There are several examples along the lines of Smoot-Hawley, but one long lasting very damaging was the Merchant Marine act of 1920 or Jones Act which required US flagged ships to transport goods and people between US ports. To be US flagged meant the ship had to be US built with US sourced materials and crewed with at least 75% US citizens. The ship building industry now with a locked in customer based raised prices to noncompetitive and unsustainable levels, shipping companies could charge higher prices for coastwise (between US ports) transport and foreign competition was all but excluded. Limited choices via protectionism is a recipe for stifled economic activity and it goes on today.
Davis Bacon Act of 1931 required government to pay prevailing wage on it contracts. This was a protectionist measure to prevent southern labor from moving north and working for lower wages, preventing labor arbitrage or true free market price discovery. The final result still in effect today is that instead of government getting the most for taxpayer dollars on public projects, the taxpayer is getting the least for his money.
These are good examples of government fixing a problem of their own making only to make matters worse for the taxpayer citizen.
That is a long time to wait for a decision and have the cloud hanging over the stock price. With oil revenues way down, and the context kazansky has put on the subject, it is doubtful SLW will get a favorable ruling. Should the ruling go against them, I wounder if they will consider moving to some place like Ireland?
For all the folks on the board that seem to think the Fed does no wrong, have a read of this quote: 'In a dynamite interview, Richard Fisher, former president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, gave what may be the biggest confession you'll ever see and hear from a Federal Reserve insider: the Federal Reserve knowingly "front ran" the US stock market recovery (i.e., manipulated the market) and created a huge asset bubble. Fisher expresses certainty that the "juiced" stock market will come down and is coming down now that the Fed has taken its foot off the accelerator ... and that it has a long way yet to go."
Lifted from Fed Official Confesses Fed Rigged Stock Market -- Crash Certain by David Haggith at Safehaven.
This is a mess of the feds making and it is not going to end pretty.
I have quit responding to this fellow and others like him as he only "Throws rocks" at serious posters pointing out erroneously something has not been proven or examples have not been provided, never putting forth logical contributions. In short his posts are empty, or shallow at best.
Ic298h, could you please elaborate on " the advantages of using fiat money is taught at every university throughout the world and is used by many central banks thought the world" is an honest teaching when not a single fiat currency has stood the test of time and current fiat currencies are consistently loosing value? If one quality of money is store of value, then I do not understand how the dollar consistently looses purchasing power or how with honest conviction the federal reserve could restate their goal for stable prices to be 2% inflation.
Agree Moses, The lack of direct response is proof they do not have conviction in their posts and that they have not applied rational screening to the garbage they have been fed by anyone who speaks from the democratic socialists agenda. If devalued dollars are not dollars that have diminished purchasing power, then the dollars must have increased or at the very least constant purchasing power. Denial of that basic truth tells me they are following the talking point with irrational non supportable sentiment. They have their right to speak, but that does not extend to my obligation to listen.
I criticized Reagan for not paying for the cold war and not first demanding the $3 in cuts for every tax dollar increase, Bush 41 for breaking 'his read my lips, no new taxes' pledge, Clinton for accounting gimmicks to balance the budget that made him look politically good and his characterizations of terrorists activities as police actions, Bush 43 for his unfunded wars and unfunded prescription drug benefit, and now Obama for about everything he has done, and has not done for that matter. For all the positions I know why I held the position because I did my own evaluation as most rational people would do. Each citizen of the country informed by an unbiased press and expressing opinion as a clearly identified editorial needs to do the same. Unfortunately what we have now is an indoctrinated, not educated, voting public cheer leading with talking points as the cheers. Sanders stating that global warming was the root cause for the Paris attacks? the depths of stupidity are amazing and swallowed hook line and sinker by their loyal non thinking supporters.
Exactly, and a belief I have held as long as I can remember. If the "right" is not the result of stolen property, then it is earned or inherited or gifted by some other means in a voluntary manner and thus becomes the property of the one who receives it. Any guess as to the number of educational outlets, public and private, that teach this?
Lifted from a recent Micheal Pento blog: "The global economy has become debt disabled and market prices have been massively distorted by governments and central banks. The Free market has been eviscerated and supplanted by money printing and deficit spending on an unprecedented scale. The bottom line is that there is now a historic and humongous gap between stock prices and economic fundamentals. And a gigantic gap between fixed income yields in relation to the underlying credit quality.
Evidence of the crumbling economic foundation can be found everywhere you look.
The US manufacturing sector is now clearly in a recession. The latest confirmation of this came from the Dallas Fed survey, which was announced this past Monday, showing a drop of -20.1. Commodity prices, junk bond spreads and money supply growth all indicate the global economy is not only weakening but approaching the Great Recession levels realized in early 2009. After all, investors would have to believe that commodity prices, taken in aggregate, which are trading at prices reached during the nadir of the Great Recession, say nothing about global demand in order to maintain the economy isn't in serious trouble."
I am sure we have a few that will take a different view, but in my opinion that quote pretty much sums up the mess and why we are in it, thanks mostly to the fed and the lack of oversight or responsible action by Congress. Central planning has never worked and is not working now. When this situation becomes apparent to those who nay say now, we will be well into the painful healing process bought to us by market forces seeking to eliminate the humongous gaps.
I bought more today at $5.08 and a few days ago at $7.90. Market participants taking this issue this low must be thinking the dividend is going to be cut. They may be correct, but Enbridge could make a powerful statement about their assessment of MEP's health by holding the dividend constant or even adding a token amount.
It matters Jack. About 30% is held by institutions and many of them are holding in street name for clients. I cannot find the holdings of insiders, but we little fellows have enough votes to come up with 1/3 of the outstanding shares voting no. Keep the faith, punish management for a really bad deal by voting no, and punish them in the next company elections for squandering shareholder value.
I agree, but the cost to manipulate is getting more expensive and less effective. The more expensive will not slow the money printing fed but less effective may turn out to be ineffective no matter how much money they throw at it.
Goldbug, you cannot get through by presenting a well organized and documented response because they refuse to process the thoughts in a logical manner. The point of the post was to get them to think about what they are professing to be wisdom in a new line of reasoning. No, I did not expect a response, but I would like to read one or more from anyone who cares to take on the question.
I really appreciate your posts. The history is great and while I am not nearly as well read as you, the topics are great for steering me to relevant subjects. Moses makes valid contributions as well.
I would be glad to entertain the opposing views in a more positive manner if there was some rational thought and support behind the arguments. Arm waving, disrespectful name calling and repeating talking points is a sure sign the presenter is uncomfortable in his position as he knows if he were honest with himself, he would realize he has become a cheer leader for another person's point of view w/o first having made a critical evaluation.
The weekend is forthcoming, I am having a relaxing time on the sandy beach potentially consuming a favorite adult beverage and putting a slab of beef on the barbecue.
You assume the US has gold reserves claimed by the US government. There is serious counter party risk to that assumption and it is an assumption as an audit has been proposed and forcefully opposed. These trusties of the gold would not have anything to hide, or would they?
Not in the exact words, but I have discussed it with an investment adviser who also teaches and he said I had a very good point.
Very good article. Thanks for the tip.
The incentive for loans has moved from productive ventures that have profits paying the loan service plus a return more than covering the risk to consumption. A loan for consumption by definition consumes wealth as the loan must be serviced from previously retain wealth. An example is a vacation paid via a credit card. This is not to say taking a vacation is bad, rather to point out there are inescapable consequences. The recent employment report that was "so good" supported this contention as about 10% on the new jobs were in wealth building disciplines. Another support for this contention is the rapid growth of public sector debt as percentage of total debt. Government's spend is virtually all consumption and the retained wealth that services the debt is from the tax payer, not the folks on the dole who receive a disproportionate ration of the largesse.
That buildup of debt has also brought forward economic activity as one reason for taking on debt is to pay for a good or service now rather than saving and paying for the same good or service in the future. Incremental to the items discussed in the article, debt is very destructive as the time of slowed economic activity resulting from incurring debt is the concurrent time additional tax revenues are required to service the debt. Less economic activity means less tax revenue leading to more borrowing to service the increasing debt or raising taxes or a combination of both, an economic death spiral. The federal government and local governments are currently borrowing to service debt, fund future liabilities such as pension funds, and provide current services. The governments have entered that death spiral. Sure it is a tough spiral to break, but putting it off only makes it tougher. This country is in dire need of fiscal leadership, something it will probably not get until it is forced on us by the market.
When I was a kid, I bought a gallon of gasoline for 19.9 cents. At a low point in the cycle for petroleum products it is roughly ten times that price today. It still costs roughly 20 cents if you buy with two junk silver dimes. It costs a little more than a dollar to by a junk silver dime in bulk. The dime has retained its purchasing power, the fiat has not. Sorry if those facts do not meet your logic requirements, they are just facts.
Since you stated above, " stepping away from the argument(s) defines the win" I assume you mean what you say. I would agree particularly and only if the person making the argument was being genuine. You have refused to answer very direct questions, rather deflect, name call, and accuse a person with a differing view point of " deliberately misinforms(ing) the public." That is not being genuine. You might agree with the positions of Moses, Goldbug, and others, just that you have dug in so deep, you have to defend the indefensible to save face.
One thing is for sure, the content of your posts tells the story of the discussion and who has the done their own thinking and who has not.
Over at Safehaven punctuation commercial, Micheal Pento has posted an excellent article on this topic that is worth consideration. Central banks buying their government's debt with newly created fiat money, what could possibly go wrong?
I was just playing around with some numbers wrt the value of a dollar when the fed was created and the present. I have seen several estimates, but they seem to center on the dollar having lost 95% to 98% of its purchasing power during the feds stable prices mandate. To maintain a $100 1913 dollars purchasing power, it takes an interest rate of about 3.9% compounded annually to stay even. It actually is more as taxes are paid on interest income. I can't wait for the fiat money supporters to indicate how this is a small price to pay for "economic stability" or any of the other faux benefits of fiat.
The dollar is not a store of wealth and thus not money. It does well as a currency for exchange of goods and services if you over look the aspects of reporting large transactions to the federal government (one of those freedoms lost). It does very well as a stealth wealth transfer tool from the folks that labor or otherwise earn wealth to those connected.
Mining and logging (-11,000) and manufacturing (-1,000) lost jobs and construction gained (+46,000) for a meager rise in wealth building categories in the employment report, which confirms the ISM data. If the US does not alter the misapplication of capital via fixed interest rates, shrink the all consuming government sector, and eliminate the punitive regulation on wealth generating industry, wealth generation in this country is going to continue contracting. Along with it, any hope for a lasting economic recovery.