Walmart's New Health Food Push: Is It Too Hard to Swallow?
Bonds Are a 'Safe' Investment: A Big Lie Gets Even Bigger
Members of the G-8 nations (Britain, Canada, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, Russia, and the United States) met in Leece, Italy, yesterday to discuss the state of world affairs. The main topic on the table was whether they should end their stimulus efforts and let world economies float their own boats.
The meeting, which Russian finance minister, Alexei Kudrin, described as "stormy," concluded with agreement that there would be no immediate end to the stimulus programs. U.S. Treasury Secretary Geithner indicated that the U.S. had no intention of moving toward a tighter policy. He said, "it's too early to shift toward a policy of restraint." It must be noted that the more fiscally conservative governments of Germany and Canada favored ending the stimulus programs as soon as they are no longer needed.
The final communique included a statement that financial ministers did discuss the need to find ways of ending the stimulus programs. They concluded by saying, "the breath and intensity of the prolonged downturn have revealed the importance of strengthening our commitment or standards of propriety, integrity and transparency."
So now, you might ask, did the G-8 accomplish anything? From the tone of the meeting, it seems too early for the G-8 nations to end the stimulus programs already in place, at least for the time being. Eventually, there will be a time when these programs will end and the economies of the world will go back to free floating, without government interventions.
Should world economies end their stimulus programs now?
Goldman Earnings Sink After Buffett Dividend
Johnson & Johnson's Income Falls 23%
Burberry Shares Leap on Sales Update
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-14-2009 @ 9:47PM
william lindblad said...
In one word. No.
We are presently on a plateau and plateaus are flat. They do not have hills, but they do edges, usually very steep.
That sums things up. Government intervention has created a sense of stability, take it away and chaos will sure to come back. The main thing that is evident here is that this is not a small problem as it entails the attention of the G8 and as you mention Canada and Germany as being fiscally conservative, they too have problems. Germany more so than our Northern neighbor. The Krauts have an unemployment problem along with a socialist idea to work rules and the work week. They have a system that has a lot of plumbing problems. The Canuks have yet to get a full does of the fall out from Detroit. Count on this one being big and attention getting. The Ruskies got Stalins steel producing megatropolis that is now in the same position of ours - when it folded. They have one hell of an unemployment problem. None of this is B.S. either - it is all real, very real.
The G8 strategy has been flawed from the git-go as they have yet to agree to act in concert. The problem is housing. I know this sounds crazy but if you want to kill grass you have to kill the root. In the present economic case they have to find a uniform approach to stabilize and resurrect housing - world wide. Contrary to popular opinion, the problem is hardly confined to the U.S. The financing, legitimate and voodoo, are world wide. After that, they should agree on a worldwide banking policy to prevent a repeat. I am not talking nonsense. The banking system need controls and we need to go back to banks being banks, not bank/investment houses. All of this will take a lot of time .
In the interim, they need to keep abreast of the bond/equity/currency markets. If they don't, deflation is sure to give to inflation. There are many factors that suggest that this is around the corner and many more, like how does the U.S. intend to fund the automakers retirement accounts that will cease to be solvent in about two years? (that's given current market)
Ever hear the expression of "sitting on a powder keg".
6-15-2009 @ 2:08PM
clikdawg said...
"Should world economies end their stimulus programs now?"
Ai-yai-yai -- the answer to that question (particularly in the case of our own "stimulus" program) can only be derived after answering a slew of pointed preceding questions:
Do you believe the "stimulus" money is being spent wisely; if not, what reason do you have for believing that the guys who have not been spending it wisely will suddenly change their ways?
Are you satisfied with the regulatory, accountability, and oversight mechanisms connected to the "stimulus"? With the amount of unaccounted-for billions in revenues? With funds ostensibly provided for one purpose being used for another?
Do you believe that "stimulus" theory and "stimulus" practice are one and the same?
Can you trust ANYONE, in any political party in any country on earth, with trillions of easily-pocketed, easily-divertable, easily-slush-funded currency not to use it to buy an unassailable power-base? What percentage of one trillion dollars would it take to buy the entire United States Congress, f'r'instance, d'you suppose?
Are you content to see the Federal Reserve assuming the de facto role of the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of your government?
Where does the money come from, again, and how're we gonna pay it back?
There, now -- answer all of those questions as honestly as you know how, taking into account every last little detail you have learned about how the Culture of Corruption operates in the US, and THEN answer Ms Madon's original question ... if you even have to.
In my book, Timmy just needs the rest of the world to keep playing the "stimulus" game so Bam-Bam and company can go on looting the US taxpayer without looking like the last bandits left unsatisfied.
Could jes' be me, though, huh?