<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Banking In A State</title>
	<atom:link href="http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/</link>
	<description>What happened to the global economy and what we can do about it</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:48:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave of Maryland</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-35063</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave of Maryland]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-35063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So if the existing system doesn&#039;t work &amp; so far as we can tell, never will work, that it will only bring us eventual doom, then let&#039;s go looking for some other system.  Political system.

What about Marxism?  In its existence, did the Soviet Union suffer from this problem, YES or NO?

If it was free of the bankers, then is it worth trading our system, warts vs: warts?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So if the existing system doesn&#8217;t work &amp; so far as we can tell, never will work, that it will only bring us eventual doom, then let&#8217;s go looking for some other system.  Political system.</p>
<p>What about Marxism?  In its existence, did the Soviet Union suffer from this problem, YES or NO?</p>
<p>If it was free of the bankers, then is it worth trading our system, warts vs: warts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NKlein1553</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34286</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[NKlein1553]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:41:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34286</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I can&#039;t subtract.  &quot;Almost four-hundred years ago,&quot; should be almost three-hundred years ago.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t subtract.  &#8220;Almost four-hundred years ago,&#8221; should be almost three-hundred years ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NKlein1553</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34285</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[NKlein1553]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:28:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No, not the same Richard Lester.  The Dr. Lester I was referring to taught at Princeton and died in 1997:

http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/97/q4/1231-lester.html

Also, when I asked if you thought people today could be trusted to implement a responsible monetary policy, I definitely was not trying to argue for private money systems.  For the reasons you mentioned I think such a scheme would be the antithesis of democratic control over the money supply.  What I was trying to ask was if you think some sort of an updated version of what Pennsylvania had almost four-hundred years ago would be possible today?  Something along the lines of what Mark Thoma advocates here:

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/11/the-fed-is-already-transparent.html

Actually, Thoma isn&#039;t really arguing for democratic control over the money supply here either.  Thoma doesn&#039;t think the Fed is independent enough, and only wants to allow elections in order to create the illusion that the people are in control.  Personally, I would go much farther than this.  I&#039;d like to see direct elections of Federal Reserve governors and chairmen/women.  Actually, I find the whole: &quot;the Federal Reserve needs to be insulated from political meddling,&quot; argument to be incredibly naive.  There&#039;s tons of evidence showing both Federal Reserve Board governors and chairmen have been influenced by political considerations in the past.  More troubling, these kinds of arguments show an utter contempt for the democratic process.  I&#039;m continually shocked by how easy it is for so-called new-age liberals to show their complete disregard for basic democratic values like majority rule without getting called to task.  Whoever Mark Thoma&#039;s civics teacher was should be ashamed of him/herself.  Social Studies teachers everywhere unite!  Down with John Locke!  It&#039;s time we started listening to Rousseau.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, not the same Richard Lester.  The Dr. Lester I was referring to taught at Princeton and died in 1997:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/97/q4/1231-lester.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/97/q4/1231-lester.html</a></p>
<p>Also, when I asked if you thought people today could be trusted to implement a responsible monetary policy, I definitely was not trying to argue for private money systems.  For the reasons you mentioned I think such a scheme would be the antithesis of democratic control over the money supply.  What I was trying to ask was if you think some sort of an updated version of what Pennsylvania had almost four-hundred years ago would be possible today?  Something along the lines of what Mark Thoma advocates here:</p>
<p><a href="http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/11/the-fed-is-already-transparent.html" rel="nofollow">http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/11/the-fed-is-already-transparent.html</a></p>
<p>Actually, Thoma isn&#8217;t really arguing for democratic control over the money supply here either.  Thoma doesn&#8217;t think the Fed is independent enough, and only wants to allow elections in order to create the illusion that the people are in control.  Personally, I would go much farther than this.  I&#8217;d like to see direct elections of Federal Reserve governors and chairmen/women.  Actually, I find the whole: &#8220;the Federal Reserve needs to be insulated from political meddling,&#8221; argument to be incredibly naive.  There&#8217;s tons of evidence showing both Federal Reserve Board governors and chairmen have been influenced by political considerations in the past.  More troubling, these kinds of arguments show an utter contempt for the democratic process.  I&#8217;m continually shocked by how easy it is for so-called new-age liberals to show their complete disregard for basic democratic values like majority rule without getting called to task.  Whoever Mark Thoma&#8217;s civics teacher was should be ashamed of him/herself.  Social Studies teachers everywhere unite!  Down with John Locke!  It&#8217;s time we started listening to Rousseau.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: StatsGuy</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34281</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[StatsGuy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:07:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34281</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I haven&#039;t...  The only Richard Lester I&#039;m familiar with run the Industrial Productivity Center at MIT.  Not the same one, I assume.

Libertarian monetarists are fond of private money systems - I personally am skeptical of something on that large a scale, primarily due to the concentration of power in the hands of agents that are beyond the control of democratic institutions.  (Even more so than the Fed.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t&#8230;  The only Richard Lester I&#8217;m familiar with run the Industrial Productivity Center at MIT.  Not the same one, I assume.</p>
<p>Libertarian monetarists are fond of private money systems &#8211; I personally am skeptical of something on that large a scale, primarily due to the concentration of power in the hands of agents that are beyond the control of democratic institutions.  (Even more so than the Fed.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dcb</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34251</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[dcb]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:39:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34251</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[why isn&#039;t Mr. Merryweather banned form the industry?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>why isn&#8217;t Mr. Merryweather banned form the industry?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NKlein1553</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34227</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[NKlein1553]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:19:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[More from Dr. Lester:

The colonies had their own script and could pay for their activities while taking less in taxes. Colonial scrip was not backed by gold or silver and therefore the colonies could control its purchasing power. This was similar to the &quot;tally stick&quot; system used by the British Empire for over 700 years. It was different from the conventional European mercantilist system of money which required governments to borrow from banks and pay interest for those loans, as gold and silver were the only regarded forms of money. Colonial scrip, were &quot;bills of credit&quot; created by the government, based on the credit of that government, and this meant that there was no interest to pay for the introduction of money. This went a considerable way towards defraying the expense of the Colonial governments and in maintaining prosperity. The governments charged low interest when it loaned out this paper money to its citizens, with land as collateral, and this interest income lowered the tax burden on the people, contributing to prosperity.

*One of the commentators on Mark Thoma&#039;s website turned me onto Dr. Lester&#039;s work, but I can&#039;t seem to find who it was so I can&#039;t give them credit.  My writing here incorporates a lot of that poster&#039; comments (I saved them in a word file) so if he/she is reading this I apologize for posting parts of your comments without giving credit.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More from Dr. Lester:</p>
<p>The colonies had their own script and could pay for their activities while taking less in taxes. Colonial scrip was not backed by gold or silver and therefore the colonies could control its purchasing power. This was similar to the &#8220;tally stick&#8221; system used by the British Empire for over 700 years. It was different from the conventional European mercantilist system of money which required governments to borrow from banks and pay interest for those loans, as gold and silver were the only regarded forms of money. Colonial scrip, were &#8220;bills of credit&#8221; created by the government, based on the credit of that government, and this meant that there was no interest to pay for the introduction of money. This went a considerable way towards defraying the expense of the Colonial governments and in maintaining prosperity. The governments charged low interest when it loaned out this paper money to its citizens, with land as collateral, and this interest income lowered the tax burden on the people, contributing to prosperity.</p>
<p>*One of the commentators on Mark Thoma&#8217;s website turned me onto Dr. Lester&#8217;s work, but I can&#8217;t seem to find who it was so I can&#8217;t give them credit.  My writing here incorporates a lot of that poster&#8217; comments (I saved them in a word file) so if he/she is reading this I apologize for posting parts of your comments without giving credit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NKlein1553</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34226</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[NKlein1553]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[StatsGuy, your summary above reminds me of something one of my economic history professors used to say: &quot;Probably the only time in the history of the United Stares the people ever exercised real democratic control over the supply of money was in the colonial period before Great Britain outlawed colonial scrip.&quot;  Or something like that (it&#039;s been a few years so I&#039;m paraphrasing).  Have you ever read anything by Dr. Richard A. Lester?  He was an economic history professor at Princeton back in like the 1940&#039;s who wrote about colonial economies, especially Pennsylvania.  According to him the price level during the 52 years prior to the American Revolution was more stable than the American price level has been during any succeeding fifty-year period.  Apparently Pennsylvania established a &quot;land bank&quot; that allowed landowners to borrow paper &quot;scrip&quot; money with their land as collateral.  Sounds pretty good doesn&#039;t it?  Do you think people today could be trusted to implement a responsible monetary policy or is the (relatively) unaccountable Federal Reserve Board our only option?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>StatsGuy, your summary above reminds me of something one of my economic history professors used to say: &#8220;Probably the only time in the history of the United Stares the people ever exercised real democratic control over the supply of money was in the colonial period before Great Britain outlawed colonial scrip.&#8221;  Or something like that (it&#8217;s been a few years so I&#8217;m paraphrasing).  Have you ever read anything by Dr. Richard A. Lester?  He was an economic history professor at Princeton back in like the 1940&#8242;s who wrote about colonial economies, especially Pennsylvania.  According to him the price level during the 52 years prior to the American Revolution was more stable than the American price level has been during any succeeding fifty-year period.  Apparently Pennsylvania established a &#8220;land bank&#8221; that allowed landowners to borrow paper &#8220;scrip&#8221; money with their land as collateral.  Sounds pretty good doesn&#8217;t it?  Do you think people today could be trusted to implement a responsible monetary policy or is the (relatively) unaccountable Federal Reserve Board our only option?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: notabanker</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34190</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[notabanker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:58:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34190</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#039;Strict implementation of MtM would enforce upon banks the same short-term time horizons as the markets.&#039;

Yes, but surely this rule is for benefit of the markets?  Then does not destroying MtM application disadvantage the markets?  Given that everyone faces the reality of asset valuation via market, an immediate audited replacement of MtM is required and any demand for MtM relief by a bank should be refused. Previous opinions re bank destruction etc were never more than opinios and their uncritical  (criminal?) acceptance has cost us taxpayers over a trillion dollars!

We investors and plucked chickens must demand an immediate reinstatement of MtM and clawback of misdirectred public funds.

Couple this with taking public control and operation of our nation&#039;s money!

I believe it will be better for banks for them to have a finite financial environment in which to operate.  The particular concern is similar to that evinced when children behave badly with no boundaries.

Many banks probably operate in a risky manner because competition ensure thay do so or lose the profit race?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;Strict implementation of MtM would enforce upon banks the same short-term time horizons as the markets.&#8217;</p>
<p>Yes, but surely this rule is for benefit of the markets?  Then does not destroying MtM application disadvantage the markets?  Given that everyone faces the reality of asset valuation via market, an immediate audited replacement of MtM is required and any demand for MtM relief by a bank should be refused. Previous opinions re bank destruction etc were never more than opinios and their uncritical  (criminal?) acceptance has cost us taxpayers over a trillion dollars!</p>
<p>We investors and plucked chickens must demand an immediate reinstatement of MtM and clawback of misdirectred public funds.</p>
<p>Couple this with taking public control and operation of our nation&#8217;s money!</p>
<p>I believe it will be better for banks for them to have a finite financial environment in which to operate.  The particular concern is similar to that evinced when children behave badly with no boundaries.</p>
<p>Many banks probably operate in a risky manner because competition ensure thay do so or lose the profit race?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: StatsGuy</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34148</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[StatsGuy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:58:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34148</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Probably far less than that - in the Great Depression, we had 25% savings rate, which is excessive.  Historically, 10% seems fine - perhaps less.

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/6/25/saupload_us_savings_rate.JPG

In terms of how much base money to feed into the system...  enough to stabilize asset prices.  At a _crude_ guess, the S&amp;P 500 went from 180 in 1985 to 1100 today (down from peak in 2007).  That&#039;s a 6-fold increase.  The monetary base went from 200 to 800 billion in that same time, a 4 fold increase.  That suggests adding about 400 to perhaps 500 billion in _permanent_ base money into the system.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE

Recent moves in the Base chart are misleading in the sense that the Fed has indicated it will withdraw most of that base just as soon as it can, which cripples the expectation of permanent price increases (unless you think the Fed will renege).  As an alternative, the Fed could _slowly_ extract this &quot;temporary&quot; base, and replace it with a tax credit to match 30% of costs for high-priority long term infrastructure.  That would finance 100 billion in long term credits per year for half a decade, which would match with &gt;300 billion from the private sector per year.  Of course, that requires Congress to actually do something useful since the Fed doesn&#039;t run fiscal policy.

Instead, Congress would rather wait till things get worse, and then finance repeated extensions to unemployment insurance and watch tax revenues tank.  Absurd.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably far less than that &#8211; in the Great Depression, we had 25% savings rate, which is excessive.  Historically, 10% seems fine &#8211; perhaps less.</p>
<p><a href="http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/6/25/saupload_us_savings_rate.JPG" rel="nofollow">http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/6/25/saupload_us_savings_rate.JPG</a></p>
<p>In terms of how much base money to feed into the system&#8230;  enough to stabilize asset prices.  At a _crude_ guess, the S&amp;P 500 went from 180 in 1985 to 1100 today (down from peak in 2007).  That&#8217;s a 6-fold increase.  The monetary base went from 200 to 800 billion in that same time, a 4 fold increase.  That suggests adding about 400 to perhaps 500 billion in _permanent_ base money into the system.</p>
<p><a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE" rel="nofollow">http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE</a></p>
<p>Recent moves in the Base chart are misleading in the sense that the Fed has indicated it will withdraw most of that base just as soon as it can, which cripples the expectation of permanent price increases (unless you think the Fed will renege).  As an alternative, the Fed could _slowly_ extract this &#8220;temporary&#8221; base, and replace it with a tax credit to match 30% of costs for high-priority long term infrastructure.  That would finance 100 billion in long term credits per year for half a decade, which would match with &gt;300 billion from the private sector per year.  Of course, that requires Congress to actually do something useful since the Fed doesn&#8217;t run fiscal policy.</p>
<p>Instead, Congress would rather wait till things get worse, and then finance repeated extensions to unemployment insurance and watch tax revenues tank.  Absurd.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TonyForesta</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34147</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TonyForesta]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:30:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34147</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;The big banks must be broken up.&quot;   With all due respect, - one thousand thanks for stating the obvious.  This very intriguing paper graphs a massive redistribution of wealth through unregulated PONZI schemes, and the conjuring of money out of thin air, and government capture (or in my unwashed pedestrian parlance bribing, owning, and controlling those things called governments) to the predatorclass alone and exclusively.  Andrew Haldane and Piergiorgio Alessandri eloquantly articulate what anyone who is not predatorclass already palbably knows.  Over the last several decades - with a rapid increase in velocity in the last few decades, - and hyper increase in velocity in the last two years - the predatorclass has succeeded (by capturing the state, the socalled governments) in illicitly redistributing the worlds wealth and resources into a few exclusively predatorclass hands.   

We are in fact in a &quot;doom loop&quot;.   All the bettors are compelled by the wildly speculative forces into betting on the next bubble, hoping beyond hope all along that they are wise enough, or have enough insider information to escape, or cash out before the inevitable collapse.   Irrational exuberance alone is bruting, pimping, and propping up this market.  The next crisis, (and it is inevitable that there will certainly be another horrorshow crisis because NOTHING has changed, and no one has been held accountable for wanton abuses and grotesque crimes) -will serve to further entrench the wealth and resources of the predatorclass from the blood and off the backs of the poor and middleclass.      

Since said predatorclass owns and controls the socalled governments, and will certainly privatize gains and socialize losses, - the &quot;doom loop&quot; will be inevitable and unending.   

The peoples only hope is to strike out at our oppressors.  Governments are bought and paid for by the predatorclass and will not help us.  There effectively is no law, since in harsh reality the predatorclass can and does play and operate by one set of laws and standards and is shielded and granted immunities and imponderable largess from the government they own, and control, - and an entirely seperate and oppressive set of laws and standards applied to the people with NO protections or good will from the government.   

Guns and ammo are the best investments for the poor and middle class, because the predatorclass and the socalled governments they own and control are bent on enslaving or culling us.

In a short time, a months or a couple of years, - this entire nightmare (what we not endure and tolerate as civilization) is going pearshaped.

Stop paying your bills, close out all your accounts and hold cash, precious metals, stock up on food, water, medicines and survival supplies, guns and ammo, and get locked, cocked, and ready to rock, because the America and the world we were born into has already ended.  The future is ruthless domination, enslavement, and/or a massive culling of the unwashed masses by the predatorclass.   Know this predators, many of us will not go sheepishly, or peacefully to the slaughter.  There will be blood.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The big banks must be broken up.&#8221;   With all due respect, &#8211; one thousand thanks for stating the obvious.  This very intriguing paper graphs a massive redistribution of wealth through unregulated PONZI schemes, and the conjuring of money out of thin air, and government capture (or in my unwashed pedestrian parlance bribing, owning, and controlling those things called governments) to the predatorclass alone and exclusively.  Andrew Haldane and Piergiorgio Alessandri eloquantly articulate what anyone who is not predatorclass already palbably knows.  Over the last several decades &#8211; with a rapid increase in velocity in the last few decades, &#8211; and hyper increase in velocity in the last two years &#8211; the predatorclass has succeeded (by capturing the state, the socalled governments) in illicitly redistributing the worlds wealth and resources into a few exclusively predatorclass hands.   </p>
<p>We are in fact in a &#8220;doom loop&#8221;.   All the bettors are compelled by the wildly speculative forces into betting on the next bubble, hoping beyond hope all along that they are wise enough, or have enough insider information to escape, or cash out before the inevitable collapse.   Irrational exuberance alone is bruting, pimping, and propping up this market.  The next crisis, (and it is inevitable that there will certainly be another horrorshow crisis because NOTHING has changed, and no one has been held accountable for wanton abuses and grotesque crimes) -will serve to further entrench the wealth and resources of the predatorclass from the blood and off the backs of the poor and middleclass.      </p>
<p>Since said predatorclass owns and controls the socalled governments, and will certainly privatize gains and socialize losses, &#8211; the &#8220;doom loop&#8221; will be inevitable and unending.   </p>
<p>The peoples only hope is to strike out at our oppressors.  Governments are bought and paid for by the predatorclass and will not help us.  There effectively is no law, since in harsh reality the predatorclass can and does play and operate by one set of laws and standards and is shielded and granted immunities and imponderable largess from the government they own, and control, &#8211; and an entirely seperate and oppressive set of laws and standards applied to the people with NO protections or good will from the government.   </p>
<p>Guns and ammo are the best investments for the poor and middle class, because the predatorclass and the socalled governments they own and control are bent on enslaving or culling us.</p>
<p>In a short time, a months or a couple of years, &#8211; this entire nightmare (what we not endure and tolerate as civilization) is going pearshaped.</p>
<p>Stop paying your bills, close out all your accounts and hold cash, precious metals, stock up on food, water, medicines and survival supplies, guns and ammo, and get locked, cocked, and ready to rock, because the America and the world we were born into has already ended.  The future is ruthless domination, enslavement, and/or a massive culling of the unwashed masses by the predatorclass.   Know this predators, many of us will not go sheepishly, or peacefully to the slaughter.  There will be blood.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: btraven</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34146</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[btraven]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:25:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34146</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I concur with virtually all you have said here.  

I didn&#039;t think I&#039;d ever be so &quot;on the same page&quot; with you. Interesting.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I concur with virtually all you have said here.  </p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t think I&#8217;d ever be so &#8220;on the same page&#8221; with you. Interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Hoogesteger</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34145</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Hoogesteger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with you though I wonder if its not just that these banks are too big to fail but also that they have too much market power. I think about my freshman economics class where we were told that for markets to be efficient you need a very large number of participants. Investment banking seems like it has too few providers of services to have a truly competitive market. Further I wonder if problems with assymmetric information-providers of products having more information about them than purchasers-doesn&#039;t cause rent-seeking and lead to inefficiencies. Market failure seems more the rule than the exception in finance.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you though I wonder if its not just that these banks are too big to fail but also that they have too much market power. I think about my freshman economics class where we were told that for markets to be efficient you need a very large number of participants. Investment banking seems like it has too few providers of services to have a truly competitive market. Further I wonder if problems with assymmetric information-providers of products having more information about them than purchasers-doesn&#8217;t cause rent-seeking and lead to inefficiencies. Market failure seems more the rule than the exception in finance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bayard</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34144</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bayard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:16:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34144</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let&#039;s face it, Simon, who comes out the other end (i.e. the end of the bust) with the most assets.  I guarantee that it is the very ones who participate in bubble inflation.  After all, aren&#039;t they interested in bubblefying the economy perminently, so that they can rake off their billions before the bust and put those treasuries, hedges or commodities tied to bust economies?  The answer is not just breaking the TBTF group, but the oligarchs who support the rape of the populace that transpires.  Interesting that Tim Geithner is now taking flak for his role in the AIG rescue payouts (100% on the dollar), and that is just a small example of how we are getting gamed more and more by the oligarchs and their key wonks.

Really, the bottom line is true election and lobby reform.  Until that happens, the power structure will remain largely intact because no effective regulation of anything (financial, energy, healthcare, etc.) will ever be enacted.  End of story.

This was a cogent piece and I need you and James (and others) to keep throwing stuff against the proverbial wall, in hopes that enough will stick to ultimately move things.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s face it, Simon, who comes out the other end (i.e. the end of the bust) with the most assets.  I guarantee that it is the very ones who participate in bubble inflation.  After all, aren&#8217;t they interested in bubblefying the economy perminently, so that they can rake off their billions before the bust and put those treasuries, hedges or commodities tied to bust economies?  The answer is not just breaking the TBTF group, but the oligarchs who support the rape of the populace that transpires.  Interesting that Tim Geithner is now taking flak for his role in the AIG rescue payouts (100% on the dollar), and that is just a small example of how we are getting gamed more and more by the oligarchs and their key wonks.</p>
<p>Really, the bottom line is true election and lobby reform.  Until that happens, the power structure will remain largely intact because no effective regulation of anything (financial, energy, healthcare, etc.) will ever be enacted.  End of story.</p>
<p>This was a cogent piece and I need you and James (and others) to keep throwing stuff against the proverbial wall, in hopes that enough will stick to ultimately move things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted K</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34142</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ted K]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:04:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not that you haven&#039;t said other wise things before (you have), but Carson that is no doubt the most intelligent thing you&#039;ve ever said on this site.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not that you haven&#8217;t said other wise things before (you have), but Carson that is no doubt the most intelligent thing you&#8217;ve ever said on this site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: some guy in a cube</title>
		<link>http://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/17/banking-in-a-state/#comment-34141</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[some guy in a cube]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:33:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://baselinescenario.com/?p=5522#comment-34141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Geithner used to work for the Fed and it obvious to anyone with half-a-brain that is still their dutiful and submissive errand boy. 

Re AIG: One man&#039;s &quot;botch job&quot; is another&#039;s windfall profit.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geithner used to work for the Fed and it obvious to anyone with half-a-brain that is still their dutiful and submissive errand boy. </p>
<p>Re AIG: One man&#8217;s &#8220;botch job&#8221; is another&#8217;s windfall profit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

