True, part of the issue though is the nature of the debt backed monetary system. Germany being a net saver, must lend tremendous amounts of money to other nations. Because all savings are also debt in our monetary system. So Germany ends up lending money all over the place, including areas where German bankers don't really understand the situation.
Japan was in a similiar situation in the 80's and lost tremendous amounts on bad investments. Now it mainly just backs up savings with the national debt, which is now at 200% of GDP. Germany hasn't been willing to take that path so far.
[quote name='Traktion' timestamp='1306836519' post='3004952']
They also loaned a lot of money to Greece - oops!
Recycling surplus cash into countries running deficits, just so that you can accumulate a [i]greater[/i] surplus is a fools game. China is discovering this, as is Germany.
[/quote]
Yep China figured it out... China is a lot smarter than Japan and Germany. China took the exporting as far as it could go, and got the technology they wanted, and when it couldn't be pushed farther.. they made the switch to demand led growth. First by government stimulus, then the second phase that will play out over several decades is consumer led growth.
My feeling is Japan and Germany understand what is happening but the governments are seized by the huge industrial corporations. Which benefit so much from this arrangement. Whereas in China the Communist Party is still calling the shots, and only views the profits of the industrial corporations in the big picture.
A similiar comparison is between China and the US-UK. In the US-UK without doubt the banks have seized control of the political system. And are doing things good for the banks regardless of whether it harms the populace. While in China the big 4 banks are owned by the state, which is ran by the Communist party.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Saturday, May 21, 2011
The start of the European Spring
This does look like the beginning of the 'European Spring', the moment I've been waiting years for and arguing is neccessary.
The Arab Spring started in Tunisia, when Mohamed Bouazizi was trying to make a living as a street vendor. But the Tunisian authorities made it a requirement to be licensed to be a street fruit vendor. And they limited the number o licenses available. In the bidding for the licenses Mohamed Bouazizi could not afford it.
With his livelihood taken from him, he immolated himself in an act of protest. That started the mass protests against tyranny in the Arab world.
Now Spanish youth are starting to rise up. And they are exactly right to, if they don't do something now in a collective movement, most will spend their whole life either outright unemployed or just barely surviving. This in a first world European nation.
The Spanish youth movement has made an incredible breakthrough of thought. Instead of being for the right wing party or for the leftwing party they are against both of them. Which is a much more powerful line of attack. As this left/right divide has been diffusing legitimate resistance for decades. Sadly though, they want 'more democracy'. Which I don't see solving the problems.
The final step is when they are ready to empower one man to solve the problems the nation faces. Like Putin has done in Russia. Once the problems are solved and there is opportunity they will be out there making money and having families. And the money will be there to cover the older people too.
The Arab Spring started in Tunisia, when Mohamed Bouazizi was trying to make a living as a street vendor. But the Tunisian authorities made it a requirement to be licensed to be a street fruit vendor. And they limited the number o licenses available. In the bidding for the licenses Mohamed Bouazizi could not afford it.
With his livelihood taken from him, he immolated himself in an act of protest. That started the mass protests against tyranny in the Arab world.
Now Spanish youth are starting to rise up. And they are exactly right to, if they don't do something now in a collective movement, most will spend their whole life either outright unemployed or just barely surviving. This in a first world European nation.
The Spanish youth movement has made an incredible breakthrough of thought. Instead of being for the right wing party or for the leftwing party they are against both of them. Which is a much more powerful line of attack. As this left/right divide has been diffusing legitimate resistance for decades. Sadly though, they want 'more democracy'. Which I don't see solving the problems.
The final step is when they are ready to empower one man to solve the problems the nation faces. Like Putin has done in Russia. Once the problems are solved and there is opportunity they will be out there making money and having families. And the money will be there to cover the older people too.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Universal Food Benefit instead of Citizen's Dividend
Interesting graph from the USA on the rise in food stamps. From 26 million on the program at the start of 2007 to 44 million at the start of 2011.
I know the idea of a citizen's dividend is unpopular in many circles. The idea of giving everyone free money just doesn't sit well with the protestant work ethic, foundation of our society. But people may be far more willing to entertain the idea of a universal food benefit. Which would have the same effect since we all have to eat and money is obviousy fungible.
Sort of like how universal health care is a popular idea, even though technically we could say we are giving people something for nothing and discouraging work.
For example if everyone in Britain got £100 a month food benefit. A family of 4 would get £400 a month tax free from that and that would make quite a difference in their lives. The total cost of the program would be £74 billion a year.
In the US the food stamps are coming on electronic cards that get updated on the first of each month. Its cheaper to administer that way and there is less stigma associated with using the cards, which appear as ordinary debit cards.
I know the idea of a citizen's dividend is unpopular in many circles. The idea of giving everyone free money just doesn't sit well with the protestant work ethic, foundation of our society. But people may be far more willing to entertain the idea of a universal food benefit. Which would have the same effect since we all have to eat and money is obviousy fungible.
Sort of like how universal health care is a popular idea, even though technically we could say we are giving people something for nothing and discouraging work.
For example if everyone in Britain got £100 a month food benefit. A family of 4 would get £400 a month tax free from that and that would make quite a difference in their lives. The total cost of the program would be £74 billion a year.
In the US the food stamps are coming on electronic cards that get updated on the first of each month. Its cheaper to administer that way and there is less stigma associated with using the cards, which appear as ordinary debit cards.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Growing empty office space
A prediction I made some years ago was that in time many office buildings would become empty. People thought I was crazy, and that it was a sure thing investment.
My thinking was information technology is step by step taking over the management of information in the organization. You've got to remember in the 1970's large corporations needed office towers each floor full of rows of cubicles, each cubicle having an office drone. And each drone was updating part of the information of the corporation. Such as forms in triplicate, and each being dutifully filed. With ledgers being updated.
Today most of the information is handled by servers, or even server farms. Each server can do into the billions of operations a second. So we don't need so many office drones anymore. Naturally in the government and banks they still have just as many, actually more drones. But in the competitive parts of the economy, they have been forced to gradually eliminate the drones.
For example say an area of the company needed 500 drones managing the information. Well they also then need building maintenance, management, HR, secretaries, etc.. Now say they need 25 drones to handle it. And a couple manager. Well somewhere in the country the corporation would have rented a large space to house all the cubicle drones.
My thinking was information technology is step by step taking over the management of information in the organization. You've got to remember in the 1970's large corporations needed office towers each floor full of rows of cubicles, each cubicle having an office drone. And each drone was updating part of the information of the corporation. Such as forms in triplicate, and each being dutifully filed. With ledgers being updated.
Today most of the information is handled by servers, or even server farms. Each server can do into the billions of operations a second. So we don't need so many office drones anymore. Naturally in the government and banks they still have just as many, actually more drones. But in the competitive parts of the economy, they have been forced to gradually eliminate the drones.
For example say an area of the company needed 500 drones managing the information. Well they also then need building maintenance, management, HR, secretaries, etc.. Now say they need 25 drones to handle it. And a couple manager. Well somewhere in the country the corporation would have rented a large space to house all the cubicle drones.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Luddite fallacy
I definately agree the Luddite fallacy was indeed a fallacy up until recently. The limitation on economic growth in the past was labour supply. We wanted say more factory workers in an area, but we couldn't spare labour from the farming fields. As agricultural productivity soared, all of a sudden we could fulfill our desire for more factory workers.
And indeed the very technology that was causing the automation of jobs, like the farm combine in agriculture, opened up vast new industries. Like the auto industry. Which employed millions.. and we could now afford autos, because of course we had the surplus labour who could build them.
However I believe a phase change has happened. The new technologies clearly appear to be getting rid of good jobs faster than they open up new ones. When you think about it logically this is completely natural that this point would be reached eventually.
And indeed the very technology that was causing the automation of jobs, like the farm combine in agriculture, opened up vast new industries. Like the auto industry. Which employed millions.. and we could now afford autos, because of course we had the surplus labour who could build them.
However I believe a phase change has happened. The new technologies clearly appear to be getting rid of good jobs faster than they open up new ones. When you think about it logically this is completely natural that this point would be reached eventually.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Challenges or Opportunities?
I notice many societal challenges the common thinking is automatically to assume they are insurmountable, and to dread how they will lead to a lower standard of living. For example affordable housing/lack of available housing.
A guestimate from me is Britain needs 2 million more housing units across the country over the next decade to meet current housing shortage and the housing needs of the 2.5 million net population growth expected. At least 1 million of these houses in Greater London. If half of these were my favorite, 15-20 story condo buildings with 150 units in each building, so 500,000 units in London, that would require 3,300 of these buildings to be built in Greater London. I believe in building these condo towers right clustered on major public transportation links.
An additional 500,000 housing units could be built in new suburbs expanding into the green belt. Since Greater London already has around 4 million housing units, this isn't that bad of an expansion.
Anyway the point is the number of jobs this would create in constructing these 1 million housing units in London. From architects, to engineers, to building supply firms, to transport companies, to construction trades, to infrastructure related expansion work. Its sad but in economics that growth is what gets the money flowing. With all those guys employed in good jobs, they in turn would go out and spend the money. For a nation with millions of unemployed and a housing shortage it seems a no-brainer.
A guestimate from me is Britain needs 2 million more housing units across the country over the next decade to meet current housing shortage and the housing needs of the 2.5 million net population growth expected. At least 1 million of these houses in Greater London. If half of these were my favorite, 15-20 story condo buildings with 150 units in each building, so 500,000 units in London, that would require 3,300 of these buildings to be built in Greater London. I believe in building these condo towers right clustered on major public transportation links.
An additional 500,000 housing units could be built in new suburbs expanding into the green belt. Since Greater London already has around 4 million housing units, this isn't that bad of an expansion.
Anyway the point is the number of jobs this would create in constructing these 1 million housing units in London. From architects, to engineers, to building supply firms, to transport companies, to construction trades, to infrastructure related expansion work. Its sad but in economics that growth is what gets the money flowing. With all those guys employed in good jobs, they in turn would go out and spend the money. For a nation with millions of unemployed and a housing shortage it seems a no-brainer.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine coming paradigm
-Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine- This is the garden of eden of unpicked orchards. In the long run, you take an elderly person and extract adult stem cell from an organ in their body. You then isolate healthy cells that have not mutated through damage through time. And you reset the telomeres on these isolated stem cells. At this stage you can also insert the genetics that you want into these stem cells. This will combine nicely with genetic engineering.
In Bioreactors you replicate hundreds of millions of these young, healthy stem cells. When that is completed you filter out the bad replications you made, and keep the healthy ones. Then you inject or use some other method to insert these cells into the elderly person's organ. As the elderly person's cells die as usual, and this depends on the cell type, the young, healthy stem cells will replicate themselves and rejuvinate the person's organ. You do this across all cell types in the body, and it is rejuvinated from a cell replication perspective. This isn't a cure all for aging by itself, but we are talking a huge advance.
There is fears that resetting the telomeres could increase cancers. But I feel this is wrong, young people have these healthy cells with long telomeres left, yet are far less likely to get cancer. I believe most cancer is a failure of the immune system. This is why you see AIDS patients getting cancers.
An 80 year old with whole body replacement of the adult stem cells, would actually have healthier stem cells than a 30 year old. Literally have younger cells. Of course after hte original batch of elderly people were treated, the plan would be to do it on a more regular basis. People wouldn't wait until 80 to get going on these procedures, they may start at around 50, and reset the clock.
In Bioreactors you replicate hundreds of millions of these young, healthy stem cells. When that is completed you filter out the bad replications you made, and keep the healthy ones. Then you inject or use some other method to insert these cells into the elderly person's organ. As the elderly person's cells die as usual, and this depends on the cell type, the young, healthy stem cells will replicate themselves and rejuvinate the person's organ. You do this across all cell types in the body, and it is rejuvinated from a cell replication perspective. This isn't a cure all for aging by itself, but we are talking a huge advance.
There is fears that resetting the telomeres could increase cancers. But I feel this is wrong, young people have these healthy cells with long telomeres left, yet are far less likely to get cancer. I believe most cancer is a failure of the immune system. This is why you see AIDS patients getting cancers.
An 80 year old with whole body replacement of the adult stem cells, would actually have healthier stem cells than a 30 year old. Literally have younger cells. Of course after hte original batch of elderly people were treated, the plan would be to do it on a more regular basis. People wouldn't wait until 80 to get going on these procedures, they may start at around 50, and reset the clock.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)