Re: New Airport is a HORROR !(sandy was right !) # Part 3 of 3

Part 3 of 3


Even the more conservative of Clinton's economic adviser are interested:

For most of the 1990s, the Clinton administration pursued a relatively
conservative set of economic policies that focused on efforts to
improve overall growth, such as free trade and balanced budgets. Most
economists believe Clinton's economic policies did, in fact,
strengthen the economy as a whole. But it's also becoming apparent
that the poor and middle class didn't benefit from the subsequent
period of growth as much as the administration had hoped -- and that
both groups remain surprisingly vulnerable to economic dislocation
today.

Of course, even back in the early '90s, not every member of the
Clinton administration was so sanguine about the policies it was
pursuing at the time. Among those dissenting was then-Secretary of
Labor Robert Reich, who proposed that "if we blended our flexible
labor markets with [Europe's] investments in human capital and put the
safety net somewhere in between ours and theirs, you would have the
best system in the world." Reich's argument famously lost out to those
of Clinton's more conservative advisers -- among them former National
Economic Council Chairman Laura Tyson and former Treasury Secretary
Robert Rubin.

And so it was a little ironic that, a few weeks ago, it was Tyson and
Rubin, along with some other former Clinton advisers, who found
themselves discussing Denmark at a panel on economic policy
co-sponsored by The New Republic and the Brookings Institution. Tyson,
who just completed five years as dean of the London Business School,
first raised the possibility that Denmark might be a model for the
United States, noting that "there is nothing in the growth rates to
suggest that Denmark is paying a penalty for having a high level [of
taxes and government spending]. ... This is not to mention in addition
the fact that health care coverage in Denmark is universal, and it is
not to mention the fact that, actually, Denmark has one of the lowest
poverty rates in Europe and has the lowest poverty rates for children
in all of the oecd countries."


And the US is *STILL* the international economic powerhouse.
Still you can not produce any evidence to support this opinion of yours
and cannot disprove any of those that I produced to demonstrate the opposite.
Check this out:
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article828724.ece

Thursday, December 28, 2006
Curtains for the greenback?

The mighty greenback is slowly but surely losing its pre-eminence as the
world's reserve currency. Consider the evidence:

1. The US dollar has fallen by more than 10 per cent against the euro and
14 per cent against the pound this year.

2. Asian central banks have been steadily diversifying their holdings away
from USD-denominated assets into the euro, yen and pound.

3. Key petrodollar economies such as Iran, the UAE, Indonesia and
Venezuela have said they are looking to shift their reserves into euros
or to price oil sales in the currency.

4. Today's Financial Times reports that Euro notes have overtaken the
dollar<href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/18338034-95ec-11db-9976-0000779e2340.html";>:

The US dollar bill’s standing as the world’s favorite form of cash is
being usurped by the five-year-old euro. The value of euro notes in
circulation is this month likely to exceed the value of circulating dollar
notes, according to calculations by the Financial Times. Converted at
Wednesday’s exchange rates, the euro took the lead in October.

The figures highlight the remarkable growth in euro notes since their
launch on January 1 2002, three years after the start of Europe’s monetary
union, which in January welcomes its 13th member – Slovenia, the former
Yugoslav republic.

“After the launch, we expected growth to stabilize – but it has
continued over five years,” Antti Heinonen, head of the European Central
Bank’s bank notes directorate, told the Financial Times.

Although the ECB does not deliberately promote the international use
of the euro, it has become popular in official foreign exchange reserves –
even if it is far from challenging the dollar’s lead as the most popular
reserve currency.

Individually, these might be dismissed. Together, they point to a gradual
erosion of the greenback's long standing dominance of global currency
markets and central bank reserves.
....

UPDATE: Felix Salmon of Economonitor offers five main reasons why there
are more euros in circulation than
greenbacks<href="http://www.rgemonitor.com/blog/economonitor/170437";>.
Meanwhile Dean Baker
<href="http://www.prospect.org/deanbaker/2006/12/the_dollar_is_2.html";>
has this to say:

First, the dollar is not essential to world finance. People are happy
to hold euros and other currencies, no one needs to hold dollars. Second,
the euro passing the dollar is not some sort of cataclysmic event.

As long as people still have faith in the basic soundness of the
dollar, they will be happy to hold it, even if it slides to number 2 by
some measures. Of course, if investors become convinced that the currency
is on a downward path, then it could lead to a serious run.

In short, the world does not need the dollar, but it is also not
anxious to throw it in the toilet, or at least not yet.


The domestic economy is flat.
Yes, almost as flat as the US's (that is going backwards, you know: @).

Wrong yet again.
Right, as the documents I produced demonstrate.

US GDP is still growing.
But you cannot prove it in any way as well as you cannot produce any
evidence that could disprove the documented shrinking of the US economy.

Funny that it is a bit on the low side this year,
Read again:

May 31, 2007 9:24
The second version of the first quarter GDP numbers were released this
morning
<href="http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm";>,
and they mark the economy down to a 0.6% annual growth rate from the
1.3% rate estimated back on April 27.

0.6% annual growth rate! With federal *and* state deficit at an all time
high. And with a never precedented large ownership of domestic production
capabilities (those that were not already outsourced abroad) as well as
infrastructure owned by foreign investors, eager to convert the dollars
they bought as US federal bonds into hard assets before the dollar loses
yet more value against the Euro and the Yen and British Pound. You call
that an "economic powerhouse"? Absurd. The US federal deficit is such,
it's becoming impossible to pay the interests without a further issue of
bonds that increment the total debt. Plus, the imports jumped high and
exports lagged behind
<href="http://www.battery.com/content/news/charger/November2005/tipping.html";>:
(November 2005) The US Trade Deficit hit a record $66.1 billion
<href="http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000006&sid=agdF6JxXUwDI&refer=home";>
in September as imports surged and exports slumped 2.1%, the largest drop
since September 2001. The trade deficit hit a record 6.3% of GDP
<href="http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata/digests/20050916-fri.html#anchor2";>
in the second quarter,

Please read also this:
http://www.chicagofed.org/publications/fedletter/cfljune2005_215.pdf
Figure 1 plots the evolution of the U.S.
current account over the past 27 years.
According to the National Income and
Product Accounts (NIPA), the U.S. has
run a current account deficit for 24 of
the past 27 years--the exceptions being
1980, 1981, and 1991. Figure 1 reveals
that the NIPA ratio of the current ac-
count to gross domestic product is essen-
tially driven by fluctuations in net exports,
since net foreign income and unilateral
transfers have been fairly constant per-
centages of GDP.
....
Conclusion
Regardless of the method used to calcu-
late it, the size of the net exports deficit
that would allow the U.S. to maintain its
current level of international indebted-
ness as a percentage of GDP is well below
that of the current net export deficit. My
estimates suggest that the U.S. net export
deficit must fall by 3% to 3.5% of GDP to
maintain the current net foreign asset
to GDP ratio. However, I also note that
if the U.S. continues to enjoy relatively
high rates of return on its foreign assets,
the resulting net foreign income surplus
would allow it to run relatively large net
export deficits without much change
in the net foreign asset to GDP ratio.


So, the foreign debt would already be beyond repayability, if it was not
for returns on foreign assets. Trouble is, the export deficit is already
at 6.7%, 3 points too high, and increasing, and domestic assets are
increasingly in foreign hands. I do not have handy data about US foreign
assets variations these past few years, but I do not know of major US
acquisitions of valuable foreign assets lately, and would be surprised if
they could afford any. They failed in Afghanistan (the pipeline is not
there yet and meanwhile Kazakhstan stuck a deal with Russia), Iraq we all
know how it is going, they did some successful (financially) mess
(humanitarian and environmental) in Africa (Nigeria), but seems to me far
too little.

Europe is the highest it's been in decades, and the US growth rate
is *STILL* slightly ahead of Europe.
Poor ol' Tchihuahua: you forgot to put the deficit into account. Wealth is
not just what you cashed in. It's what you earned less running expenses,
less debt interest rates, less debt amortization quotas (that are
negative, being the US debt still on the increase), ...
Less what you are capable of producing in the future that you could sell
in order to extinguish you debt. And the US have increasingly less to sell
and also an increasingly dimming production capability. So, poor ol'
Tchihuahua, please tell us: where will the US get the money they need to
pay the interest rates it will owe to it's debt, and where will they get
the money to extinguish the debt itself, if that money will not be able to
come from exports of hard goods the international market will need and
would foreign assets stop producing such a high surplus like they are now
(remember there's an increasing number of foreign nations bored of seeing
much of their wealth going to the US paying their gargantuan debt)?
Europe and Japan have about the same debt as the US, plus can count on a
strong industry capable of producing hard goods that have being selling
strong for decades.
Yet once more, only opinions, the words of poor estranged Tchihuahua
spoken against facts.

The worst that the US gets is still as good or better than the best
Europe can muster.
Europe and Japan muster a mostly domestic productive economy that allows
them to produce what the internal market needs PLUS export excess
production PLUS all that it takes to provide their people with a welfare
most US people can only dream of, who are presently just getting screwed.

In case you might want more updated news

??? The article you just posted (snipped for space) proves *my* point.
The US economy is still growing. Even though it is growing a tad less
this year than last, it's still growing.
It's growing so little it will hardly be able to pay the interest rates on
it's debt this year. And most predictions are the worse is yet to come.

:http://time-blog.com/curious_capitalist/2007/05/so_is_this_what_a_rec...
May 31, 2007 9:24
So is this what a recession feels like nowadays?
Posted by Justin Fox

The second version of the first quarter GDP numbers were released this
morning
<href="http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm";>,
and they mark the economy down to a 0.6% annual growth rate from the
1.3% rate estimated back on April 27. If that gets knocked down a little
more when the "final" version comes out June 28, then ratcheted down
even more in the benchmark revision a year or two from now, we may learn
that the U.S. economy spent the first quarter of 2007 going backwards.

555555555555555 Gee, *if* they adjust downwards,
They already did get adjusted downwards, from 1.3% on April 27th to 0.6% on
May 30th. That is, in less than a month it dropped 46%. And it dropped
from a meager 1.3% annual growth rate, way below EU's 3.1-3.2% 2007 yearly
estimated GDP (up 0.6% from the past year, so it's 0.775-0.8% quarter
estimate)
<href="http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PGP_PRD_CAT_PREREL/
PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2007/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2007_MONTH_05/2-15052007-EN-AP1.PDF">)
and Japan's 0.9% quarter
<href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3985364c-bc98-11db-9cbc-0000779e2340.html";>.
A stunningly strong economy, undeniably!

then *if* they adjust
downwards again, then *if* they adjust downwards again, then *if* they
adjust downwards again, then *if* they adjust downwards again, then
*if* they adjust downwards again, then *if* they adjust downwards
again, then *if* they adjust downwards again, then *if* they adjust
downwards again, then *if* they adjust downwards again, then *if* they
adjust downwards again, then *if* they adjust downwards again, then
*if* they adjust downwards again, .........
The fact is, there is no evidence it could go up, and there's evidence the
US economy is not even going to manage staying flat. It is already in free
fall.

Look at what there is today:
*) there is an even greater, unprecedented federal *and* local deficit;

The annual budget deficit in the US is lower than the same in Europe.
False, as usual.
I did some research on this matter too, and I found it's hard to come to
firm conclusions due to the fact the EU's deficit is the sum of the
individual states, it's not a centrally managed one. However, what I found
is that:
- the US's budget deficit of between $150 billion and $200 billion this
year(<href="http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Releases/
US+FY07+Budget+Deficit+Likely+Between+$150B+And+$200B+-+CBO/2435659.html">),
«it now accounts for about 7 percent of GDP, more than double the previous
modern record of 3.4 percent in the middle 1980s (as a result of which the
dollar dropped by 50 percent against the other major currencies over the
three-year period 1985–87)»
<href="http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/paper.cfm?ResearchID=705";>

What about Europe?
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2481842,00.html
«The European Commission said the German budget deficit fell from 3.2
percent of GDP in 2005 to 1.7 percent in 2006, the first time Berlin had
managed to bring its budget deficit below the three-percent threshold --
mandated by EU rules -- since 2002.
....
According to the European Commission, the German budget deficit will fall
to 0.6 percent of GDP in 2007, reaching 0.3 percent of GDP in 2008.»

Germany was one of the EU countries with the highest deficit/GDP ratio, so
much that it risked a disciplinary procedures from the European
Commission. But Hey!, it's now below 1%, compared to the US's 7%!

In fact, if the US wanted to join the Euro it would meet the deficit
requirements whereas Germany and France would not.
Germany and France already do. In fact, they both are in the Euro zone and
do not risk any disciplinary procedures from the European Commission,
which would be carried upon on any EU member country with a deficit
exceeding 3% of it's GDP. So, truth is that, with a 7% deficit to GDP
ratio, the USA would have no chance of being admitted into Eurozone.

*) technological innovation and production is increasingly less "made in
the US", with patents on innovative *hard* (rather than soft,
IP-related), technology issued outside the US at an all time;

Yes, we've moved on to the next level.
You (are you the US?) moved to selling vaporware because that's the only
thing you can sell now, having already outsourced or sold your hard
industry to foreigners.

Hunting and Gathering became
Agriculture became Manufacturing becomes Intellectual. It's called
"progress".
It's called despair. Having no hard goods to sell to the international
market, they try to peddle "ideas". And, as such a market is absurd in
many ways and/or works contrary to the interests of many markets (being
strongly lopsided in favor of the strongest economies, favoring monopolies
and having a bad effect on R&D and technological innovation), they have
only one way to make it work: coercing nations into it with the force of
bilateral Trade Agreements or WTO rules. Yes, those same agreements that
choked so many economies around the world most countries are presently
running away from like it was a plague.

Europe is the
largest internal market in the world; 61 of the world's largest 140
companies are based there. It dominates in banking and insurance,
aerospace with Airbus,
"Airbus"??? They are on the verge of bankruptcy!
Mind you, they were capable of delivering on the most ambitious modern
air transport project, the fully two-tiered and largest
passenger/freight/ mixed airplane ever built.

When did they do that? They said they were going to but then delay,
delay, delay. To date they have not delivered *ONE* A380 to a
customer. *NOT ONE*.
True, yet the 9 A380 built so far flew 2,900 hours during 1,995 test
flights, with the first delivery less than two months away. Where is
Boeing with it's 747-8? Scheduled start of service dates are 2009 for the
freighter 747-8, and 2010 for the passenger version. Yet none built, zero
hours flown on tests.

Boeing had to scrap it's
plans to keep up with the competition years ago.

No, they went a different direction.
The had to to stay in business.

Instead of "larger" they went to "more efficient". And it worked.
So much so that they are still spending on the design of their own
superjumbo, the

Airbus in 2002 hold 60%
of world orders for civil airliners seating over 100 passengers.

It's not 2002.
It is:
<href="http://www.icmr.icfai.org/casestudies/catalogue/Business%20Strategy1/BSTR046.htm";>
57% market share in 2002. However, I acknowledge Boeing was capable or
reversing the table. Even though Airbus's deliveries are at an all-time
high, Boeing did better and now Boeing holds this large a percentage of
the world airliner market.

And Airbus lost a huge chunk of those orders because they couldn't deliver.
They did.

http://www.secondharvest.org/export/sites/harvest/learn_about_hunger/...

Why do you keep quoting tripe from places like the ILO and Second
Harvest? How about "World Worker's Daily"?
What does the "World Worker's Daily" have to do with the sites I quoted?

Let's get right down to the
level of Communism/Socialism you're trying to preach.
I see. You're so despaired you cannot prevail in this debate, you
can see no other way to get your message through than discredit your
opponent making up allegations and false accusations.

http://www.ilo.org/global/About_the_ILO/lang--en/index.htm
The International Labour Organization (ILO) is the tripartite UN agency
which brings together governments, employers and workers of its member
states in common action to promote decent work throughout the world.

What does this have to do with Socialism or Communism?

http://www.secondharvest.org/how_we_work/food_banking.html
America's Second Harvest — The Nation’s Food Bank Network is the largest
charitable hunger-relief organization in the country addressing the
problem of domestic hunger by distributing more than 2 billion pounds of
donated food and grocery product annually to more than 25 million hungry
people in the United States, including 9 million children and nearly 3
million seniors.

What do charitable organizations have to do with Socialism or Communism?

These guys theories have been proven ridiculously wrong. The Soviet
Union collapsed. China moved to more Capitalism and suddenly they are
booming. It's been in the news.
This has nothing to do with anything I reported and any of the sources I
quoted. Sorry, Tchihuahua, your yelping is not impressing anyone.

then you can claim pretty much whatever you'd like.
All right, be content with more money and less happiness.
Actually I'm content with all more money I need and with as much
happiness I can deal with.

It's not an "either/or".
I didn't write it is. Read again: I wrote: «more money and less
happiness». You have to falsify evidence or making up false allegations in
order to prove yourself right. How pitiful.

Having both is quite possible.
I clearly stated it. I know many happy people who do have money. I quoted
a study about the Danes who happen to have a lot of both.

The key is "work". Something you've already clearly labelled as
distasteful to some.
Yes, it is distasteful to the modern era slaves, that is those who have to
work 12-hr per day, 29 days per month. You do not think the same, of
course, since these people's labor is the one that allows you all the
wealth you enjoy and all the spare time you have.

We stupid Europeans will make it do with more happiness and less money.

Your adjective, not mine. ;-)
I did expect lame-brainers not to be able to grasp what irony is.

Unfortunately you are making do with less money and a whole lot less
happiness.
I'm sorry to point you out you know nothing of myself and so inevitably
fail miserably whenever you try to guess anything of who I am, what I do
and have. Try a soothsayer's crystal ball, you'll have better chances.

Before I close. I notice that when you counter what other people write
that does not conform with your ideas how the world is and is evolving,
you always advance just your opinions, never supported by any reference,
study, data, or verifiable source of information.

I notice that your references are either so far out of date (literally
or figuratively as in the ILO and Second Harvest)
More B.S. you have to make up to prove you are right: the ILO's data are
less than two years old, and the secondharvests' are even more recent,
being based on their actual operations and latest US Census Bureau data.

or you completely
misunderstood them (as shown by the articles you posted to prove
Europe was not collapsing which in fact said the opposite).
Sorry, everything I quoted clearly demonstrates that most of European
countries enjoy both a better economy and a better welfare and a better
lifestyle, in spite of less cash generally (but not always) ending up into
their pockets.
I'll spare you with other depressing statistics like the US being ranked
#97 in the list of the more peaceful countries on Earth (just above Iran),
with North European countries and New Zealand firmly on the top, and about
the US being one the countries with the highest violent crime rates and
inmates to total population percentage.

If you're looking for a long term study that you can compare notes on
you won't find it on Usenet.
I based nothing on data available on Usenet. I never searched Usenet for
my references. Again, falsities and inventions you have to make up in a
last-ditch attempt to discredit me. It's like spitting against the wind,
amigo Tchihuahua. You've being making a sorry show of yourself.

Do I post my opinions? Yes. What did you think? That I would be posting
*your* opinions?
Did I ever say you do or should? I accused you or posting *undocumented*,
*unproven*, *unverifiable* and *unsupported* opinions like they were
facts. They are not, they are easily demonstrated false, inventions of
your mind, as I've being doing over and over again. The only thing you
could do is belching out yet more unsubstantiated opinions, false
accusations and allegations that miserably fail any test against reality.
You're a loser, Tchihuahua.

If you really need someone to document that the Socialist view of life
you support
I never supported anything of the like. Just your ridiculous, empty
allegations,

has been proven wrong
You didn't prove anything, neither wrong or right. You only spewed out
your unsubstantiated opinions that documented facts and reality disprove.

then you are so far out of touch with reality that you wouldn't believe
anything supplied by anyone.
With is what in psychotherapy they call "projection".

Bye bye, amigo Tchihuahua.
Find some peace.





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Barack Obama accused of making Depression mistakes
    ... President Clinton and Vice President Gore launched their ... budget deficit, keeping interest rates low, and spurring private- ... President Clinton?s Record on the Economy: ... budget deficit grew to $290 billion in 1992, the largest ever, and was ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: OT - Barack Obama accused of making Depression mistakes
    ... President Clinton and Vice President Gore launched their ... budget deficit, keeping interest rates low, and spurring private- ... strongest economy ever. ... budget deficit grew to $290 billion in 1992, the largest ever, and was ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Questions on the Economists article: "The not-so-incredible shrinking deficit"
    ... > A new forecast from the Congressional Budget Office shows America's ... > budget deficit once again coming in lower than expected. ... > or 3.6% of GDP, when he stood again in 2004. ... > America's economy ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Soul Searching....
    ... The Federal Budget Deficit: Bush Benchmark Achieved, ... Economy, MSM Biz/Other Bias, MSM Biz/Other Ignorance, ... Reagan-Bush 41 and Kennedy Johnson eras, when more aggressive tax cuts ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: This is absolutely GREAT!!!
    ... Federal deficit hits record $455 billion ... WASHINGTON -- Compounding terrible economic news, budget officials ... In Congress, the record deficit is likely to intensify debate over ... economy and, in turn, reduce the deficit. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
Loading