Re: Leading Publication [Freezing Point] Shut Down In China

ltlee1 wrote:
> Enkil wrote:
>> ltlee1 wrote:
>>> Enkil wrote:
>>>> ltlee1 wrote:
>>>>> Enkil wrote:
>>>>>> ltlee1 wrote:
>>>>>>> Yeah, yeah, yeah.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The American government decided not to published M3 beginning
>>>>>>> this March.. It must also reflect a crackdown.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why? Has M3 been controversial and causing problems for the
>>>>>> government?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No information on M3, no
>>>>>>> more complaints on irresponsible government printing tons and
>>>>>>> tons of money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> M3 doesn't actually provide that info, but don't let that stop
>>>>>> you. Rant away.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/gillespie/2005/1114.html
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>> Bye Bye, M3, but Why?
>>>>> by Doug Gillespie, Executive Editor
>>>>> Gillespie Research
>>>>> November 14, 2005
>>>>>
>>>>> Summary
>>>>>
>>>>> Last Thursday afternoon, in what legitimately can be described as
>>>>> cryptic fashion, the Federal Reserve announced that commencing in
>>>>> March, it would stop releasing monetary aggregate "M3." Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many of us believe that the various money measures are very
>>>>> important analytical tools. In this regard, aggregate "M3" is
>>>>> right up there among the more important. Apparently, though, the
>>>>> Federal Reserve does not agree, although it does not tell us why.
>>>>>
>>>>> (As of the end of October, M3 exceeded $10 trillion in size. The
>>>>> nature of its components make it the best place to turn to try to
>>>>> assess possible "intervention" [euphemism for "manipulation"] in
>>>>> the financial markets.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Last Thursday afternoon, the Fed made what I consider a bizarre
>>>>> announcement that beginning in March, it will stop releasing M3,
>>>>> as well as the more important components that comprise this
>>>>> critical measure. "Bizarre"? Yes, I think so, but surely no less
>>>>> than "strange." The announcement came late in the afternoon of a
>>>>> day in which there was an early closing in the bond market, and
>>>>> on a day preceding a bond-market and banking holiday.
>>>>>
>>>>> At minimum, that qualifies as "strange." But so is doing away with
>>>>> M3 -- unless you are planning ahead in trying to hide something.
>>>>> Am I suggesting there might be something of a nefarious nature
>>>>> going on here? I certainly am!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So when you equated the two issues you were in fact acknowledging
>>>> that there was something nefarious about the shutting down of
>>>> Freezing Point. All right then.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> (Perhaps this is a precursor to Chairman Bernanke's first
>>>>> helicopter money-drop operation?)
>>>>>
>>>>> As stated earlier, the announcement, such as it was, contained no
>>>>> explanation of why the Fed is doing this. An excerpt follows.
>>>>>
>>>>> This development has a very bad odor do it, so you can be sure we
>>>>> will be revisiting it soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Part of Federal Reserve Announcement of 11/10/05:
>>>>>
>>>>> "On March 23, 2006, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
>>>>> System will cease publication of the M3 monetary aggregate. The
>>>>> Board will also cease publishing the following components: large
>>>>> time deposits, repurchase agreements (RPs), and Eurodollars. ..."
>>>>>
>>>>> The "entire" announcement can be accessed at "Discontinuance of
>>>>> M3." --------------------------
>>>>
>>>> So you couldn't find anything to support your contention that, "No
>>>> information on M3, no
>>>> more complaints on irresponsible government printing tons and tons
>>>> of money."? Just as I said.
>>>
>>> M3 measures the amount of money supply. A ballooning M3 of course
>>> means the the government are "printing more money.". Not providing
>>> M3 of course means less ammunition to accuse the government of
>>> irresponsible monetary policy. It is a matter of logic.
>>
>> Then you should have no problem producing a authoritative quote
>> stating that government monetary policy will no longer be able to be
>> monitored due to the lack of M3 data.
>
> I did not suggest that at all.

Why must I always remind you of the things you yourself say?

"No information on M3, no more complaints on irresponsible government
printing tons and tons of
money."

and

"A ballooning M3 of course means the the government are "printing more
money.". Not providing
M3 of course means less ammunition to accuse the government of irresponsible
monetary policy"

> M3 reflects a facet of American
> economical situation.. Similarly, Freezing Point reflects a facet of
> China's situation. I also see no reason to assume that shutting down
> Freezing point will cause something to become irreplaceable.

It seems a publication such as Freezing Point being published in China Youth
Daily isn't replaceable. That is unless the government reverses its
decision.

> No authoritative quote to that effect.
>
>>>> Now would you like to actually try to refute what the Washington
>>>> Post article states by actually analyzing and writing about the
>>>> shutting down of Freezing Point or would you rather ignore the
>>>> original post and continue to discuss the irrelevant
>>>> discontinuation of publishing M3 data?
>>>
>>> I don't see anything about Washingtonpost on your current post. I
>>> have no idea what you want to discuss.
>>
>> The very first post itself. Isn't that obvious? You entered this
>> thread without addressing the original post or its topic. Either do
>> that or start a new thread.
>
> I entered the thread comparing the shutting down of Freezing Point and
> the shutting down of information on M3. But it seems to me that you
> understand my post.

I understand that the two things have no relationship at all. I hope you
come to understand that.

>>> In addition, although you have answered my post, but you failed to
>>> address the question I have raised.
>>
>> What question had you raised and does it have anything to do with the
>> original post by Demorising?
>
> Alright, I will rewrite the issue as a question:
> Is it not a fact of life that governments, including America and
> China, restricte or selectively release information over state meida
> all the time?

Why don't you simply make a statement? One that actually pertains to the
specifics of the shutting down of Freezing Point.

>>> It is a fact of life governments
>>> restricted or selectively release information state media all the
>>> time. It is not new nor unique to China.
>>
>> Do you have any comment on the notion that the CCP suspension of
>> Freezing Point was a "crackdown on freedom of expression" or not?
>
> Is Freezing point not a government publication? Why is the
> government's decision to shut down government publication "a
> crackdown on freedom of expression?"

Are you suggesting there was nothing expressed in the publication? That
those that created it were not given any freedom in its publication? What
do you know about the magazine to support that position?

> If M3 informationis not
> irreplaceable, why Freezingn Point information is irreplaceable?

I never said it wasn't irreplaceable. Why would you say that? I simply
said that government spending can be fully monitored without M3. Now as it
pertains to monitoring large-denomination time deposits (in amounts of
$100,000 or more), balances in institutional money funds, RP liabilities
(overnight and term) issued by all depository institutions, and Eurodollars
(overnight and term) held by U.S. residents at foreign branches of U.S.
banks worldwide, then that information isn't replaceable.

If
> Freeze Point information is complied by humans, isn't it also true
> that M3 and other information are also compiled by humans?

Do humans outside of the government have the means to compile M3 data
without the resources of the US government? I'd be skeptical of that. If
they did then your earlier "concerns" are quite unfounded. Now do humans in
China have the ability to publish the same things that were published in
Freezing Point without the nominal cover of being part of the state-run
media? Well we know already they cannot.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Great Divide
    ... government thought that patents would stimulate invention. ... How could they make money from ... >>Patent Office. ... > Stimulating publication of research. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: The Great Divide
    ... It's a job because they are being paid to obtain patents, ... And DuPont's money would be spent more productively than in rent ... Stimulating publication of research. ... government deposit insurance, the taxpayers are compelled to, against ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Leading Publication [Freezing Point] Shut Down In China
    ... >> M3 of course means less ammunition to accuse the government of ... > not suggest government monetary policy will no longer be able to be ... >>> Freezing point will cause something to become irreplaceable. ... A government publication can be free to publish whatever it pleases. ...
    (soc.culture.china)
  • Re: Leading Publication [Freezing Point] Shut Down In China
    ... >> Enkil wrote: ... >>> Freezing Point. ... >>> more complaints on irresponsible government printing tons and tons of ... I also see no reason to assume that shutting down ...
    (soc.culture.china)
  • Re: Leading Publication [Freezing Point] Shut Down In China
    ... >>> more complaints on irresponsible government printing tons and tons of ... >>> down of Freezing Point or would you rather ignore the original post ... governments selectively releasing information were equivalent. ... government release of information but about the CCP silencing voices ...
    (soc.culture.china)