Signs that a collapse is under way.

[dagnabit]

So who's gonna be the chosen one in the cast of characters running against the incumbent? If you lean toward the most money/best organized, your above theory melts.

romney/bachman ticket looses to the big O

 

[SpasticGramps]

I guess the Greek serfs are a little pissed at the IMF and ECB fascist whores. The set the Finance Ministry on fire.

It was put out shortly after. Hmmm, apparently they don't care for the banker status quo much. Silly serfs. I'm guessing next year when the third bailout is needed and their economy is even in worse shape they will be even more thrilled. If they don't fall apart before that.

Look at all happy faces. Austerity for everyone.

 

[dagnabit]

ohhhh can we be more like Europe pleeeeeeease?

i think that has been the rallying cry of alot of sheep in the past few decades.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Quotes about the Greek's exercise in futility today. MarketWatch quotes all.

“The fact that the Greek parliament has passed the government’s medium-term fiscal plan clearly reduces the chances of a near-term disaster,” said Ben May, economist at Capital Economics in London. “Greece should now receive its next bailout tranche in early July, covering its financing needs until at least mid August and averting an imminent default.”

Phew. Glad we avoided a near-term disaster in favor of long term complete destruction. Thank GOD!

Still, bond investors see it as nearly inevitable that Greece, and maybe other debt-laden peripheral countries, will eventually detach from the euro-zone after a very high cost to Europe, he said.

In other words it's just a matter of time before the EU dissolves. No shit Sherlock.

“Its not a question of if, but of when Greece will default,” Brady said. “At some point rather soon, there is going to be a move by European politicians and policy makers to save core Europe at the expensive of peripheral Europe. The cots of saving Greece and Portugal will be Pyrrhic in nature.”

In Athens,Greek lawmakers passed a package of additional austerity measures and asset sales in a bid to avert a potentially devastating default.

Phew, again. Thank god the bankers don't have to take haircuts today. Thank god their status quo has been preserved for a few more precious months to squeeze what little blood is left in the turnip that is Greece. Thank god for the American slaves who are footing a big piece of this bill that will do nothing, but prolong Greece's misery.

Thank god for Keynesian can kicking. What would the banking elite do without it? Shit. They might have to realize their losses!! What a tragedy that would be. Banking elite taking losses?! Nonsense. Losses are for the proletariat.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Wasn't Mubarak's son responsible for investing his own country to smithereens? Monetary systems are only as good as their regulatory structure. For the last 30 years, we've been tearing it down for fast gain for the few and big trouble for everybody else.

It's another example of not playing the game but blowing it up instead. Take what's mine and then I'll blame the system for fucking everything up. It's helps keep some folks minds off the fact I'm rigging the system itself to pay me while I'm ripping them and others.

 

[joeuser]

My new signature...hope you like it...and it's a primary contributor to the mess we're in. Not a sign of collapse...an instigator to it.

Fucking SCOTUS...selling the people down the river. The government is corrupt to the bone!

 

[bentom187]

all they had to do was burn the place problem solved. i think we should slowly surround the FED with kindiling wood theyll never notice. then we have ourself a barn fire and a smoke out.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Wasn't Mubarak's son responsible for investing his own country to smithereens?

Yes. The FED has done the same to us. Create bubbles and blow them up. Let the banks make big bucks on the way up and let the proles realize the losses on the way down. They fucked everyone in Great Depression #1. This is round #2.

Our monetary system has been the shits for 100 years. This is just the last hoora. The dollar has just about lost all of it's value since the FED has taken over issuance of currency in 1913. When it reaches 0 or negative return in the next ~10 years the party will be over.

 

[Hydrosun]

there will be no economic collapse; only a fluctuation of economic strength, that is, stronger economies will surface out of the weakened ones, some countries will have rough times, others better, some people within x or y country will loose and others will win... it comes and goes...

life goes on.

go smoke now

peace

Tell that to the Argentines of 2001, it sure felt like a collapse to them.

 

[Frozenguy]

So we are all in agreement that the US is not a democracy.

It is a Constitutional Republic. Leaders elected by the people make laws within the bounds of our written constitution.


Pledge of allegiance-- "... and to the Republic for which it stands, ..."

Democracy sucks balls yet it's all you'll hear in school and on the media. Democracy democracy democracy. Spread democracy blah blah blah. It's complete bs.

"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on whats for dinner." (not mine, I forget who to give credit to).

 

[Cojito]

Tell that to the Argentines of 2001, it sure felt like a collapse to them.

economies fluctuate. you guys can chicken-little-it all ya want, but Argentina's doing great. and they have been since '03.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Yes. The FED has done the same to us. Create bubbles and blow them up. Let the banks make big bucks on the way up and let the proles realize the losses on the way down. They fucked everyone in Great Depression #1. This is round #2.

I agree with this^. But this isn't synonymous with the bank industry alone. Oil prices spike and then settle above the latest sustained price. Hard to say all this happened with Cheney's energy meetings as they were largely private. But after this period, big oil margins methodically went 4x the norm.

Our monetary system has been the shits for 100 years. This is just the last hoora. The dollar has just about lost all of it's value since the FED has taken over issuance of currency in 1913. When it reaches 0 or negative return in the next ~10 years the party will be over.

Inflation is a fact of life with fractional reserve. Responsible regulations kept the party from burning for more than 6 decades. We'll always have thieves but now their legal and can go after our party. This has nothing to do with the type of monetary system we utilize. Closer to the point is capitalism/money/power has destroyed the system that works.

IMO, blaming fractional reserve for the wealthys' destruction of (banking reforms) is the argument that rich bankers are making.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

So we are all in agreement that the US is not a democracy.

Nope. Your definition fits your parameters.

It is a Constitutional Republic. Leaders elected by the people make laws within the bounds of our written constitution.

You conveniently miss the point that lawmakers are freely elected by majorities. Not to mention that laws constitute the majority of lawmakers' votes.

What qualifies as democracy in your eyes, every voter determining the outcome of every law? There would be no need for representatives and the idea of efficient representation flies out the window.

If you weren't pursuing such disparate political ideals, you'd see how the majority (democratic) process works.

Democracy sucks balls yet it's all you'll hear in school and on the media. Democracy democracy democracy. Spread democracy blah blah blah. It's complete bs.

"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on whats for dinner." (not mine, I forget who to give credit to).

What do you want, a king?

 

[dagnabit]

ok DB you are right we are ALL wrong

we live in a democracy and republic only means without a king...

dictionaries be damned!!!

DB has ruled the constitutional republic has been disbanded! we are a democracy!!!!

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

ok DB you are right we are ALL wrong

we live in a democracy and republic only means without a king...

dictionaries be damned!!!

DB has ruled the constitutional republic has been disbanded! we are a democracy!!!!

Sure thing dag, even your definition examples royalty vs the peoples republic of France.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

IMO, Bernanke isn't the one stop shop for our global economic ills. In fact, globalization itself is said to be rife with risks we never anticipated.

Stop globalization?!? Not likely. But we can regulate the fraud that heightens global-scale risks.

OECD Reviews of Risk Management
Policies
Future Global Shocks
IMPROVING RISK GOVERNANCE
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf

this is (just) the forward... complicated stuff

The International Futures Programme’s project on “Future Global Shocks” originated in 2009 with a series of consultations among partners focusing on follow-up work to the decade-long research into risk management.

The awareness of risk management in government and the private sector has risen dramatically in recent years. Large-scale disasters have been recognised as challenges to public policy, usually at the national or regional level. The concept of “global shocks” takes account of a different pattern of risk: cascading risks that become active threats as they spread across global systems, whether these arise in health, climate, social or financial systems. Little work has been done on risks present in large-scale system interdependencies and the propagation of risks across global systems. Among the more important findings of this work for public policy is recognition that surveillance has now emerged as a key component in risk
assessment and management. New knowledge management tools, modelling and data arrays provide unprecedented opportunities for anticipating some important global threats, and are increasingly sought by public policy managers worldwide. Secondly, there is a heightened role for security agencies in collaboration with regulatory agencies to use, adapt and implement risk-assessment tools in designing more resilient systems at the national and international
levels. This report contributes directly to highlighting these new trends.

This report on future global shocks begins the next phase of OEC D reviews of riskmanagement policies. In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis global leaders are acutely aware that another systemic shock could severely challenge economic recovery, social
cohesion and even political stability. Visible indicators of vulnerability persist in the forms of economic imbalances, volatile commodity prices and currencies, colossal public debts and severe budget deficits. Quarterly indicators on economic recovery are closely scrutinised for signs of more chronic, structural weaknesses that place stress upon the social fabric, our final cushion of stability. Less visible than these metrics are the drivers of vulnerability that tightly weave interconnections between commercial supply chains, technological systems and investment vehicles underlying the global economy. Unanticipated events such as natural disasters, failures in key technical systems or malicious attacks could disrupt these complex systems and produce shocks that propagate around the world. There is a palpable sense of urgency to identify and assess risks arising from vulnerabilities in these crucial systems, and to develop policies that will bolster efforts for prevention, early warning and response to ensure sustained economic prosperity. This urgency explains the demand for OEC D to deliver strategic advice on preparing for and responding to potential global shocks mired in uncertainties. While the list of potential global risks is quite long, this report focuses on a pressing shortlist, i.e. the relatively few that begin suddenly and result in severe, wide-scale disruptions or impacts.

The report draws primarily from analysis contained in five case studies on different types of events that could lead to global shocks, and a background paper that provides an overview of concepts, ideas, and examples of extreme events. All six background papers Future global shocks – © OEC D 2011
4 – Foreword are available separately on the OEC D website:

www.oecd.org/futures.

The report’s contents are also based on input derived from consultations with the project’s Steering Group and the results of independent research conducted by the OEC D Secretariat. The Steering Group selected the case studies’ topics on financial crises, pandemics and cyber risks for their potential to impact global systems and relevance in connection with recent events. The case studies on social unrest and geomagnetic storms were also commissioned to ensure that the report’s conclusions were applicable to a broader range of events that might produce global shocks.

This report is part of the pioneering work of the International Futures Programme on risk. The OEC D first began to analyse the policy implications of emerging and systemic risks in 1999 as part of its mission to build-up the organisation’s foresight capacity. Since
then, OEC D countries have suffered major international terrorist attacks in 2001, 2003 and 2005, unprecedented destruction during hurricane Katrina in 2005, the worldwide financial meltdown in 2008 that reshaped and expanded the number of key constituents of global economic governance, the first declared pandemic in over 40 years in 2009, and most recently the Tohuku earthquakes, tsunami and ensuing nuclear reactor accidents at the Fukushima power plant. Never before have global risks seemed so complex, the
stakes so high, and the need for international co-operation to deal with them so apparent. Throughout, the International Futures Programme has carried the torch in analysis of global risks along with its committed network of partners from government, industry,
academia and civil society. In addition to its seminal report, “Emerging Risks in the 21st century: An Agenda for Action”, and “Large-scale Disasters: Lessons Learned”, it has published thematic reports and country case studies on the underlying economic, technological, environmental and social trends driving the emergence of global risks. The analysis and main conclusions from these publications hold true today, which underlines the need
for policy makers to pay added attention to risks that are ever more present and ominous.

The Project team was composed of Michael Oborne, Barrie Stevens, Pierre Alain
Schieb, David Sawaya and Jack Radisch, who was the principal author of the report. Pierre Alain Schieb, and Daniel Hoffman, then chief economist of Zurich Financial Services, developed some key concepts for the project; these were then discussed within the
International Futures Programme and with other OEC D partners with a view to launching a new project. The original Steering Group for the project included public and private sector participants as well as research professionals. Matthew Conroy developed the interesting “Tool Kit” for the project. Tom Van Nuffelen, Nadège Braure and Alexandra Hallas-Button provided valuable research assistance. Jennifer Stein and Gill Omeara performed much appreciated copyediting and publication support, Peter Vogelpoel created the layout, and Anita Gibson and Rossella Iannizzotto provided logistics support. The Steering Group of the project met under my chairmanship over the 18-month period of the project.

Paris, June 2011

When serious individuals and organizations approach the serious problems we face, other individuals like the Koch brothers fan the flames of Illuminati, Al Gore, and the best/worst excuse of all... Uh, you'll lose your freedoms if I'm not allowed to blow up the joint.

 

[Frozenguy]

Nope. Your definition fits your parameters.



You conveniently miss the point that lawmakers are freely elected by majorities. Not to mention that laws constitute the majority of lawmakers' votes.

What qualifies as democracy in your eyes, every voter determining the outcome of every law? There would be no need for representatives and the idea of efficient representation flies out the window.

If you weren't pursuing such disparate political ideals, you'd see how the majority (democratic) process works.



What do you want, a king?

What does a king have to do with this?

No, its not by my parameters. It just is. Don't you think the Pledge of Allegiance would of said "... and to the democracy for which it stands, ..." if we were a democracy?!

Democracy is the rule of the people. We the people do not rule! We just don't, plain and simple. And thank god we don't!
The way public opinion is so easily swayed is outright terrifying, and to think of empowering that body? Gives me nightmares, I'll gladly keep Obama Ooo that sent shivers up my spine lol..

We may have democratic elections (where it applies, e.g. governors. Not the president.) but our form of government just isn't a democracy.

Democracy is not mentioned anywhere in the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution.

The republic is here to affirm and protect our inalienable rights while a democracy fold under pressure.

The sad thing is, our republic is failing considering the PATRIOT ACT and other fraudulent legislation.

 

[Frozenguy]

You conveniently miss the point that lawmakers are freely elected by majorities. Not to mention that laws constitute the majority of lawmakers' votes.
?

I didn't conveniently forget about congress.

Lets run a thought experiment: Consider you get the majority to vote out the 1st amendment. Lets see if your democracy wins or if the republic wins. If we have a democracy, 1st amendment will go away. We all know that the 1st amendment wont go away. Unless the republic fails. Which it arguably is. But still doesn't change what we were intended to be, have been, are, and hope to continue to be: a republic.

We may have democratic like elections for some of our leaders, but our form of government is a republic.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

What does a king have to do with this?

Well, that's basically what republic means, no royalty as ruling class. Britain has a queen but they're a functioning democracy.

No, its not by my parameters. It just is. Don't you think the Pledge of Allegiance would of said "... and to the democracy for which it stands, ..." if we were a democracy?!

Your argument doesn't make the case we're not a democratic republic. Some of you guys actually think that democratic government means democrat government for chist sakes, lol.

Democracy is the rule of the people. We the people do not rule! We just don't, plain and simple.

There's something about elective representation you don't get. Or your representatives aren't representing your interests. Maybe it's a bit of both.

And thank god we don't! The way public opinion is so easily swayed is outright terrifying, and to think of empowering that body? Gives me nightmares, I'll gladly keep Obama Ooo that sent shivers up my spine lol..

You've got an argument that the uneducated voter drags us from expansion to destruction, rinse/repeat. Some folks don't pay attention to history and repeat it every other vote. Somehow the other team will work towards similar goals, better than the other side did... lol. We've got a pig being dragged between goalposts and nobody scores. But the uneducated voter guarantees stalemate will never cease, while a vocal minority refuses to grasp that tax cuts isn't economic strategy.

We may have democratic elections (where it applies, e.g. governors. Not the president.) but our form of government just isn't a democracy.

Democracy is not mentioned anywhere in the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution.

yawn

The republic is here to affirm and protect our inalienable rights while a democracy fold under pressure.

The sad thing is, our republic is failing considering the PATRIOT ACT and other fraudulent legislation.

You might have a point threat PA is unconstitutional. Next time a cowboy runs 'round and tells everybody to be afraid, be afraid of the cowboy.

The mention of republic is to affirm we'll never be ruled (much less taxed w/o representation) by tyrannical royalty.

 

[dagnabit]

you would be right if republic only meant w/o a monarch...

sorry DB being obstinate does not equal being correct..

your definitions seem to be the "whacked" interpretations.

BTW "Britain" is not a "functional democracy" the term is constitutional monarchy.
this really is civics 101 you are arguing against, well that and the dictionaries..