• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Everything posted by ShcShc11

  1. Anyone else have experiences with this? Thanks.
  2. Sad! Its funny to see these comments though: "You should never ski period, its stupid, risky and cause of many deaths and annual head injuries" "Skiing and driving a car are two totally different things. Driving a car is a necessary risk. Riding on skis isn't." "I'm not stopping anybody from skiing. I just choose to not take that risk. Thats all. Comparing skiing to driving a car is ridiculous because unless you want to take 3 days to travel across town, you need a car. However, you don't need to ski to accomplish anything. Unless of course you live at one of the poles and need ski's so your dogs can pull you around. But why not just get a snowmobile?"
  3. Thousands of Japanese? You mean millions of Japanese. 20 million Japanese civilians were to be starved in a year-long Navy Blockade. 20 thousand Koreans were dying each month as the war prolonged. Chinese, Filipinos still under Japanese rule were also dying; not necessarily because Japanese were cruel but because their logistical system were completely broken. If the Japanese can't feed themselves, then they can't feed the people they occupy as well. Cheers! Shc
  4. If only it was Public Health Care like the rest of the world
  5. I'm nitpicking, but... The Abwehr was a pretty bad intelligence service, which arguably made Germany lose the war (e.g: Intelligence estimating only 1/10th of the size of the Soviet Union infantry capabilities and 9,000 tanks instead of the actual figure of 23,000 tanks). Hitler's infamous proclamation in October 1941 that the "Soviet Union will never rise again" essentially came from bad Abwehr intelligence info. The Germans essentially captured x3 more than the total estimated Soviet infantrymen estimated by the Abwehr; surely, the war is won if you captured x3 soldiers! Not to mention that it was fully infiltrated by Soviet Agents by 1943. That said, I would compare the Abwehr to the 2003 WMD scandal. Both poor intelligence leading to bad decision-making. A more appropriate comparison would probably be KGB. Cheers! Shc
  6. Lucky for us, I can tell you it is not. The U.S is, for example, in a better medium and long-term economic structure/ forecast than Canada. And Canada is in a decent position. Cheers! Shc
  7. Once again, the reasons you listed above are why the other countries have not dumped the dollar. That is also the biggest factor for our country not going into hyperinflation. But we do have inflation. The price of milk, gas, and especially gold is going up. Pumping $ trillions into an economy with nothing to back it has consequences, and also does have other countries starting to look for alternatives. No. We had borderline DEFLATION and not inflation. Inflation must be measured based on price excluding energy and food. We BARELY pumped sufficient money to fill the 2008 Lehman Brother gap of 2.5 trillion $. Our 10 years bond are at an all-time low indicating that we need to put MORE money into the economy in order to have a normal economy. Remember that we were on zero-bound economy and this whole notion of hyperinflation is nonsense (unless you can show me French troops are about to invade us, take our economic resources and force us to pay war reparations ). See my previous posts on economics. Cheers! Shc
  8. There are NO alternatives to the U.S currency as World Reserve Currency. At best, there will be a new "SPG" currency by 2040-2050, but nothing can match the U.S currency in terms of size and stability. Also, I don't know why this notion of "hyperinflation" keeps coming up. Last time I checked, there aren't any French troops in our economic heartland stealing our coal like 1920s Germany. ... > Euro: The Euro is completely unstable in its current form > South Korean Won: Far too small and unstable. > the Chinese Yuan Renminbi: The Chinese are the ones who most need a "world currency". Their choices are limited to U.K Pound, Japanese Yen and U.S (mostly U.S because U.K and Japan are too small) p-s: I wouldn't consider the U.K as a "world reserve currency" at all in the 1900s; let alone the 1960s lol... unless if by "world", you mean India. Cheers! Shc
  9. It's one thing to suggest the search button And then ... looks like you had a pretty bad week Cheers!
  10. hahaha. Exactly my thoughts as well
  11. And the stunt is for the greater of ALL humanity!!
  12. What year would you like to start with? We can talk about about 1929 and its impact on the U.S and/or Europe (including National Socialist economy). But anyway, if we want to go back to basics. Let's remember the difference between a forecast and a projection. A forecast is a future-oriented financial information prepared using assumptions that are the most probable set of economic conditions while a projection is based on one (sometimes more) hypotheses. I am directly pointing out WHICH hypotheses were wrong and why (namely the fact that it relied too much on austerity). And this is something that can be clearly seen in the 10 years bond. Cheers!
  13. Try this to get some perspective: first, operate under the theory that spending on anything and everything (no matter how random) like drunken sailors is responsible government domination add in a policy to tax 100% of any savings or earnings from the rich (anyone that makes more than $20K per year) for 'fairness' add in printing money like an out of control post war 3rd world country and then he really gets happy and add in the perception that a very slight reduction in a massive increase is considered "austerity" and then you can close on this unique brand of economic theory Haha. I understand everything I say sounds counter-intuitive and henceforth slightly difficult to understand (because we are so hardwired to think that an economy is like our personal finance). However, remember that zero-bound economy is different. If you want to learn more about the economy, I advise you to see the 10 years U.S bond and understand why the % is low (and has been so low) for so long. This will help understand why what I am saying isin't an opinion, but what is happened/has happened to the economy since 2007. Cheers! :) Happy weekends all! :)
  14. Your chart actually backs what I've been saying for a pretty long time (since 2009 in fact). People greatly underestimated the housing/bank crisis in the post-Lehman Brother collapse in that we needed to do much more in order to recover from the 2.5 trillion $ gap created during the Great Recession. Again, we took the course of austerity and because we took this bad economic choice, we are facing an unusually higher unemployment rate. Why? Because we didn't put sufficient effort in covering the 2.5 trillion $ gap. We asked for austerity, Obama went for austerity policies and now we are complaining about the policies which we asked for. Now we see studies after studies (e.g: see IMF) that the multiplier effect was bigger than previously thought and austerity measures hurt employment rate (big surprise?). Personally, I think we should just man up about it and take responsibility that this is the austerity we have been asked and it had negative consequences on our employment rate. Compare Abenomics vs Austerity measures undertaken by US vs Greater Austerity measures taken by the EU. Are you really telling me the EU is doing better since they took the austerity path? Uh the major banks would have collapsed in the U.S which would have triggered more bank bankruptcies in EU and Canada etc... etc... I remember when Citigroup went from 50$/share to 1$/share... Good times. Cheers!
  15. Please promise to enroll in Arithmetic 101. lol you can be so naive sometimes Cheers! :)
  16. When a country on zero-bound economy wrongly goes on unnecessary austerity measures then of course this would negatively affect employment. Remember a 2.5 trillion $ gap was made in 2007 housing bubble and this gap was never fully recovered because people wrongly assumed that austerity was the "responsible" thing to do. What would be responsible is to look back at some of the economic courses of action we took and ask ourselves: "Was austerity the right action?" And by now, most economists would say no (e.g: Nial Ferguson, Reinhart, Roghoff, IMF to name a few...). Cheers! :)
  17. Let's go back to the original problem with the old system (pre-2008): The problem was that this created a death spiral: young, healthy people didn’t buy insurance, worsening the risk pool, driving up premiums, driving out more relatively healthy people, etc., until you were left with a rump of very ill people paying unaffordable high rates and insurance companies have to play games with doctors and ill patients in order to recuperate their money. I can understand you don't like Obama (and that's fine), but from a purely economic viewpoint, the old system did not make sense.
  18. Unless the GOP finds even more ways to sabotage the plan, this thing is going to work, it’s going to be extremely popular It is a system that worked pretty well in Massachusetts and it is going to continue to work. From the NYTimes: ''Individuals buying health insurance on their own will see their premiums tumble next year in New York State as changes under the federal health care law take effect, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo announced on Wednesday.'' Cheers! Shc
  19. By the time you get to solo/level 7, you'l probably have gotten ''used'' to the environment and you'l know what you are capable of. Psychologically speaking, you'l have some doubts, but I found it easier to handle it than level 1-2-3 (when everything was incredibly new). + You don't have any pressure to do random tricks to pass the level so you'l probably also feel pretty relaxed. Take it one level at a time :)
  20. Very true. It's a 2 hour drive to my DZ with tolls and traffic (Even on the weekends). I enjoy the people there and have a great time whether I jump or not. BUT, chores need to be done, bills need to get paid, stuff around the house needs to be fixed. Sometimes free time just disappears. The $$ in your wallet disappears too
  21. Slowly but surely, economists are seeing the truth. The fund argued that the sequester and other forms of fiscal contraction will cut this year’s U.S. growth rate by almost half, undermining what might otherwise have been a fairly vigorous recovery. And these spending cuts are both unwise and unnecessary. In other words (as it has been repeated numerous times), trying to cut deficits actually adds to the overall deficit. Cheers!
  22. In states that have pursued the economics of austerity as promoted by the right, the result has been continually declining growth. In contrast, the US and Australia, following Keynesian principles, have each experienced economic advances since 2009. The U.S, quite honestly, took the middle path between Keynesian and Austerity. Remember that the U.S followed a wishy-washy path towards cost cutting which hurt them quite dearly in terms of the economy. The stimulus of 2009 was very little in terms of how much the economy got shocked from the 2008 Lehman Brother collapse. But, it is better far better than Britain's full-on austerity (which are now looking dangerously fiscally irresponsible). More budget cuts = More deficit during zero-bound economy. It sounds counter-intuitive but that's the truth. Cheers! :) Shc
  23. Amusing how you seem to think deficit spending a la Reagan was bad, but what Barry does is OK. Deficit spending in Reagan's time =/= Deficit spending now In a zero-bound economy, not spending increases the actual deficit by dramatically shrinking the economy (see Europe 2009-2013). Reagan`s economy wasn't zero-bound; it was a matter of rates. ... or in other words: Spending on a boat and spending on a car so you can go to work is not the same spending .. If anyone wants to learn more: -See David Cameron`s austerity (2009-2013) vs -Japan`s Abenomics. Big differences my friends :) Eitherway, after the last Roggoff scandals, even the WSJ is approving spending during zero-bound. EDIT: Cheers!