replacing higher-paid American workers with lower-paid foreign workers. The case for applying Ricardo's Comparative Advantage to today's trade situation has been thoroughly debunked. (If you don't think so, I'll be happy to debunk it here myself—again.) As for moving part of this thread, you're free to re-post your own posts in another area, or even a part of it, in a different area. The section labels are meant as general guidelines. Posters can post in any category they'd like. I move some posts because they may be harder for members and guests to find, it they're more appropriate in a different area. However, since you disparaged both Ron Paul and Karl Denninger in the same post in this section, it seems appropriate to respond to both in this area. And it seems inappropriate for me to move any part of my posts to another area. The context would be lost.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Apr 21, 2009 18:46:51 GMT -6
Karl Denninger is very entertaining and mostly correct from my point of view. Yes, his rants often go over the top and are often quite vulgar, but that is part of his charm. I try to read the market ticker everyday.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on May 10, 2009 11:33:58 GMT -6
Below is a link to Denninger on BlogTalk Radio. (I will revise this link as necessary if it's not playing the right clip.) www.blogtalkradio.com/convertplaylist.aspx?PlayListUrl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2f MarketTicker%2fplay_list.xml%253Fitemcount%253D4% 26localembed%3dprofilepage&OutputType=m3u
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jul 10, 2009 11:14:22 GMT -6
Great 91/2 minute video of Denninger describing CNBC's dishonest reporting and effective market manipulation.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Feb 8, 2010 17:41:39 GMT -6
I'm liking Denninger more all the time. Though I've already read some of his posts where he sounds opposed to Globalization & Free Trade, he really somes it up nicely in the following passage: [/i]"[/ul]
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Feb 8, 2010 19:14:32 GMT -6
Denninger's high visiability helps publicize the immoral, evil that globalization has fostered on both the American workers that lost their jobs and the inhuman working conditions for those replacing American workers.
Occassionally other nationally viewed commentators reflect on this American and foreign worker tragety but not our government and not our main stream media.
|
|
|
Post by waltc on Feb 9, 2010 1:54:28 GMT -6
Given that a vast majority of economists have functioned as mouthpieces and stooges for the forces of globalization and their assault and ruination of our middle-class; the decimation manufacturing and technology sectors and the horrific exploitation of 3rd world workers; I see no reason why we shouldn't treat economists like traitors and have them hung.
These glorified court astrologers and bone tossers deserve no less. Then go after the bankers and Wall Street gangsters.
I watched this country go from a economic power house to a veritable banana republic in 30 short years. And during this time countless corporate owned economists were trotted out for public viewing and repeatedly smugly stating that "free trade" was good for America all the while we were bleeding jobs by the millions.
And its still going on.
Last year I listened to the head ass clown from the Wharton school of business on the Lou Dobbs show pontificate on why we need "free trade" and why Americans need to get used to losing jobs. Now here was a man who never worked a day in his elitist life and has the heart of a Nazi concentration camp doctor.
I wouldn't eat him but I would put the snot job to work in a Chinese sweat shop until he expired which would be a suitable punishment for such a monster.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on May 27, 2010 9:16:24 GMT -6
This is a 45 minute video from Denninger of May 24, 2010 at a Tea Party meeting in Florida. Though I don't agree with everything Denninger says, for the most part it's really good.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on May 27, 2010 13:11:01 GMT -6
I liked the Q & A s best.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on May 27, 2010 18:08:21 GMT -6
At least Denninger admitted he is bad at predicting. For example, he admits that he predicted long ago that this government which is running 10% of GDP on borrowed money should have failed within 12 months of doing this; now, Denninger does not know how long this can go on but he admits that he can not predict when it will end.
But, that did not stop him from being entertaining and a great issue spotter.
BTW in this 45 minute video he NOW predicts S&P 300, DJIA 3000.
|
|