Can this be done?
Can you tell another person, “Respect Mr X, he is a powerful man”? If he does obey you, he is just being a robot, using force according to his plan of what respect means (eg smiling and bowing at sight of Mr X) without understanding why he is respecting Mr X.
Thus one person’s respect for another cannot be told or commanded, if it is told, it is rote, hypocritical just for show.
Can you tell another, “Accept Mr X”? If he does so, he is blindly without questioning or understanding obeying you to accept Mr X. Thus doing, he is a robot and you have karma because if the person you asks him to accept is not acceptable, is evil or deceitful, you are telling him to accept something that will harm him.
THUS IT IS RIDICULOUS AND RECKLESS TO ASK OTHERS TO RESPECT AND ACCCEPT OTHERS. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE NOR IS IT MERITORIOUS BUT IT IS KARMA CREATING BECAUSE YOU ARE TRYING TO CONVERT OTHERS INTO UNTHINKING ROBOTS OF RESPECT AND ACCEPTANCE.
Battleground Ipoh:
Whoever the Star journalist or editor who coined the word ‘Battleground Ipoh’ is unknowingly heaping deadly karma on himself.
The purpose is to up-play what is happening to stir emotions so as to boost newspaper circulation in the process you incite sentiment and should death and injury result, you are partly responsible for stoking the fire by calling it battleground.
Assistance from police, courts and press:
Who has assistance from the police, courts and press in their confrontation, BN or PR?
You must be blind to think the police, courts, press (newspapers, TV) are fair, have not sided with BN. The police and courts have no business taking sides because they are supposed to serve the nation not BN.
THUS ANYONE WHO IMPLIES THAT THE OPPOSITION ARE DISHONORABLE, WILL DO ANYTHING TO GAIN POWER IS ASKING FOR JUDGMENT, ASKING FOR BIG TROUBLE.
The US lender that proves you can trust the poor
The purpose of the story is emotional not based on reason, to tell others they are wrong, that lending to the poor is not always subprime, they can be better credit risks than wealthy people.
It is a frivolous story based on false premises. The scale of subprime lending may dwarf the scale of judicious lending to the poor and subprime lending is not so much lending to the poor but lending without scrutiny, even willful refusal to screen and many of the subprime borrowers are not poor but speculators or gamblers flipping properties for quick gains.
WHAT THIS STORY IS TRYING TO TELL YOU IS THAT YOU ARE WRONG, LENDING TO THE POOR IS NOT NECESSARILY SUBPRIME OR RISKY. BUT THE PREMISES ARE FALSE BECAUSE SUBPRIME IS ABOUT LARGE SCALE RECKLESS REFUSAL TO SCRUTINIZE BY BANKS AND MANY OF THE BORROWERS ARE NOT SO MUCH POOR AS SPECULATORS. THUS HE MAY THINK HE IS RIGHT TO OFFER AN ANECDOTE THAT ‘FLIES IN THE FACE OF FACTS’ BUT HE IS GUILTY OF CONFUSING OTHERS.
Elizabeth Wong: I don’t care:
The latest pictures are said to be close-up shots of a woman’s private parts and were published along with the older set of pictures of Wong sleeping.
When asked about the new pictures, Wong said: “I don’t know and I don’t care. I leave it to my lawyers and the police to take care of it.
She may know something of the pictures and so to say “I don’t know” is misleading or false. It is not possible she does not care, she is denying or lying that she does not care when she does. Denial is a form of forgetting and she is headed for loss of memory or forgetfulness that may prove fatal one day. She is an emotional regurgitating person who does not speak the truth and if you think she is nevertheless headed for heaven you may be right or deluded.
Still going for broke:
If you think mankind is contrite, now that the economy has collapsed ‘spectacularly’, they have seen the light and started to correct wrongs, you are deluded.
Even now, they are in denial and going for broke, governments taking over to try to spend themselves out of trouble, even when the governments are themselves broke or do not have money.
With consciousness constraints lifted initially after 1977 and further in recent years, people have become even more directly evil and self serving.
What is demonstrated in this Elizabeth Wong nude picture scam is that people betray others for material gains, they will do anything to get what they want, they see no wrong with what they do and they will incrementally tighten the screws by releasing increasingly personal pictures to get what they want.
THE TORMENTING CONSCIOUSNESS CONSTRAINTS IN PLACE BEFORE 1977 ARE NOT BECAUSE GOD WANTED TO MAKE BEINGS HERE SUFFER UNNECESSARILY, BUT NECESSARY TO SHACKLE THE EVIL TENDENCIES OF BEINGS WHO ARE SONS OF DARKNESS AND NOW THAT THE SHACKLES HAVE BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE THE AGE IS COMING TO A CLOSE, ONLY A FEW WILL SEE THE LIGHT, USE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ESCAPE EVEN AN ETERNITY OF TORMENT WHILST THE REST CELEBRATE THEIR NEWFOUND FREEDOM TO WREAK EVEN GREATER CARNAGE AND SO EVEN TODAY, THE WORLD IS GOING FOR BROKE AND THEY WILL NOT STOP UNTIL THEY FALL DOWN THE CLIFF, AND THIS INCLUDES MANY WHO THINK THEY ARE GOOD.
Demons 'harmless', says Vatican
Da Vinci Code sequel Angels and Demons is "harmless entertainment," according to the Vatican's official newspaper.
This is wrong view because whatever is false, fantasy is harmful because it fosters delusion that is always harmful.
Fantasy is fabricating that with repetition becomes increasingly realistic so that the foolish gullible man cannot separate fact from fantasy.
THUS WHOEVER SAID IT IS HARMLESS IS DELUDED, HAS WRONG VIEW. AGAIN WRONG VIEW IS NOT HARMLESS BUT THE BUDDHA SAID IT IS THE PATH TO HELL OR THE ANIMAL WOMB.
Hee proves herself a liar:
Yew said Hee took the notes, tore them in half and threw them on the floor.
“I told her that she should take the money and spend it if she was so desperate for money,” he said.
Yew, who like Hee is a paraplegic, said he was “very angry” with her for trying to “take over” the Speaker’s role in the Dewan.
When approached, Hee denied that she had torn the money in half, insisting that the notes were already damaged.
By denying that she tore the money, unless the money tore by itself or someone else tore it, she is providing objective proof she is a liar.
By forcefully denying she tore the money when she did, she is training herself to pretend, to forget what she did and she is headed for forgetfulness that is always torment never pleasure.
Threatening others:
“I just want to give my speech. Respect my speech when I am giving it, you understand? If you want to work with me in the future, respect my speech. Tell them that,” murmured Raja Dr Nazrin Shah.
It is a threat to others to say if you want to work with me in the future respect my speech and threats are driven by ill will and ill will is one of five lower fetters to the lower realms.
Such respect that is demanded and based on threats is never genuine but hypocritical. You never demand respect from others and even if respect is genuine, it is meaningless and the fact that you find respect desirable reflects false perception.
ANYONE WHO THREATENS ANOTHER IS ASKING FOR SUFFERING.
What the wise raja would say:
The wise raja would say I just want to give my speech. I do not want to listen to pleas. Please do not pester me.
Where is there a threat of carrot and stick, refusing to work in the future?
The only true basis for working together:
There is only one true premise for two parties to work together and it is that there is a matter for mutual consideration that requires the input of two parties.
Anyone who suggests other reasons eg I will work with you in the future if you do not anger me or you listen to me or I am dominant is cultivating false logic that will end in tears for him, I tell you.
He is saying he will punish you by refusing to work with you in the future, something that is driven by emotion or anger or dislike.
HERE AS EVERYWHERE WHAT PEOPLE SAY OR DO IS NEVER GUIDED BY GENUINE REASON BUT DRIVEN BY FORCE. IT IS EMOTION OR ANGER THAT DROVE THE PERSON TO SPEAK THREATENINGLY.
Where the raja’s heart lies:
The raja is inadvertently revealing his sentiment that is lost on those who are foolish.
He is biased against PR and even if he works with PR in the future, it is half hearted or hypocritical.
BY THREATENING THE FORMER MB, THE RAJA IS REVEALING WHERE HIS BIAS IS. YOU CAN EXPECT FAVORITISM TO ONE SIDE IN THE FUTURE.
Rote basis of working together:
Working together should be a case by case basis depending on the circumstances or merits of each case, not a standardized generalized rehashed basis that because you crossed me now, I will never work with you in the future.
It is mad to refuse to work with another flatly on all cases just because of a tiff and anyone who does this is a robot, not just here but everywhere.
Why respect is mad:
People demand to be respected, they want others to respect them.
If respect can be demanded, it means it must be something that someone must do or say that will convey respect to the person who demands it. Thus if respecting the person means you shut up, then you shut up just to respect him, not because you want to shut up or have nothing to say.
If you want others to respect you, you will say or do certain things not because it is meaningful or applies to the occasion but in order that others will respect you.
THE ONLY TRUE REASON FOR DOING OR SAYING SOMETHING IS BECAUSE IT IS APPROPRIATE AND PRODUCTIVE, NOT BECAUSE IT SHOWS RESPECT FOR ANOTHER PERSON. THUS IF YOU SAY OR DO SOMETHING JUST TO SHOW RESPECT FOR SOMEONE, NOT BECAUSE IT IS APT FOR THE OCCASION YOU ARE PRACTICING CONTROLLED MADNESS THAT WILL END IN UNCONTROLLED MADNESS BECAUSE WHAT YOU SAY OR DO TO SHOW RESPECT HAS FALSE PURPOSE, NOT BECAUSE IT IS MEANINGFUL BUT TO SHOW RESPECT.
AGAIN IF YOU SAY OR DO THINGS SO THAT OTHERS WILL RESPECT YOU THEN YOU ARE DOING OR SAYING IT FOR FALSE REASON (SO THAT OTHERS WILL RESPECT YOU) RATHER THAN BECAUSE IT IS APT FOR THE OCCASION AND THUS WHAT YOU SAY OR DO TO COMMAND RESPECT IS CONTROLLED INSANITY THAT WILL END IN UNCONTROLLED INSANITY.
THUS ANYONE WHO DEMANDS OTHERS SHOW RESPECT TO THEM, WHO SAY OR DO THINGS TO COMMAND RESPECT IS FLIRTING WITH INSANITY.
Respect is mad in a nutshell:
IN ORDER FOR SOMEONE TO SHOW RESPECT TO YOU, HE MUST SAY OR DO CERTAIN THINGS IN CERTAIN STYLES THAT WILL BE DEEMED TO BE RESPECTFUL BY YOU OR SOCIETY, NOT BECAUSE HE TRULY WANTS TO SAY OR DO IT IN THAT WAY BUT JUST TO SHOW RESPECT. AND THAT IS A FALSE REASON FOR DOING OR SAYING SOMETHING THAT WILL END IN MADNESS.
IN ORDER FOR OTHERS TO RESPECT YOU, YOU MUST STRIVE TO SAY OR DO CERTAIN THINGS IN CERTAIN WAYS YOU & SOCIETY DEEMS WILL ENGENDER RESPECT, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE TRUE OR MEANINGFUL AND THAT IS DOING OR SAYING CERTAIN THINGS IN CERTAIN WAYS FOR A FALSE REASON, SO THAT OTHERS WILL RESPECT YOU.
THUS IN ORDER FOR OTHERS TO SHOW RESPECT TO YOU, THEY MUST SAY OR DO CERTAIN THINGS IN CERTAIN WAYS FOR A FALSE REASON, NOT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SAY OR DO IT OR IT IS APPROPRIATE BUT TO SHOW RESPECT TO YOU. IN ORDER THAT OTHERS MAY RESPECT YOU, YOU MUST SAY AND DO CERTAIN THINGS WITH CERTAIN STYLES THAT YOU PERCEIVE WILL GENERATE RESPECT, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE TRUE OR RELEVANT TO THE OCCASION.
It reflects people in this world do not understand because they see nothing wrong with respect, they think respect is natural and good when wanting respect and behaving to inspire respect is controlled insanity.
Love, not respect God:
Worship of God is not respect but love of God. If you think worship of God is respect you may deluded.
Jesus did not say if you respect me, you will obey what I command but he said if you love me, you will obey what I command.
Jesus also said that what is exalted by men is an abomination in the sight of God. Therefore, respect that is exalted by men may be an abomination in the sight of God.
THE MAJORITY OF RESPECT IN THIS WORLD IS NOT GENUINE BUT HYPOCRITICAL TO APPEASE OTHERS. EVEN IF RESPECT IS GENUINE, IT IS MEANINGLESS, STRESSFUL AND SINFUL RATHER THAN MEANINGFUL AND MERITORIOUS BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING SAID OR DONE TO PLEASE OTHERS THAT THEY ARE RESPECTED, IT IS WANTING OTHERS TO SAY OR DO THINGS TO YOU THAT MAKE YOU FEEL RESPECTED.
Let’s be consistent:
Newspaper columnist: Let’s be consistent.
By implication, consistency is desirable or good and inconsistency criticized. This is a delusion because consistency is just as undesirable as inconsistency or haphazardness.
To be consistent in speech and action you must rehash as precisely as possible. This is how footballers and golfers are consistent in their shots, they practice and practice until they are consistent in their shots and so anyone who preaches consistency is preaching being a robot.
In order to be consistent, you have to have a policy or line which you follow faithfully without deviation and instead of being a master, you become a slave of that policy or line and again you are a robot not a live specific to each occasion person.
THUS IT REFLECTS DELUSION TO ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO BE CONSISTENT. YOU SHOULD NEITHER STRIVE TO BE CONSISTENT NOR INCONSISTENT BUT DEPENDING TO THE NATURE OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCES, SEEING THE TRUTH OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCE YOU ACT OR SPEAK ACCORDINGLY NOT CONSISTENTLY THAT REQUIRES REFERENCE TO A SET OF PRINCIPLES ACCORDING TO WHICH YOU ACT.
Let’s be a good robot:
The person who advocates “let’s be consistent” is actually saying “Let’s be a good robot”.
In order to be consistent, you must remember what your response was to a previous situation to then apply to a similar situation that has re-occurred now. Without memorizing and rehashing for the present situation because you detected similarities you cannot be consistent. Thus your consistent response is a standardized nonspecific response that can be applied to a class of events, not a single particular event.
THUS THE PERSON WHO ADVOCATES CONSISTENCY IS ADVOCATING ROBOTICS, ADVOCATING REMEMBERING AND RE-APPLYING THE SAME RESPONSE TO THE SAME TYPES OF EVENTS IN THE FUTURE.
There may be an array of options like attack, defend or ignore when faced with a situation. The consistent man is the one who always picks the attack option and the inconsistent man is the one who sometimes pick the attack, sometimes pick the defend or do nothing options.
IT IS NOT A MATTER THAT YOU SHOULD BE CONSISTENT OR INCONSISTENT BUT YOU SHOULD EXAMINE AN EVENT ARISING, UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS AND BASED ON THE PARTICULAR SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU COMPOSE AND CARRY OUT A RESPONSE SPECIFIC TO THAT OCCASION WHICH IS THEN NOT PAINSTAKINGLY MEMORIZED SO THAT IT CAN BE REHASHED IN THE FUTURE.
If you are talking about consistency then you should know what you are talking about. If consistency is not about being a good robot as I say, what is it then? If you understand consistency as desirable and good when it is rehashed, never fits totally any situation and requires a tormenting existence as a robot, then you have false understanding or do not understand.
AND SO IT IS THAT HERE AS IN MANY PLACES PEOPLE THINK THEY UNDERSTAND, BUT THEIR UNDERSTANDING IS FALSE AND THEY THEREFORE DO NOT UNDERSTAND. IT IS NOT MERITORIOUS BUT KARMA CREATING TO TELL OTHERS TO BE CONSISTENT.
Vincent Tan paid Hee $25 million?
According to RPK it was Vincent Tan who paid Hee 25 million to secure her defection.
If that is true, that is merely another nail into his coffin of countless nails. Whatever his enjoyment here, and it cannot be pure bliss, he is headed for suffering that is like an ocean. You and he don’t care, but when payment commences and you have an ocean of debts to repay, you will weep and gnash your teeth.
The next shoe to fall:
Mortgage default was the first shoe to fall and credit card defaults may be the next and even bigger shoe to fall.
So all those how celebrate the worst is over and the recession will end this year may be speaking without seeing or knowing because they want or like the recession to end.
Humans have two feet and shoes of the same size but the economy may have shoes more than two and sizes of each shoe may not be same.
Rising Credit Card Losses Are Next Challenge for Banks
By ERIC DASH and ANDREW MARTIN
It used to be easy to guess how many Americans would have problems paying their credit card bills. Banks just looked at unemployment: Fewer jobs meant more trouble ahead.
The unemployment rate has long mirrored banks’ loss rates on card balances. But Eddie Ward, 32 and jobless, may be one reason that rule of thumb no longer holds. For many lenders, losses are now starting to outpace layoffs.
Mr. Ward, of Arkansas, lost his job at a retail warehouse in April and so far has managed to make minimum payments on his credit card debt, which he estimates at $15,000 to $20,000. Asked whether he thinks he will be able to pay off his balance, he said, “Not unless I win the lottery.”
In the meantime, he said, “I’m just doing what I can.”
Experts predict that millions of Americans will not be able to pay off their debts, leaving a gaping hole at ailing banks still trying to recover from the housing bust.
The bank stress test results, released Thursday, suggested that the nation’s 19 biggest banks could expect nearly $82.4 billion in credit card losses by the end of 2010 under what federal regulators called a “worst case” economic situation.
But if unemployment breaches 10 percent, as many economists predict, the rate of uncollectible balances at some banks could far exceed that level. At American Express and Capital One Financial, around 20 percent of the credit card balances are expected to go bad over this year and next, according to stress test results. At Bank of America, Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, about 23 percent of card loans are expected to sour.
Even the government’s grim projections may vastly understate the size of the banks’ credit card troubles. According to estimates by Oliver Wyman, a management consulting firm, card losses at the nation’s biggest banks could reach $141.5 billion by 2010 if the regulators’ loss rate was applied to their entire credit card business. It could top $186 billion for the entire credit card industry.
In the official stress test results, regulators published losses only on credit cards held on bank balance sheets. The $82.4 billion figure did not reflect another element in their analysis: tens of billions of dollars in losses tied to credit card loans that the banks packaged into bonds and held off their balance sheets. A portion of those losses, however, will be absorbed by outside investors.
What is more, the peak unemployment level that regulators used to drive their loss estimates is roughly what current rates are on track to reach. That suggests that if the unemployment rate gets much worse, credit card losses could be worse than what regulators projected.
And many economists expect the number of job losses to climb even higher. On Friday, the unemployment rate reached 8.9 percent as the economy shed 539,000 jobs. The unemployment rate and the rate of credit card charge-offs, or uncollectible balances, have been aligned because consumers who lose their jobs are more likely to miss payments.
Banks wrote off an average of 5.5 percent of their credit card balances in 2008, while the average unemployment rate was 5.8 percent. By the end of the year, the rate of credit-card write-offs was 6.3 percent; more recent data was not available.
Experts predict that the rate of credit-card losses could eventually surpass the jobless rate because of the compounding effects of the housing crisis and lackluster consumer confidence. Shortly after the technology bubble burst in 2001, credit card loss rates peaked at 7.9 percent.
“We will blow right through it,” said Inderpreet Batra, a consultant at Oliver Wyman, which specializes in financial services.
Unlike in prior recessions, cardholders who recently lost their jobs are unlikely to be able to extract equity from their homes or draw down retirement accounts to help pay off their debts. That means borrowers who fall behind on their bills are more likely to default, leading to higher losses.
After writing off about $45 billion in bad debts during 2008, credit card lenders are bracing for the worst year in the industry’s history. Not only are losses spiraling, but also lawmakers are on the verge of passing a set of tough new consumer protections that could have a devastating effect on profits. This week, the Senate is expected to take up the Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights after the measure passed in the House with a strong bipartisan vote of 357 to 70.
Over the weekend, President Obama pressed lawmakers to approve the new rules, which would curb the ability of card issuers to raise interest rates retroactively on consumers and would require them to reduce hidden fees and penalties. He hopes to sign the legislation by Memorial Day.
For the banks, the economics of the credit card business are increasingly troubling. As the recession has dragged on, cardholders have sharply reduced spending. New customers with strong credit histories are increasingly hard to find.
And the most troubled borrowers are so deeply mired in debt that card companies are willing to strike deals to remove late fees and reduce card loan balances. The average American household is saddled with nearly $8,400 of credit card and other revolving debt, according to Moody’s Economy.com.
Every major credit card issuer has been approving fewer new applicants, reining in credit lines and canceling unused accounts. And Meredith A. Whitney, a prominent banking analyst, expects credit card lenders to cut the lines of credit they extend to borrowers by a total of $2.7 trillion through 2010. That is equivalent to a 57 percent reduction in the credit they made available two years ago at the height of the boom.
Within the card industry, all eyes are now focused on the sharp increase in unemployment. At Citigroup, executives noted that the company’s 10.2 percent credit card charge-off rate for the first quarter had broken its “historic correlation with unemployment” and showed no sign of letting up.
American Express, Bank of America and Capital One Financial showed first-quarter loss rates that hovered around 8.5 percent, roughly tracking the unemployment rate. All three said they expected higher losses in the coming months. Even Chase Card Services, which charged off just 7.7 percent of its card loans in the first quarter, expects its loss levels to surpass unemployment by the end of the year.
Card executives say there will little improvement until the economy stabilizes and consumers are more optimistic.
Cindy Schneider of Connecticut, 53, is a long way from being confident about her finances.
She is not making any money from her job as a real estate agent and cannot find work elsewhere. Her husband’s pay was just cut 10 percent. And she worries about how they will pay off a $5,000 balance on their credit card.
When her credit card company recently raised her interest rates, saying she was three days late with a payment, Ms. Schneider transferred the balance to another card with a lower rate.
“We are borrowing from Peter to pay Paul,” she said.
Bankers Not to blame for crisis:
Governments and central bankers must take the blame for the financial crisis - not bankers, investors and others in the market, according to a new study.
YOU DO NOT NEED ANY STUDIES TO SEE AND KNOW THAT BANKERS, INVESTORS AND ‘OTHERS IN THE MARKET’ THROUGH THEIR COMMON GREED AND UNRIGHTEOUS CONDUCT HAVE ALL CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANT TO THE FINANCIAL CRISIS AS MUCH AS POLITICIANS AND CENTRAL BANKERS.
IT GOES TO SHOW THAT HUMANS EVEN THOSE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE VERY INTELLIGENT ARE DELUDED THAT THEY NEED TO CONDUCT STUDIES AND EVEN AFTER THAT, THEY CAN CONCLUDE BANKERS ARE NOT GUILTY WHEN THEY ARE GUILTY ‘LIKE HELL’, THEY HAVE LOBBIED POLITICIANS TO LIBERALIZE AND NOT REGULATE BANKING.
Super efficient appeal:
Quote: On late Monday afternoon, the court ruled that Nizar is still the Menteri Besar of Perak. On early Tuesday morning, the Appeal Court allowed a stay of execution. This means Nizar was back as Menteri Besar for a mere couple of hours yesterday and then had to hand the state back to Zambry.
What was astonishing was the speed in which the Appeal Court sat to make its decision when there are still so many older cases pending -- sometimes up to ten years while the convicted persons awaiting the outcome of their appeal languish in jail without bail during all that time.
This is again evidence that the judiciary system is loaded for those in power and against anyone threatening their power.
PETALING JAYA: It is fine to be angry but it is also important to know how to handle or express anger.
There is no expert way to handle anger, it is not fine to be angry and not important to know how to handle or express anger. Anger must not be tolerated but it must be destroyed never to rise again.
If I am correct, the person who thinks he is an expert in handling anger has wrong view that the Buddha said will end in hell or the animal womb.
Anger is dangerous like dynamite or alcohol that is addictive so that each time you get angry, you are not just suffering and making others suffer with karma accrued, it conditions you increasingly to anger such that anger becomes more easily aroused to more intense levels that get harder to control and dissipate and you are in danger of death or harm when your intense uncontrollable anger is provoked and you get into fights that may kill you. Your controlled anger aroused, you may engaged in wild driving with a challenger and end up getting killed in a crash.
WHOEVER SPEAKS OF AN EXPERT WAY TO HANDLE ANGER AND SAYS ANGER IS FINE IS ASKING FOR GRAVE JUDGMENT.
Not so quick:
Already there are some optimistic economists who are forecasting that economies will begin to grow by the end of the year and Bernanke said things are improving and should recover soon.
It is impossible they are speaking because they see and know but they are guessing driven by like or blind force instead of using genuine reason, based on data they have that they thus falsely interpreted.
Even without seeing and knowing the future (as God can), based on facts available, one with true logic can discern that such a swift recovery is unlikely.
ALWAYS IT IS NEVER GENUINE REASON BUT FORCE THROUGH LIKE AND DISLIKE THAT IS THE DRIVE IN PEOPLE’S SPEECH AND ACTIONS, IN THIS CASE, IT IS AS EXPECTED, FORCE IN THE FORM OF LIKE THAT IS THE DRIVE THAT LED THE ‘EXPERTS’ TO CONCLUDE THAT RECOVERY IS AT HAND.
The Feds have announced plans to curb derivatives that were touted to be at the heart of this financial crisis that brought the economy to a ‘screeching’ deceleration.
WITHOUT THE DERIVATIVES GIVING THE ILLUSION OF INSURANCE COVER FOR RISKY LENDING, HOW CAN BANKERS RESUME EXCESSIVE LENDING THAT WAS THE FUEL TO ALL THE EXCESSES THAT MADE THE RECENT BOOM POSSIBLE? IN THE PAST, IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE DECEPTION OF DERIVATIVES AND ENTITIES LIKE AIG PROVIDING INSURANCE FOR SUCH DERIVATIVES WHEN THEY DID NOT HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO BACK UP THEIR INSURING, THAT MADE THE BOOM POSSIBLE.
EVEN IF WE COULD RESUME THE ALCOHOL FUELED EXCESSES OF THE PAST, DO WE STILL HAVE MONEY (MONEY SAVERS THINK THEY HAVE IN THE BANKS MAY ALL HAVE BEEN LENT OUT RECKLESSLY BY BANKERS NEVER TO RETURN) IN THE BANK TO SPEND THAT IS REQUISITE TO HAVING ANOTHER BOOM? THE FACT THAT BANKS ARE UNDERCAPITALIZED AND NOT LENDING INDICATES THAT BANKS HAVE RUN OUT OF MONEY AND SHORT OF PRINTING MONEY, THERE IS NO MONEY LEFT.
THUS NOW WITH THE PUNCHBOWL OF DERIVATIVES TAKEN AWAY AND THE BANKS HAVING SQAUNDERED ALL THE MONEY DEPOSITED IN THEM, IF YOU HAVE GENUINE REASON YOU WILL REALIZE THAT A RAPID RECOVERY IS NOT POSSIBLE AND IT REFLECTS EMOTIONAL, FANCIFUL WISHFUL THINKING BY SO CALLED EXPERT ECONOMISTS AND FED CHAIRMEN THAT THEY CAN CONCLUDE THAT RECOVERY IS AT HAND.
They forget very easily:
Ordinary people, even those who tout themselves as great intellects, forget very easily even facts that are very crucial in deriving a conclusion and rather than natural and meritoriously, forgetfulness is dangerous, potentially fatal, and unnatural, a product of sin or the willful constant refusal to see the falsity of what they say or do.
IT IS NOT THAT THESE SO CALLED EXPERTS DO NOT KNOW BUT THEY FORGET OR HAVE NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT DERIVATIVES WHERE AT THE HEART OF THE CURRENT NEAR FATAL FINANCIAL CRISIS AND HOW THEY PERMITTED EXCESSIVE LENDING BASED ON INSURANCE COVER THAT WAS FICTITIOUS AND IT IS THIS EXCESSIVE UNINSURED LENDING THAT WAS THE BASIS OF THE PAST BOOM AND THAT NOW WE HAVE AWAKENED TO THE TRUE NATURE OF DERIVATIVES, THERE IS NO WAY THAT WE CAN RESUME DERIVATIVE BASED INSURE-LESS RECKLESS OR RISKY LENDING AND WITHOUT THIS RISKY LENDING THERE CAN BE NO RETURN TO THE BOOM OF THE PAST AND THEREFORE IT IS FOOLISH TO CONCLUDE RECOVERY IS AT HAND.
FURTHER, IT IS NOT THAT THESE EXPERTS DO NOT KNOW BUT THEY FORGET OR HAVE NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT BANKS ARE UNDERCAPITALIZED AND HAVE NO MONEY TO LEND WHICH IMPLIES THAT DEPOSITORS’ MONEY ARE NO LONGER THERE, HAVE ALL BEEN LENT RECKLESSLY NEVER TO BE RECOVERED IN MEANINGFUL AMOUNTS IF POSSIBLE AND WITHOUT MONEY TO LEND, HOW CAN THERE BE A SWIFT RETURN TO THE BOOM OF THE PAST?
FOR ONE WITH TRUE REASON WHO DOES NOT FORGET, HE REMEMBERS THAT IT IS THE RECKLESS DERIVATIVES THAT FUELED UNINSURED LENDING THAT LED TO THE BOOM AND WITHOUT REVERTING TO THE DERIVATIVES, RECOVERY TO THE PAST IS IMPOSSIBLE AND HE ALSO REMEMBERS THAT BANKS HAVE NO MONEY TO LEND AND WITHOUT MONEY TO LEND, THERE CAN BE NO RECOVERY TO THE PAST.
FORGETTING IS NOT NATURAL OR GOOD BUT IT IS A PRODUCT OF SIN THAT CAN BE DANGEROUS, LEAD TO FALSE CONCLUSIONS THAT A PERSON WHO REMEMBERS CLEARLY AVOIDS.
Ask Mugabe:
De facto, governments all over the world are throwing the rule books out of the window to print money in desperate attempts to stave off economic collapse.
Mugabe has been printing money ‘like mad’ and now it costs millions for Zimbabweans to buy even eggs. Do we ever learn that printing money is never the answer or is it because of desperation, devoid of ideas, governments throw more firewood into the bonfire of consumption?
People have been ranting at Mugabe but it looks like the west and advanced world are no better, they have now become Mugabes of printing money.
IF BANKS ARE FULL OF MONEY THEY WOULD BE LENDING LIKE NO TOMORROW AND IT IS BECAUSE THE BANKS ARE UNDERCAPITALIZED AND SHORT OF FUNDS THAT MEANS THEIR DEPOSITORS’ MONEY HAVE BEEN LENT, POTENTIALLY NOT TO BE RECOVERED THAT GOVERNMENTS HAVE TO DESPERATELY PRINT MONEY AND BOOST CONSUMPTION.
IN THIS SCENARIO AND NOW WITHOUT DERIVATIVES TO GIVE A SEMBLANCE OF BACKUP FOR RECKLESS LENDING, WHATEVER RECOVERY CAN ONLY BE ANEMIC AT BEST.
What is the problem?
The world economy is in crisis, even grave crisis we are told. Exactly what is the problem or problems behind the crisis can be known and it may be very simple. If the underlying problem is known then whether there is a cure or swift return to the past can be known.
DESPITE WHAT MAY BE TOUTED, THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM LEADING TO THE WORLD CRISIS IS VERY SIMPLE AND KNOWING THE PROBLEM AND THERE IS NO SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM, THERE CAN BE NO QUICK FIX AND QUICK REVERSION TO THE PAST IF ANY.
Normally banks must set aside a sizeable amount of money in reserves to backup whatever lending they do to meet ‘eventualities’ in case of default.
The entity of derivatives outsourced such risk to say insurance companies whose capacity to stand surety was never properly assessed. Not only that, banks hide sizeable loan portfolios under the table, using entities that they do not have to declare.
IT IS THIS OUTSOURCING OF RISK TO OTHERS WHO IN TRUTH DID NOT HAVE THE MEANS TO STAND SURETY AND THE ADDITIONAL HIDING OF MUCH LENDING IN OFF THE TABLE VEHICLES THAT PERMITTED THE BUILD UP OF DEBTS TO MONSTROUS LEVELS AND ALLOWED THE WORLD AND AMERICAN ECONOMIES TO BOOM TO SUCH GREAT HEIGHTS FOR SO LONG AND NOW THAT WE KNOW THE HOCUS POCUS OF DERIVATIVES, FEW IF ANY WILL ACCEPT THEM EVEN IF YOU OR ITS CREATORS WANT TO SELL THEM, CAN WE REVERT TO THE ‘HOT ECONOMY’ OF THE PAST EVEN IF THE ECONOMY WERE TO STAGE A ‘RECOVERY’?
IF BANKS HAVE NOT RUN OUT OF MONEY, THIS CRISIS WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED AND IT IS PRECISELY BECAUSE BANKS HAVE RUN OUT OF MONEY AND GOVERNMENTS TOO HAVE BEEN TAKING ON EXCESSIVE DEBTS, SPENDING MORE THAN THEY SHOULD, THAT WE HAVE COME TO THIS CRISIS.
IF PEOPLE START REPAYING THEIR NOW MONSTROUS DEBTS, CONSUMPTION WILL FALL AND THE ECONOMY WILL BE IN RECESSION IF NOT DEPRESSION. EVEN IF THEY DO NOT REPAY THEIR MONEY, THE BANKS HAVE RECKLESSLY LENT ALL THE SAVERS MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO CANNOT REPAY AND THEY (BANKS) NOW HAVE NO MORE MONEY TO LEND TO KEEP THE ECONOMY BUBBLING ALONG. INTO THIS SITUATION, GOVERNMENTS STEP IN BY UNRIGHTEOUSLY PRINTING MONEY AND STIMULATING THE ECONOMY BY INFRASTRUCTURE WORK AND GIVING DISCOUNTS TO CAR BUYERS, ETC THAT ONLY SERVES IN PART TO LESSEN THE IMPACT OF THE COLLAPSE OF DERIVATIVE BACKED RECKLESS LENDING AND THE DEARTH OF MONEY IN BANKS.
THUS IF YOU UNDERSTAND THE UNDERLYING CAUSES OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC CRISIS, YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS CHECKMATE, THERE IS NO PALATABLE QUICK WAY OUT.
WHATEVER ELSE THERE MAY BE AND HOWEVER COMPLEX IT MAY APPEAR TO BE, THE UNDERLYING BASIS OF THE CRISIS IS STILL THIS: BANKS HAVE LENT WAY IN EXCESS OF WHAT IS SENSIBLE BY USING DERIVATIVES TO FALSELY OUTSOURCE RISK, THEY HAVE IN ADDITION HIDDEN MORE LENDING IN UNDER THE TABLE ENTITIES AND IT IS THIS STEROID BASED LENDING THAT WAS THE BASIS OF THE PAST BOOM AND NOW NO ONE WILL ACCEPT DERIVATIVES AS COLLATERALS EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO SELL THEM TO OTHERS AND SO WITHOUT DERIVATIVES BEING ACCEPTED, HOW CAN THERE BE A RECOVERY TO THE PAST?
NOT ONLY THAT, NOW PEOPLE AND COMPANIES ARE SADDLED WITH EVEN MOUNTAINOUS DEBTS THAT WILL TAKE A LONG TIME IF EVER TO REPAY AND WHILST THEY REPAY, CONSUMPTION WILL BE DEPRESSED AND THUS NO BOOM.
PEOPLE’S MONEY IN BANKS HAVE ALL BEEN LENT OUT, OFTEN FOOLISHLY SO THAT IT MAY BE LOST FOREVER AND WITHOUT MONEY TO LEND, HOW CAN BANKS SUSTAIN THE ECONOMY WITH THE LIFELINE OF CREDIT?
IF THE PROBLEM OF THE WORLD ECONOMY IS AS I DESCRIBED ABOVE THEN ONE UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY UNDERSTANDS THAT IT IS BASICALLY CHECKMATE, THERE IS NO PALATABLE AND SWIFT WAY OUT OF THE MORASS.
No comments:
Post a Comment