...no lessons learned.
“Those who continue to point out inconvenient facts about our economy and financial markets will continue to be branded doomers and conspiracy theorists. Scorn and ridicule will be the weapons used by the Deep State to undermine confidence in reality- based analysis. Newsletter writers and money managers will be accused of fear mongering to attract subscribers and investors. I’m neither a newsletter peddler or investment professional. I’m just a dude who gets up every morning and drives to my job to support my family. I benefit in no way financially by taking a stand against the corrupt, lying, propaganda peddlers for the establishment.â€~Jim Quinn
https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018 ... s-learned/
10 Years Later...
-
dammitgriff
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:06 am
10 Years Later...
Last edited by dammitgriff on Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
This country's monetary system has been fraudulent from the bottom to the top for the past 100 years, and sometimes they have to put on a show pretending to fix things.
I got this far: ..." the criminal Wall Street banks who committed the greatest control fraud in world history and the disposition of their good assets to non-criminal banks who did not recklessly leverage their assets by 30 to 1, while fraudulently issuing worthless loans to deadbeats and criminals. ...
The reasons for the mortgage meltdown were primarily bottom up. Greedy mortgage brokers and realtors, buyers who lied on applications, and an abandonment of their basic mission of honest risk assessment by the 3 big credit bureaus led to a classic real estate bubble. Those "criminal Wall Street banks who bought the mortgages and assorted mortgage based derivatives were the victims, not the perpetrators.
Some of the mortgage brokers and mortgage bankers have been prosecuted but relatively few of the lying buyers and none of the credit assessors. It's easier and more politically correct to feed the masses Marxist and populist instincts by blaming Wall Street.
I didn't read much of the rest except to note the author's chartist tendencies and purported ability to predict the future, prophesying DOOM.. There's way too much going on in an economy to predict it'll happen again just like the last time, or because there appears to be a pattern. This fallacy applies to the entire pseudoscience of Economics and has made it highly useless in predicting anything beyond a 6 month horizon.
What are some of the limitations and drawbacks of economics as a field? By Investopedia
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answer ... z5QM7A30Ne
Economics is a social science that examines how people produce, distribute, and consume goods and services. This means that much of the field is based on human behavior, which can be somewhat irrational and unpredictable. For this reason, it has certain inherent limitations that prevent economists from being able to accurately predict market performance and know exactly how certain policies will affect different sectors and economies.
In addition, the field of economics suffers from the problem of non-replicability. It is impossible to recreate all market conditions or be certain of predictions based on how markets have behaved in the past under similar circumstances. Unlike the hard sciences, where researchers are able to isolate certain variables and figure out direct relationships between cause and effect, there is no way to completely isolate any variable in the world of economics. The markets are simply too large, too intertwined and too influenced by human behavior to act in any way that is 100% predictable. In fact, there are so many variables involved that it is even impossible to identify all the factors in play in the first place.
The limitations of economics become especially problematic in normative economics, which involves recommendations about how things ought to be and what types of policies the government should implement in order to improve the economy. Different economists come to completely different conclusions about what kind of regulations and controls should be applied to various markets and exactly what outcomes will result. While they can point to data, historic precedence and other facts to support their arguments, they is no way to guarantee that they are right.
Because the field of economics cannot provide concrete conclusions, it is susceptible to criticism from a variety of sources, as is the case with political economics. Politicians often use normative economics to argue for certain policy changes that support their own agendas. They present their beliefs and hypotheses to the public as irrefutable facts when, in actuality, there is no way to verify the validity of their ideas except to put them into practice and evaluate the results.
Economics was born out of the idea that human beings could study the nature of wealth in order to better the world, but it is a problematic area of inquiry. While positive economics can help people understand what is currently happening, it is much more difficult to use similar modes of thinking to predict the future and influence policies to ensure overall improvements. Even longstanding theories that are considered essential aspects of economics sometimes contradict one another. Ultimately, economists have to choose to subscribe to a particular school of thought that best aligns with their beliefs. These opposing viewpoints can cause controversies and only add to the limitations of economics in actually solving financial problems.
The reasons for the mortgage meltdown were primarily bottom up. Greedy mortgage brokers and realtors, buyers who lied on applications, and an abandonment of their basic mission of honest risk assessment by the 3 big credit bureaus led to a classic real estate bubble. Those "criminal Wall Street banks who bought the mortgages and assorted mortgage based derivatives were the victims, not the perpetrators.
Some of the mortgage brokers and mortgage bankers have been prosecuted but relatively few of the lying buyers and none of the credit assessors. It's easier and more politically correct to feed the masses Marxist and populist instincts by blaming Wall Street.
I didn't read much of the rest except to note the author's chartist tendencies and purported ability to predict the future, prophesying DOOM.. There's way too much going on in an economy to predict it'll happen again just like the last time, or because there appears to be a pattern. This fallacy applies to the entire pseudoscience of Economics and has made it highly useless in predicting anything beyond a 6 month horizon.
What are some of the limitations and drawbacks of economics as a field? By Investopedia
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answer ... z5QM7A30Ne
Economics is a social science that examines how people produce, distribute, and consume goods and services. This means that much of the field is based on human behavior, which can be somewhat irrational and unpredictable. For this reason, it has certain inherent limitations that prevent economists from being able to accurately predict market performance and know exactly how certain policies will affect different sectors and economies.
In addition, the field of economics suffers from the problem of non-replicability. It is impossible to recreate all market conditions or be certain of predictions based on how markets have behaved in the past under similar circumstances. Unlike the hard sciences, where researchers are able to isolate certain variables and figure out direct relationships between cause and effect, there is no way to completely isolate any variable in the world of economics. The markets are simply too large, too intertwined and too influenced by human behavior to act in any way that is 100% predictable. In fact, there are so many variables involved that it is even impossible to identify all the factors in play in the first place.
The limitations of economics become especially problematic in normative economics, which involves recommendations about how things ought to be and what types of policies the government should implement in order to improve the economy. Different economists come to completely different conclusions about what kind of regulations and controls should be applied to various markets and exactly what outcomes will result. While they can point to data, historic precedence and other facts to support their arguments, they is no way to guarantee that they are right.
Because the field of economics cannot provide concrete conclusions, it is susceptible to criticism from a variety of sources, as is the case with political economics. Politicians often use normative economics to argue for certain policy changes that support their own agendas. They present their beliefs and hypotheses to the public as irrefutable facts when, in actuality, there is no way to verify the validity of their ideas except to put them into practice and evaluate the results.
Economics was born out of the idea that human beings could study the nature of wealth in order to better the world, but it is a problematic area of inquiry. While positive economics can help people understand what is currently happening, it is much more difficult to use similar modes of thinking to predict the future and influence policies to ensure overall improvements. Even longstanding theories that are considered essential aspects of economics sometimes contradict one another. Ultimately, economists have to choose to subscribe to a particular school of thought that best aligns with their beliefs. These opposing viewpoints can cause controversies and only add to the limitations of economics in actually solving financial problems.
-
dammitgriff
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:06 am
Good grief, you’ve proven the author’s point. If you can’t interpret the charts our own government publishes to see his concern, no need to attack the messenger.
My beef is that we aren’t given all the facts, only selective information that has the intended effect of calming the masses to get them to keep the economy going in the wrong direction, which was apparent only after the last two financial crises hit.
The banks are the gatekeepers that offer risky loans, and they know the borrowers are only marginally qualified to receive them. The banks are incentivized to loan money for the interest returns.
I do agree with you that people who can’t afford these loans for houses, education, credit cards or cars have no business applying for them. The banks aren’t forcing anyone to sign paperwork, but Americans who can’t pay their bills still keep getting approved for loans.
My beef is that we aren’t given all the facts, only selective information that has the intended effect of calming the masses to get them to keep the economy going in the wrong direction, which was apparent only after the last two financial crises hit.
The banks are the gatekeepers that offer risky loans, and they know the borrowers are only marginally qualified to receive them. The banks are incentivized to loan money for the interest returns.
I do agree with you that people who can’t afford these loans for houses, education, credit cards or cars have no business applying for them. The banks aren’t forcing anyone to sign paperwork, but Americans who can’t pay their bills still keep getting approved for loans.
You are catastrophizing based on economic theories of little validity. Like Marxism, any of them, Classical Economics, Keynesian Economics, Monetarism, all of them, can become a religion to true believers, who really seem unable to hear what any critic is saying, unable to accept criticism, unable to change.
-
dammitgriff
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:06 am
The government is the one putting out the data, and they’re using information asymmetry to confound the real issues. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is what you’re referring to, not Austrian Business Cycle theory, which accurately describes and predicts the boom-bust market cycle.jjk308 wrote:You are catastrophizing based on economic theories of little validity. Like Marxism, any of them, Classical Economics, Keynesian Economics, Monetarism, all of them, can become a religion to true believers, who really seem unable to hear what any critic is saying, unable to accept criticism, unable to change.
Based on historical market corrections, we are due for a doozy. And Goldman Sachs just released a report predicting/estimating the timeframe of December this year for the real fun to begin.
Don’t you remember all the talking heads on TV in 2008 telling everyone the economy was just fine, and the American people had nothing to worry about...until the bottom fell out literally just days later and a modest $500 billion mortgage market almost toppled the $200 Trillion global economy.
They didn’t have a clue then, and they don’t have a clue now. All the Fed and central banks did was print $20 trillion dollars to bail out the bankers and drove down interest rates to near-zero to re-inflate the bubble. They refused to let those big banks—the ones responsible for the crash to begin with—to fail. And because of that, we are in even worse shape now than the last meltdown.
I’m hearing and reading financial and economic experts predicting a 50 to 80 percent correction in global markets. All the indicators are already there and we are just waiting for the first domino to fall.
