Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
bearORbullENIGMA

Why Did They Manufacture This Credit/debt Bubble?

Recommended Posts

Your answers will result in shaping the content of my video:

I suspect your questions are leading.

I can't answer the first because I do not know, specifically, what you mean by manufacture in the context you've used it. I know that governments embraced credit, but that this is not necessarily a bad thing... I recognise however that manipulation of credit can be embraced for a variety of reasons - not all of which are noble. I am sure that governments/treasuries/regulators are either systemically corrupt or inept - maybe both... but I do not adopt the view of a conspiracy... I think the main problem is a lack of responsibility and oversight... where fallible individuals are presented with perverse incentives.

The K-cycle did not cause anything - it merely attempts to explain what has happened. It is not a causal force.

The 9/11 angle is interesting - but I'm not sure about causality... I never did buy the idea that interest rates should need to fall substantially because a terrorist incident (with less tangible destruction than most natural disasters) had happened. I'm sure that there is more to the story - but I'm equally sure that the wilder stories circulating on the internet are fabrications as people struggle to understand a very confusing period of history. I remain to be convinced about the extent to which whoever coordinated the attack intentionally influenced the (rather obvious) economic and military consequences.

I don't believe in "total economic meltdown" - it is a scare tactic used by partisans during economic negotiation.

I'm not sure it was deliberate - in the sense that the outcome was known and pursued - but I am of the opinion that governments were, at least, negligent... and that individuals were, almost certainly, corrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Politicians and Business people think they understand the implications of their decisions, but they do not. The complex interactions of society and finance are beyond any individual comprehension. Thus they continually make the same mistakes because the consequences take so many years to come about.

When a crisis arises many people attempt to take advantage of it, extreme theories and politics become more popular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Politicians and Business people think they understand the implications of their decisions, but they do not. The complex interactions of society and finance are beyond any individual comprehension. Thus they continually make the same mistakes because the consequences take so many years to come about.

When a crisis arises many people attempt to take advantage of it, extreme theories and politics become more popular.

Why do these different mistakes always lead to the same boom bust cycles?

Why do the rich elites always seem to profit from the busts?

Why is the average person's wealth always wiped out during the depression, conveniently pushing them back into poverty & eventually wage slavery?

Why is the system perpetuated if it is merely complexity & incompetence that leads to these supposedly unwanted accidents that occur consistently throughout history?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With 9/11 situation it could have been engineered to secure resources for when the financial collapse occurs.

If you destroy credit/money it comes down to arms. Who's got the biggest guns win. Like to guess who that is?

Guess where the US Army is at the moment of financial meltdown, if you run out of money you need to seize the assets you need.

Bin Laden was CIA, once CIA always CIA.

Everything with intelligence is smoke and mirrors.

If you really want conspiracy you can quite easily make a case that this has all been planned from the 80s.

The US / USSR where in an economic war race to see who could burn the most cash on arms.

The US won with the Star Wars Space programme, the Soviets knew they didn't have the money to try and come up with the same. The fact that it was unlikely to work was irrelevant the scheme was so expensive the Soviets baulked and the game was over.

Now just suppose that the US was also bankrupt, the game lost. What then, you start to invent huge sums of money to inflate your way out of debt. For a time this might appear to work, but everyone keeps spending and the debts get even bigger it's only a matter of time before the truth is discovered.

You need a plan, before it's discovered you are bankrupt you need to secure the energy you need.

What you need to do is get your troops to where the oil is before your found out to be bankrupt.

So how do you engineer getting your troops to where the oil is so that no one notices until it's too late?

Perhaps create a new enemy that has no state but will allow you to station the troops where needed.

I'm sure you can fill in the gaps.

So that's today's lunacy theory.

Believe none of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll go with the incompetence option.

Incompetence is used as an accusation by the mainstream media - in part because it is true - but also because questioning the morality of actions that protect the Status Quo or the Elite is TABOO.

Take the Iraq War for instance; The mainstream media - when it does on the rare occasion voice dissent - tends to question the competence of the strategy & our Leaders. Very, very rarely does it mention the immorality of creating a bloodbath to gain control of areas of Strategic importance & almost NEVER does it mention the immorality of a foreign policy that has seen America & the U.S. slaughter nearly 10 million people since WWII.

We are trained to think incompetence through repetition in the media.

Yes incompetence exists, but as incompetent as our leaders are, the system still works in favor of the rich. How does that work with incompetence alone?

As incompetent as our leaders in the Western nations are, we have become the de facto rulers of the World. Did we do that through incompetence alone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"To avoid Total Economic Meltdown, on the understanding that the game was up for the Financial World Order as we know it."

Replace "avoid" with "cause" and you might be getting close. Fairly standard technique for controlling other countries (see Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins) now used against the U.S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"To avoid Total Economic Meltdown, on the understanding that the game was up for the Financial World Order as we know it."

Replace "avoid" with "cause" and you might be getting close. Fairly standard technique for controlling other countries (see Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins) now used against the U.S.

Do you know, I bought that book about 6 months ago & now it's cued up at about the 3rd or 4th next book to read.

I've yet to finish Ex-CIA agent Philip Agee's 'CIA diary' on economic & political subversion in Ecuador & other places, then I'm reading 'Calling the shots' (how Washington dominates the UN) & then The Condor Files on Pinochet's US funded death squads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Too simple.

Didn't manufacture it completely, but strongly encouraged it.

Had to simplify it for reasons of space & comprehension.

Also, I feel that I'm using the term 'manufacture' loosely enough so that encouragement justifies it. For instance, I'm using it in the same context that you might say that a Company intentionally 'manufactures' a desire for it's products through advertising or a government intentionally 'manufactures' an economic collapse in a non-aligned state by imposing sanctions & embargoes on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Too simple.

Didn't manufacture it completely, but strongly encouraged it.

If they didnt want to lend so much, they wouldnt have gone to extraordinary lengths to disguise the Off balance sheet Vehicles and the method they were using to avoid capital ratio regulations.

This was a deliberate attempt to overlend.

Once started the greed kicked in.

There was no wall of money, it was a manufactured scheme to enrich bankers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

read any basic economics textbook

something like,

Economics: Private and Public Choice, James D. Gwartney

and all will be explained.... its not rocket science. too many people expect the media to give them an education these days :rolleyes: and that goes for newspapers like the FT, and CNBC/Bloomberg, (this site) etc .

read/download some decent books if you want to learn / be enlightened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Take the Iraq War for instance; The mainstream media - when it does on the rare occasion voice dissent - tends to question the competence of the strategy & our Leaders. Very, very rarely does it mention the immorality of creating a bloodbath to gain control of areas of Strategic importance & almost NEVER does it mention the immorality of a foreign policy that has seen America & the U.S. slaughter nearly 10 million people since WWII.

If you read the Indy you would be almost bored by the amount of times they have gone off about how immoral and generally oil centered the whole piece of crud was. They bang on about it quite regularly and have only gone quiet about it because nobody seems to care. Robert Fisk is a good example. Sees the whole thing as a classic colonial land grab doomed to bloody failure.

I wonder what the Indy editors think to themselves these days. "We've been banging on about Iraq and Global Warming for years now and nobody cares. Let's do a story about Elvis being spotted on Mars and see if anyone notices."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do these different mistakes always lead to the same boom bust cycles?

Why do the rich elites always seem to profit from the busts?

Why is the average person's wealth always wiped out during the depression, conveniently pushing them back into poverty & eventually wage slavery?

Why is the system perpetuated if it is merely complexity & incompetence that leads to these supposedly unwanted accidents that occur consistently throughout history?

Because that's how it works dammit!

People have tried setting up alternatives. Hippies had a go with communes. Result? Vitually nobody was interested. Marxists tried to have the system of production in common. We all know how that went. We're stuck with capitalism and because the big winners of crashes are those who hold actual assets, they get to be in charge when the boom gets going so they make more assets so...

The other option, of course, is to have a revolution in the crash which results in either a miserable failure of Marxist idealism or another bunch of people taking the rich people's stuff and then becoming the rich people themselves.

When you drop apples, they fall to the ground. When people think they can get something for nothing they make stupid mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mattsta1964

There's no doubt that the Central banking system is the origin of the problem.

The BIS relaxed the reserve ratio and other regulations in the Basel II accord. The various national Central banks then set base rates too low. The high street lenders and mortgage companies thought it was all a jolly good wheeze of course.

What happened after that was just a consequence of central banking policy. If interest rates had been kept higher, people would have been encouraged to save and asset prices would have remained more stable.

So why did the central banks allow this to happen?

It's got to be deliberate. I just can't see how this can have happened through incompetence. The BIS and the Cebtral banks MUST have known years ago what the consequences would be.

Also, central banks are really just shell companies. Their reserves are modest. Their real power is seignorage and the power to create whatever deposits are required for government spending out of thin air. They have nothing to lose in a recession. They are the ultimate example of moral hazard and it seems that they create these hazards for their own objectives.

So I'm afraid I'm firmly in the tin foil hat brigade.

The central banks created this crisis though what their objectives are.........is unknown of course. Though personally, I believe the international bankers have genocidal agendas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
read any basic economics textbook

something like,

Economics: Private and Public Choice, James D. Gwartney

and all will be explained.... its not rocket science. too many people expect the media to give them an education these days :rolleyes: and that goes for newspapers like the FT, and CNBC/Bloomberg, (this site) etc .

read/download some decent books if you want to learn / be enlightened.

Any basic economic textbook will no doubt educate us on the doctrinal line, however I - for one - am interested in the truth beyond the vested interests of the economists viewpoint.

What do you think is the media's job?

To provide distracting forms of entertainment & to avoid rigorous investigation/presentation of factual information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you read the Indy you would be almost bored by the amount of times they have gone off about how immoral and generally oil centered the whole piece of crud was. They bang on about it quite regularly and have only gone quiet about it because nobody seems to care."

Yes, the Independent, the Guardian & the Mirror have all voiced dissent about the Iraq War, but that is a minority of the mainstream media & all of these papers are ridiculed, considered 'leftist' & somehow not to be taken seriously by the the consensus in the mainstream media. Three Newspapers voicing dissent out of the 10 to 15 nationals & 5 major TV channels about ONE of the MANY wars we have waged hardly disproves my point.

There was almost Zero morally toned dissent about Afghanistan, Kosovo, the Gulf Slaughter, & the 15-20 countries America & Britain invaded or bombed or overthrew the governments of in Latin America & Indochina throughout the 60s, 70s & 80's. Even when Suharto died very recently, I think only 2 British Newspapers mentioned that the CIA & MI6 has sent him death lists to help slaughter 600,000 people (Indpendent & Guardian).

I would challenge your assertion that 'nobody seems to care'; you make it sound like the war is popular. In fact, the Iraq War is one of the only wars were the people came out on the streets & protested en masse before the invasion actually took place (not like Vietnam protests where people took to the streets after the mainstream media gave people permission to feel that the war was futile near the end only after the rich elites broke consensus over whether it really was a profitable venture).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because that's how it works dammit!

People have tried setting up alternatives. Hippies had a go with communes. Result? Vitually nobody was interested. Marxists tried to have the system of production in common. We all know how that went. We're stuck with capitalism and because the big winners of crashes are those who hold actual assets, they get to be in charge when the boom gets going so they make more assets so...

The other option, of course, is to have a revolution in the crash which results in either a miserable failure of Marxist idealism or another bunch of people taking the rich people's stuff and then becoming the rich people themselves.

When you drop apples, they fall to the ground. When people think they can get something for nothing they make stupid mistakes.

You make it sound like the only alternative to Capitalism is Communism & that those who want a change of system only want to plunder from the rich, rather than to stop the plunder of the poor by the rich.

It is the rich elites who have inherited vast amounts of Capital & Land who think they can get something for nothing, whilst the rest of humanity slaves away to pay for corporate bailouts to socialize the cost & risks for rich elites, rent for land that was stolen off them by the rich elites & War to protect rich elite's investments abroad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 337 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.