Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
¡¡¡Tema cerrado!!!
Asunto: »Political & economic ideologies (communism, capitalism et
Euro is not a problem.
I think you don't want to see.
About debt problems.. that is a fake track that media give to make people think about economics as a moral tale.
That's wrong.
I know that every economy wants growth but if you boost your growth over your structural and demographic capacity using too much debt and getting overinvested, then your future will suffer
WTF is this? Why a private company making private investiment, borrowing private money should fail for a question of "demographic capacity"???
you are kidding me. Re-Start from the basics, please.
It's invitable and no monetary policy will be able to save you from it but only postpone problems and probably even create monetary and macroeconomic instability. Monetary policy is overvalued
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???
WE don' t need no monetary policies. WE need currencies!!!
You really didn't understand.
I want only the market of currency to do what EVERY economist in the world say is it rule to do!
Demographic movements are key to long-term economic development. You can't escape a demographic pyramid becoming a romboid. That's why China and India are in a race to become rich before they become old.
So germany are a failing country?
Something says me you are very confused.
I think you don't want to see.
About debt problems.. that is a fake track that media give to make people think about economics as a moral tale.
That's wrong.
I know that every economy wants growth but if you boost your growth over your structural and demographic capacity using too much debt and getting overinvested, then your future will suffer
WTF is this? Why a private company making private investiment, borrowing private money should fail for a question of "demographic capacity"???
you are kidding me. Re-Start from the basics, please.
It's invitable and no monetary policy will be able to save you from it but only postpone problems and probably even create monetary and macroeconomic instability. Monetary policy is overvalued
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???
WE don' t need no monetary policies. WE need currencies!!!
You really didn't understand.
I want only the market of currency to do what EVERY economist in the world say is it rule to do!
Demographic movements are key to long-term economic development. You can't escape a demographic pyramid becoming a romboid. That's why China and India are in a race to become rich before they become old.
So germany are a failing country?
Something says me you are very confused.
One day two man were navigating on a little boat.
A made a hole in the boat and it started to sink.
B claims "what are you doing, you are killing us"
and A responded: "but you cheated with your girlfriend"
B thougths it was true, but still it doesn't make sense at all.
that little joke means that YES country with economics problems had their flaws. Still their sinking is not caused by that.
Those two things can be both true, contemporary!
A made a hole in the boat and it started to sink.
B claims "what are you doing, you are killing us"
and A responded: "but you cheated with your girlfriend"
B thougths it was true, but still it doesn't make sense at all.
that little joke means that YES country with economics problems had their flaws. Still their sinking is not caused by that.
Those two things can be both true, contemporary!
i can not anything bad on euro. look:
1. more than half of my pension is owned by my state, I will get poor pension from this 1 system
wait...mobil problem
(editado)
1. more than half of my pension is owned by my state, I will get poor pension from this 1 system
wait...mobil problem
(editado)
i can not anything bad on euro. look:
1. more than half of my pension is owned by my state, I will get poor pension from this 1 system
2. the rest (it was half several years, but now they lower it, so just 25%) is my private pension system
and there:
- 50% is invested in stability EU fond, there is 2-3% half revenue :-) but it guarantees not go below 0
-50% is invested in stocks EU fond (indexes) and there is now 16% half revenue :-D !!
god bless the euro and I suppose my state give me chance give much more into private fonds :-)
1. more than half of my pension is owned by my state, I will get poor pension from this 1 system
2. the rest (it was half several years, but now they lower it, so just 25%) is my private pension system
and there:
- 50% is invested in stability EU fond, there is 2-3% half revenue :-) but it guarantees not go below 0
-50% is invested in stocks EU fond (indexes) and there is now 16% half revenue :-D !!
god bless the euro and I suppose my state give me chance give much more into private fonds :-)
I choose EU stocks only, cos I believe in EU strength.
World stocks have much smaller revenues last 2-3 years as EU have :-)
World stocks have much smaller revenues last 2-3 years as EU have :-)
i can not anything bad on euro.
I don't understand.
World stocks have much smaller revenues last 2-3 years as EU have :-)
well, nobody gives money for free.. so there must be a reason why those revenues are greater than the other..
that reason is called RISK, a risky investiment find harder to find investors, so it need better revenues to attract money.
On the contrary I'm going to buy extra-EU bonds to protect me from the euro-break storm.
I don't understand.
World stocks have much smaller revenues last 2-3 years as EU have :-)
well, nobody gives money for free.. so there must be a reason why those revenues are greater than the other..
that reason is called RISK, a risky investiment find harder to find investors, so it need better revenues to attract money.
On the contrary I'm going to buy extra-EU bonds to protect me from the euro-break storm.
@I don't understand.
a lot of people just blame EU and euro..... so I post my statement
so there must be a reason why those revenues are greater than the other..
EU after crises is now in good condition.
It is smart risk, for example you can always change structure in your pension fond from the risk one to stability (guaranteed) one.
a lot of people just blame EU and euro..... so I post my statement
so there must be a reason why those revenues are greater than the other..
EU after crises is now in good condition.
It is smart risk, for example you can always change structure in your pension fond from the risk one to stability (guaranteed) one.
so I post my statement
that statement is what I don't understand. Maybe for the lack of the verb.
that statement is what I don't understand. Maybe for the lack of the verb.
European comminssion press release
they admit it.
The still growing macroeconomic, employment and social divergences threaten the core objectives of the EU as set out in the Treaties, namely to benefit all its members by promoting economic convergence and to improve the lives of citizens in the Member States. The latest review shows how the seeds of the current divergence were already sown in the early years of the euro, as unbalanced growth in some Member States, based on accumulating debt fuelled by low interest rates and strong capital inflows, was often associated with disappointing productivity developments and competitiveness issues.
In the absence of the currency devaluation option, euro area countries attempting to regain cost competitiveness have to rely on internal devaluation (wage and price containment). This policy, however, has its limitations and downsides not least in terms of increased unemployment and social hardship, and its effectiveness depends on many factors such as the openness of the economy, the strength of external demand, and the presence of policies and investments enhancing non-cost competitiveness.
they admit it.
The still growing macroeconomic, employment and social divergences threaten the core objectives of the EU as set out in the Treaties, namely to benefit all its members by promoting economic convergence and to improve the lives of citizens in the Member States. The latest review shows how the seeds of the current divergence were already sown in the early years of the euro, as unbalanced growth in some Member States, based on accumulating debt fuelled by low interest rates and strong capital inflows, was often associated with disappointing productivity developments and competitiveness issues.
In the absence of the currency devaluation option, euro area countries attempting to regain cost competitiveness have to rely on internal devaluation (wage and price containment). This policy, however, has its limitations and downsides not least in terms of increased unemployment and social hardship, and its effectiveness depends on many factors such as the openness of the economy, the strength of external demand, and the presence of policies and investments enhancing non-cost competitiveness.
Hmm internal devaluation vs currency devaluation? I mean I somewhat cant see difference in the end...
when you lower workers salaries you make them poor but you don't get any significant advantage.
Their competitivity regaining is useless if you get it destroyng public balance and private internal demand. In the end this causes an economic disaster.
When your currency devaluate your goods will cost less outside and your workers will not easily buy foregin countries goods (but will continue to buy their country's products), so your exportation boosts, your importation falls and your unemployment decrease. That's not the paradise, f.e, importing oil, or energy will mean higher costs, importing technologies or food the same.. those cost will generate a costant outcome of money... and so people will not continue to keep their actual standards, but on the other side it stimulates internal market to produce goods you can't import.
t's what USA, China, UK, etc did in those last years (and please don't claim for protectionism, that is another thing)
and almost every country that have its own currency do it in crisis times.
Only EU can't do it , because of its currency.. and of their cheating politician leaders!
Anyway.
The point I want to stand is that nobody voted for internal devaluation and salaries drop.
Who want to lose its job or to accept a lower salary?
Who gets the best advantages? Importers (they have a strong currency market to invade) and financial institutes (their money get value in time!!!)
Who pays? workers and companies.
Their competitivity regaining is useless if you get it destroyng public balance and private internal demand. In the end this causes an economic disaster.
When your currency devaluate your goods will cost less outside and your workers will not easily buy foregin countries goods (but will continue to buy their country's products), so your exportation boosts, your importation falls and your unemployment decrease. That's not the paradise, f.e, importing oil, or energy will mean higher costs, importing technologies or food the same.. those cost will generate a costant outcome of money... and so people will not continue to keep their actual standards, but on the other side it stimulates internal market to produce goods you can't import.
t's what USA, China, UK, etc did in those last years (and please don't claim for protectionism, that is another thing)
and almost every country that have its own currency do it in crisis times.
Only EU can't do it , because of its currency.. and of their cheating politician leaders!
Anyway.
The point I want to stand is that nobody voted for internal devaluation and salaries drop.
Who want to lose its job or to accept a lower salary?
Who gets the best advantages? Importers (they have a strong currency market to invade) and financial institutes (their money get value in time!!!)
Who pays? workers and companies.
Remember the US government shutdown few months ago and it's reason ("funding gap")? Perfect system indeed ... ;) Not to mention the rich got even richer and everyone else is paying the 'bill'.
The problem is much more complicated and many of the known systems are sick, but it won't be changed as those in power benefits from these sick systems.
The problem is much more complicated and many of the known systems are sick, but it won't be changed as those in power benefits from these sick systems.
Remember the US government shutdown
I think that was only an internal polical problem.
The problem is much more complicated and many of the known systems are sick, but it won't be changed as those in power benefits from these sick systems.
this is maybe true, but I think we must understand that is not "this economy" that is sick, but it's the euro-zone that is buil with the goal of devaluation of prices and salaries. Then we can discuss about global economy flaws, but not confusing the euro-zone with rest of the wolrd.
I think that was only an internal polical problem.
The problem is much more complicated and many of the known systems are sick, but it won't be changed as those in power benefits from these sick systems.
this is maybe true, but I think we must understand that is not "this economy" that is sick, but it's the euro-zone that is buil with the goal of devaluation of prices and salaries. Then we can discuss about global economy flaws, but not confusing the euro-zone with rest of the wolrd.
Hmm internal devaluation vs currency devaluation? I mean I somewhat cant see difference in the end...
There is no difference in the end, bot lead to consumption adjusting to productivity (unless you fuel again the same process that eroded competitiveness in the first place).
In the short run, currency devaluation involves sharp changes in exchange rates and some degree of high, perhaps 2-digit inflation for a year or two (from that point, it depends on what subsequent policies you implement), while internal devaluation involves like 10 years of 2-digit unemployment and iron fist repression of social unrest.
So yes, it's like opening a closed can. All methods that end up with the can being opened look alike in terms of the final outcome, but they may imply a very different process.
There is no difference in the end, bot lead to consumption adjusting to productivity (unless you fuel again the same process that eroded competitiveness in the first place).
In the short run, currency devaluation involves sharp changes in exchange rates and some degree of high, perhaps 2-digit inflation for a year or two (from that point, it depends on what subsequent policies you implement), while internal devaluation involves like 10 years of 2-digit unemployment and iron fist repression of social unrest.
So yes, it's like opening a closed can. All methods that end up with the can being opened look alike in terms of the final outcome, but they may imply a very different process.