Fishy Economics

Click to Play

why a global free market without border is a fishy idea.

Recession?: Only for Men; Women Gain in Tough Economy

There is discriminatory spending by our government of the stimulus bill. It has gotten so bad that the media is renaming the recession the “Man-cession”. The only sector of the economy that is in growth are jobs that women are stronger at. Pink collar over the last ten years has grown 10%. Keep in mind there isn’t any equivalence between the sexes in other ways because society is unforgiving to unemployed men and we do not have a domestic option. The educational system has also gone out of it’s way to discriminate towards men. and yet our government is still pushing affirmative action in the stimulus bill? someone has to explain to these feminists about social engineering… it has always failed the people. While the Pink Collar fascists still have pictures of Hillary Clinton and her pant suit crew on their profile pictures on facebook, out-of-wedlock births to young women is getting out of hand… and guess what? It isn’t daddy’s fault!

Men are losing jobs at far greater rates than women as the industries they dominate, such as manufacturing, construction, and investment services, are hardest hit by the downturn. Some 1.1 million fewer men are working in the United States than there were a year ago, according to the Labor Department. By contrast, 12,000 more women are working

Read more at debbieschlussel.com or you will get CANCER like Barbara Ehrenreich… you have been warned! bah wah ah ah hah hah

someone has to explain to these feminists about social engineering… it has always failed the people. While the Pink Collar fascists still have pictures of Hillary Clinton and her pant suit crew on their profile pictures on facebook, out-of-wedlock births to young women is getting out of hand… and guess what? It isn’t daddy’s fault!

Inflation-adjusted median income for young families has declined from $44,000 in 1979 to $38,000 in 2007, Sum said. During the same period, as jobs that allowed less-educated men to support a family have diminished, out-of-wedlock births to young women rose to 50 percent of births, from 20 percent in 1980

via boston.com

Over the past couple of decades, the male-female ratio on campuses has been changing dramatically. Women outnumber men by a 4-3 ratio on college campuses. Men currently make up only 43 percent of college graduates. In short, many today acknowledge that there is a crisis of the disappearing educated male.

sexist campus activism of participants in the nation’s 500 college gender studies departments. The conference program, attended by about 100 professors and student affairs personnel, exposed some unpleasant facts: men are “overrepresented” in drug and alcohol abuse, violations of campus regulations, and acts of violence and sexual assault, and they are “underrepresented” in academic programs and campus leadership activities.

Over the past couple of decades, the male-female ratio on campuses has been changing dramatically. Women outnumber men by a 4-3 ratio on college campuses. Men currently make up only 43 percent of college graduates.

In short, many today acknowledge that there is a crisis of the disappearing educated male.

Hostility toward men and masculinity begins in daycare and increases each year thereafter. Sexual harassment training and policies have created an uncertain environment, if not a hostile one, where men have to watch their every word and action lest it be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Some experts criticize a campus “worldview that sees things only in terms of oppressors and the oppressed.” Typically, the few campus men’s studies programs are designed to push an anti-masculinity agenda.

via americanthinker.com

the women shit on us. they take all the jobs. meanwhile affirmative action in the stimulus bill when the industry that is effected by job losses is men’s. the problem is getting worse, but the burden is all men’s

the feminists then demonstrated the death grip they hold over Obama and the leaders of the Democratic Party. The feminists swung into action with noisy accusations that the stimulus discriminated against women because its jobs would go mostly to men.

The feminists had no sympathy with the fact that men were victims of most of the lost jobs because the majority of manufacturing and construction jobs are men’s jobs. The segments of our economy dominated by women — social services, education, health, childcare and welfare — have actually gained jobs during this recession.

Nevertheless, the feminists demanded that half the stimulus jobs be given to women. The feminists worked to achieve this result by directing the stimulus funds into the types of jobs where women predominate and by allocating at least a third of the spending in manufacturing and construction industries to training women for those men’s jobs.

All the feminist organizations joined in the political clatter. They called for a meeting so they could lecture Obama’s economic advisers and hurl their demands that the stimulus package create jobs that women like, such as workplace-comfortable inside jobs with air-conditioned offices and carpeted floors.

As one tactic to intimidate Obama administration officials, the feminists successfully insisted that participants in the meeting be seated in a circle without a table between them — a format that enabled the feminists to be confrontational. The feminists created their own vocabulary to shout at the men, demanding jobs for “human infrastructure” and “human bridges,” which were euphemisms for social service, health-care, childcare and librarian jobs.

via townhall.com

The feminists were well aware that Obama’s chief economist is Larry Summers, the former president of Harvard University, who had already proven himself a pushover for pushy feminists. His embarrassing confrontation with hysterical feminist faculty over academic math and science professorships proved that there is no way to appease the feminists and that apologizing to them only makes matters worse

via townhall.com

60% of college grads and grad school programs like law degrees are occupied by women. I don’t have a problem with this, but it is a little unfair to ask for affirmative action.we idolize Asia’s strong educational ethos, but seem to fear Asia’s strong cultural patriarchal view of the family. strong traditional Jewish values were patriarchal too. I’m not saying that we should turn the world upside down for anyone, but the gender revolution and our school’s ability to create innovators seem to be running parallel. women have strengths. their emotional quotient gets work in the modern world, why are we still doing this to men? Gender Engineering is destructive to all of us.

oh… and stop thinking I hate women. I love women… I want women. they don’t want me because I don’t have a job and they do.

a Leftist opinion on China – What is their side of the argument?

Dani Rodrik is writing for the Jordan Times and is an economics professor at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. from a Sephardic Jewish family from Turkey, this was written for a newspaper in Jordan. His analysis is that China should internalize their market because devaluing their currency is angering the West, but without this measure China would not be able to grow and because the country is a member of the World Trade Organization they can not pass tariffs. Without growth the Chinese government would destabilize because of the size of their population and a slowdown of this magnitude is claimed to put China below the 8 per cent growth threshold that it’s leadership apparently believes is necessary to avert social strife. Of course this is poor thinking because China just can’t insulate itself from the people who buy it’s products. China can still grow and play fair.

China’s undervalued currency and huge trade surplus pose great risks to the world economy. They threaten a major protectionist backlash in the United States and Europe; and they undermine the recovery in developing and emerging markets. Left unchecked, they will generate growing acrimony between China and other countries. But the solution is not nearly as simple as some pundits make it out to be.

Listen to what comes out of Washington and Brussels, or read the financial press, and you would think you were witnessing a straightforward morality play. It is in China’s own interests, these officials and commentators say, to let the renminbi appreciate. After all, the Chinese economy can no longer rely on external demand and exports to sustain its remarkable growth, and Chinese consumers, who are still poor on average, deserve a break and should be encouraged to spend rather than save.

This story casts China’s policy makers in the role of evil and misguided currency manipulators, who, inexplicably, choose to harm not only the rest of the world, but their own society as well. In fact, an appreciating renminbi would likely deal a serious blow to China’s growth, which essentially relies on a simple, time-tested recipe: encourage industrialisation. Currency undervaluation is currently the Chinese government’s main instrument for subsidising manufacturing and other tradable sectors, and therefore promoting growth through structural change.

Before it joined the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 2001, China had a wider range of policy instruments for achieving this end. It could promote its industries through high tariffs, explicit subsidies, domestic content requirements on foreign firms, investment incentives, and many other forms of industrial policy. But WTO membership has made it difficult, if not impossible, to resort to these traditional forms of industrial support. China’s tariffs declined precipitously in the late 1990s, and many of the other inducements were also phased out. Currency undervaluation has become a substitute.

It is not just China that benefits from a competitive currency. There is a strong positive relationship across all developing countries between currency undervaluation and economic growth. But this relationship is much stronger in China, presumably because the productivity gap between the rural, traditional parts of the economy and the modern, industrial sectors is so huge.

The trouble with currency undervaluation is that, unlike conventional industrial policy, it spills over into the trade balance. It acts as a subsidy on the production of tradable goods (which is desirable), along with a tax on their domestic consumption (which is incidental and undesirable). Indeed, China’s current-account imbalance, which had remained moderate until the current decade, began its inexorable rise in 2001 – precisely when the country joined the WTO.

Given that WTO rules tie China’s hands on industrial policy, how much of a growth penalty would the Chinese economy suffer if the renminbi were to appreciate? My estimates, crude as they are, suggest a steep tradeoff. An appreciation of 25 per cent – roughly the extent by which the renminbi currently is undervalued – would reduce China’s growth by somewhat more than two percentage points. This is a significant effect, even by the standards of China’s superlative growth performance.

Most importantly, a slowdown of this magnitude would put China below the 8 per cent growth threshold that its leadership apparently believes is necessary to avert social strife. No one knows where the 8 per cent figure really comes from, and many experts believe that China’s society and polity are capable of handling much lower growth. But, even if political implications are put aside, it would be a tragedy if the most potent poverty-reduction engine the world has ever known were to experience a notable slowdown.

To be sure, other countries that relied on exports to grow rapidly – such as Germany, Japan and South Korea – eventually had to let their currencies appreciate. But China is still a very poor country, at barely one-tenth the income level of the US. It has a huge reservoir of surplus labour in the countryside. In addition, China must live with restrictions on its industrial policies that none of these other countries, in pre-WTO days, had to abide by.

So we are left, it seems, with two equally unappetising options. China can maintain its currency practices, but at the risk of large global macroeconomic imbalances and a major political backlash in the US and elsewhere. Or it can let its currency appreciate, at the risk of inducing a growth slowdown and political and social unrest at home. It is not clear that advocates of this option have fully comprehended its potentially severe adverse consequences.

There is, of course, a third path, but it would require rewriting the WTO’s rules. If China were allowed a free hand with industrial policies, it could promote manufactures directly while allowing the renminbi to appreciate. This way the increased demand for its industrial output would come from domestic rather than foreign consumers.

It is not a pretty solution, but it is the only one. The great advantage of industrial policies is that they enable growth-promoting structural change without generating trade surpluses. They are the only way to reconcile China’s continued need for industrialisation with the world economy’s requirement of lower current-account imbalances.

The writer, professor of political economy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, is the first recipient of the Social Science Research Council’s Albert O. Hirschman Prize. His latest book is “One Economics, Many Recipes: Globalisation, Institutions, and Economic Growth”. ©Project Syndicate, 2009. www.project-syndicate.org

via jordantimes.com

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

account gap is reducing supply of dollars overseas -

IT is getting harder for governments to buy United States Treasuries because the US’s shrinking current-account gap is reducing supply of dollars overseas, a Chinese central bank official said yesterday. The comments by Zhu Min, deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China, referred to the overall situation globally, not specifically to China, the biggest foreign holder of US government bonds. via shanghaidaily.com

while it is bothersome that China is doing this and it shows that China isn’t interested in American rebounds… it still doesn’t mean that they are right. for certain we are ill, but the one asset that the Chinese don’t think about is the value of American resources… which are undervalued and once utilized could dig America out of the hole quickly. Don’t listen to your bullies unless they are completely tied to you. China is not so involved in the United States that it wouldn’t help them to see their hegemonic threat die. We should not listen to the criticism of China anymore then we would listen to Syria’s criticism. that said debt is a horrible thing, but I still believe in our country.

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

Chinese officials generally are very careful about commenting on the dollar and Treasuries, given that so much of its US$2.3 trillion reserves are tied to their value, and markets always watch any such comments closely for signs of any shift in how it manages its assets.

China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange reaffirmed this month that the dollar stands secure as the anchor of the currency reserves it manages, even as the country seeks to diversify its investments.

In a discussion on the global role of the dollar, Zhu told an academic audience that it was inevitable that the dollar would continue to fall in value because Washington continued to issue more Treasuries to finance its deficit spending.

He then addressed where demand for that debt would come from.

“The United States cannot force foreign governments to increase their holdings of Treasuries,” Zhu said, according to an audio recording of his remarks. “Double the holdings? It is definitely impossible.”

“The US current account deficit is falling as residents’ savings increase, so its trade turnover is falling, which means the US is supplying fewer dollars to the rest of the world,” he added. “The world does not have so much money to buy more US Treasuries.”

China continues to see its foreign exchange reserves grow, albeit at a slower pace than in past years, due to a large trade surplus and inflows of foreign investment. They stood at US$2.3 trillion at the end of September.

Shanghai Daily | 上海日报

where I agree with Marxism and doubt Capitalism

I agree with Marx that class struggle is inherent, but disagree in that this struggle is usually a bad thing and misplaced. I do not await a revolution in linear messianic framework. Internationalist Libertarianism like what Ron Paul is talking about fails to take that libinal factor into account. We used to say Communism failed because it didn’t take desire into account, I never thought I’d see the day where I would say the same thing about Capitalism. the nature of internationalist greed is to monopolize the resources.

systemaztize onto a gold standard and create a trading free for all and then you get haves and have nots that will be sexually inclined to blow the system up. the best way to keep the system from cannibalizing is to create a financial currency that reflects all resources and pulls away from the symbolic power of either an arbitrary Federal Reserve or the virtual concept of “Gold” which is not running influence beyond it’s symbolism. Petrol exchanges will motivate people to search for alternative equivalences. It is also important to only trade with Republics that are deserving. Ron Paul seems to see the solution to Iran is to trade with our enemy. The only reason I could see this being a desire is because Paul benefits outside of our borders. Watching Paul on Russian Television does not increase my confidence. What keeps Capitalism’s engine running is a Republic with it’s checks and balances, not an internationalist free for all that trades with every backwards dictatorship.

not relying on the government does not mean pure autonomy

it still means you rely on the people around you. absolutist arguments is what got us to where we are now with Ron Paul vs. the Democrats. this tough love is extremist propaganda. you still need jobs. the idea that everyone is responsible for themselves in Capitalism is not true. small elegant infrastructure creates jobs, not no infrastructure. the theorists are not only wrong, they are exploiting argument to orchestrate prejudice.

Financial Guru Volcker Criticizes Obama Plan

Christopher Dodd seems to want power going to the big banks, Volcker wants power going to the FED

Volcker “criticized an administration proposal to create a council of regulatory agencies that would be headed by the Treasury Department. Instead, he called on lawmakers to give the central bank more authority to oversee the financial system. “It’s a natural function for the Federal Reserve,” Volcker said.”

isn’t this the opposite of what Ron Paul wants?

Caught In The Middle. No One to Blame

/*Images are wrapped in divs classed “flickr_badge_image” with ids “flickr_badge_imageX” where “X” is an integer specifying ordinal position. Below are some styles to get you started!*/#flickr_badge_uber_wrapper {text-align:center; width:260px;}#flickr_badge_wrapper {padding:10px 0 10px 0;}.flickr_badge_image {margin:0 10px 10px 10px;}.flickr_badge_image img {border: 1px solid black !important;}#flickr_badge_source {text-align:left; margin:0 10px 0 10px;}#flickr_badge_icon {float:left; margin-right:5px;}#flickr_www {display:block; padding:0 10px 0 10px !important; font: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Sans serif !important; color:#3993ff !important;}#flickr_badge_uber_wrapper a:hover,#flickr_badge_uber_wrapper a:link,#flickr_badge_uber_wrapper a:active,#flickr_badge_uber_wrapper a:visited {text-decoration:none !important; background:inherit !important;color:#3993ff;}#flickr_badge_wrapper {}#flickr_badge_source {padding:0 !important; font: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Sans serif !important; color:#666666 !important;}

www.flickr.com

"The reason the FED let Lehman fail was because of the price of the Oil

“The reason the FED let Lehman fail was because of the price of the Oil. Oil was trading at 140 usd a barrel. Today Oil is at 44 usd a barrel.” – Igor The Troll”

” Too much Gas in the economy! It was all set up! If you want the car to stall, overflow it with Gas! The Markets were set up to fail buy manipulating the price of OIL from 90 usd to 140 usd. Lehman could not hold the position because it was betting that the OIL price would come down. When the OIL went to 140 usd, Lehman needed to increase collateral, but it did not have enough liquid assets.” – Igor The Troll

“Letting OIL fall was politically desired moral hazard. Hence, the FED let Lehman bite the bullet. Collateral Damage to fix US trade imbalance. The OIL going from 90 usd to 140 usd was done intentionally to have the economy FAIL. This was done to make Bush look bad to get Obama elected.” – Igor The Troll

http://friendfeed.com/e/0717bef9-5cb6-447c-ab13-9ea28422732b/The-reason-the-FED-let-Lehman-fail-was-because-of/

“If you want to confirm my hypotheses check George Soros trades. Was he Buying OIL from 90 usd to 140 usd??? OIL went from 90 to 140 from Jan 2008 to July” – Igor The Troll

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=USO#chart2:symbol=uso;range=5y;compare=^dji;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

“This chart will show you the picture. From beginning of 2008 someone bought OIL like crazy. The market started to come down in the middle of 2007 because of the change to accounting rule, make mark to market.” – Igor The Troll

“Lehman was selling insurance for OIl, which is logical and good bet when OIL trading at 90. Who was buying insurance, besides the hedge funds who manipulated the price? Airline companies who need to guaranty OIL price at 90 or they lose money flying the planes on set air ticket price. Also OIL exporters want export price guarantied. But there is no reason to have the price of OIL go from 90 to 140 when economy is slowing down. The price of OIL should have declined not went up. By forcing the price of OIL to go up from 90 to 140 in the short period, you make it unprofitable for corporations to make business. So by manipulating OIL up you cause the economy to crash! So being now the government spending trillions of dollars to fix the economy, why they did not lend Lehman 100 billion to stay in business? The crash was set up to get Obama elected! Lehman was the fall guy, a scapegoat! ” – Igor The Troll

my understanding was that the price of oil we don’t control. do you think Obama used his OPEC connections to screw Bush? pushed the price of oil up? Bush was a fall guy… betrayed by his business partners who wanted to work with a new guy? ….but now wait a second… it was Bush who let Lehman fail. not Obama! – NoahDavidSimon

Bush did not let Lehman fail, he had no power to do anything. Paulson is a democrat plant from Goldman Sachs. The Goldman Sachs boys decided time to work with the new to be administration – Democrats. They are just covering their Asses with the best bet to win! – Igor The Troll

Obama is OPEC’s boy from a long time ago. OPEC did not want McCain to win, because McCain was going to Iran. OPEC chose to support their new Horse Obama. – Igor The Troll

Binary Politics

Click for Noah

ever get the feeling that Ron Paul would steer the ship in the wrong direction? The scene in the “The Poseidon Adventure” comes to mind when Hackman begs the people to climb up the Christmas tree and the elite bourgeois decide to follow the rules. Remind people of what Obama is doing to your kids and that the dumb prick “Libertarians” are going absolutist against it. WE NEED A NEGOTIATION! our children will be living in poverty if we don’t. Time tables must be made for all social spending and foreign debts. The government must privatize all finance companies if the economy picks up and this is all a false alarm. Let us pass legislation that gets us back into the free market, but does not let capitalism run wild either. Elegant legislation please! Tell Ron Paul that he was wrong about Iraq and he is wrong about the BAILOUT too. if we don’t do something soon our kids will all be in debt

Formats available: Flash Video (.flv)

send people a card
http://apps.facebook.com/graffitiwall/cards/view.php?card_rn=df8291d9d02588cf6af8d88117c7a0c6&s=nf
CHANGE THE WORLD!