[handlewanker]

To borrow or not to borrow, that is the question, for it is easier to go bankrupt by being underfunded than deep in debt.

The question your "investor" asks is, "is he good for the dough"?

Borowing with a heavy debt already weighing you down is usually the solution TO TRADING YOUR WAY OUT OF TROUBLE, but you have to have the ability to make the new borrowing pay, otherwise, like a common wage earning credit card bashing pleb, borrowing money from a friend to pay your late current instalment on the credit card is a recipe for disaster.

Most businesses carry a running bank loan arrangement, but the productivity of the company means they make more from the money borrowed than the interest to maintain the borrowing.

Paying off the loan too early means you have to borrow again to fund the next project and so on.

Internally life goes on as usual, but external international projects are a gamble on how much you can make with how much you can borrow.

Importing a million dollars worth of raw material gets transformed into 10 million dollars of export goods, and so the money exchange goes on, provided your credit rating is AAA or more.

It is a fact that no country in the World has a zero deficit in it's economy, but the important bit is how your credit rating stands with your trading partners.

BTW...Hitler, though misguided and vain had the interest of a greater Germany driving him, and as he inherited a bankrupt nation after 1918, he was hardly likely to drag it down further, it took the combined nations of the Allies and 5 years of total war to achieve that.

Stalin on the other hand, had the ideology of wresting the power from a very small group of priviliged elitists, and leveling the class barrier, being of working class stock he saw it that way as the only way for social justice to prevail where previously only some lived in actual splendid conditions to the detriment of the common worker. The Romanovs killed themselves by their attitude to the common working class, and the purges by Stalin were to ensure that it did not revert back.

I would not even try to compare Chairman Mao with any contempory leader either past or present....he did preside as total and absolute dictator over the largest group of English speaking Humanoids in the World, (there are more English speaking Chinese on mainland China than the total population of the USA), and as such led his people to a victory over the old system that now dominates the World in both productivity and affluence.

Social Justice...... having looked it up on Wiki, it states briefly....... "Social Justice is based on the concept of Human rights and equality, and involves a greater degree of egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution and even property redistribution....refered to as more equality of opportunity than exists in some societies"...etc....that seems a lot like a definite Socialist attitude, Mc Carthy would have gone ballistic if that had been mentioned in his presence.

The only time you have to worry about Socialism is when you have obscene amounts of money obtained by conniving and unscrupulous business methods using the right connections, and are reluctant to share it around more than you have to, either by taxation or due process of the law...LOL.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

Ol' Nusolar was a Government guinea pig for the Nuke industry...LOL.
Ian.

[nusolar]

I WOULD LOVE TO CHAT, BUT GOT TO GET SOME WORK DONE

[jhowelb]

Ol' Nusolar was a Government guinea pig for the Nuke industry...LOL.
Ian.

Check out the "about me" tab on his public profile.

http://blog.rssapplied.com/wp-conten..._the_troll.jpg

[jhowelb]

The question your "investor" asks is, "is he good for the dough"?

...............a recipe for disaster.



Social Justice...... having looked it up on Wiki, it states briefly....... "Social Justice is based on the concept of Human rights and equality, and involves a greater degree of egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution and even property redistribution....refered to as more equality of opportunity than exists in some societies"...etc....that seems a lot like a definite Socialist attitude, Mc Carthy would have gone ballistic if that had been mentioned in his presence.

The only time you have to worry about Socialism is when you have obscene amounts of money .................
Ian.

Check the news, China is unloading our debt real fast!

Disaster is what we are looking at. (You too, Aussie!)


Fair definition, KEEP READING!


Ask those people who were in Tienanmen Square about money.


Look this one up, "Islamic Socialism". (recomend you go farther than Wiki......they are a bit dicey.)



All this shares a common motive with the AGW crowd.

[nusolar]

TWO WORDS FOR YOU "The Higgs"

[jhowelb]

a hypothetical massive elementary particle predicted to exist

[jhowelb]

snip

Borowing with a heavy debt already weighing you down is usually the solution TO TRADING YOUR WAY OUT OF TROUBLE, but you have to have the ability to make the new borrowing pay, otherwise, like a common wage earning credit card bashing pleb, borrowing money from a friend to pay your late current instalment on the credit card is a recipe for disaster.

snip

For a BUSINESS that actually PRODUCES some thing at a profit, this risky scheme might get you out of trouble. Government, on the other hand, produces nothing and has nothing that it hasn't first taken by force from it's citizens.

Think you can borrow your way out of debt? Try standing in a bucket and lift yourself by the bail!!

[handlewanker]

It's common practice to borrow money to make money, most business dealings if not all are in this category, and money borrowed is "venture capitol", risked money until your boat comes home etc.

The Government's job is to manage the economy and run the machinery of the country, sometimes they get it wrong, and yes, there are better forms of Government but only if the hearts and minds of the people are as one.

Forcing a revolution from the top as happened in Russia in 1917 by Lenin and co, is a typical example of "leading the horse to the water".....China was a different kettle of fish, emerging from a feudal system as they did, having nothing they had nothing to lose.

The recipe for success in business is to pay the workers the bare minimum and keep all the profits.....it's ludicrous to think otherwise......"otherwise" is Socialism with all it's drawbacks of identity denial and suppression of self achievment.
Ian.

[jhowelb]

We are pretty much on the same wave length except I think that the government that does the least governs best.

They should, as our constitution states, provide for the common defense, protect the borders and ports and promote general welfare. (among the several states)

Of that group they only do one fairly well and fuxx up every thing else they do.

That said, the thought of a revolution scares me spit less! And THAT is what I fear is coming!

[handlewanker]

Personally I like the idea of Co-opereatives, where you don't have to have Government control or intervention to make it work.

Co-ops are self generating units and as such are totally divorced from ideology, political leanings or religions, but at the same time maintain a sense of identity and personal achievement, where Socialism fails on all points in comparison.

Socialism is the idealogy of the mass populace, whereas Co-operatism requires no idealogy or political affiliations, and can be applied with broad principles over a wide spectrum of endeavour, requiring no specific doctrine of self denial to achieve end results.

Broadly speaking the Co-operative system money you make stays in YOUR pocket without the need to fund someone else's failures.

Co-operatives are private enterprises with a collectivity structure that ensures prosperity for individuals by combined effort with individuality maintained.

That is one way to go Green for Green reasons not for someone else's vested interest.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

The quiet revolution, where change comes because change occurs.

Nothing stays the same unless it's cast in iron and left to itself.

Circumstances get forced when ineptness in Government impacts on the populace, and the value of the working hour erodes to mean less in the pocket.

Unless the present form of Government changes, you can expect more of the same, or a spiraling downward trend with full reverse thrust tearing the heart out of the machine.

It takes brave hearts and desperate men to face the grim reality of change when the wind blows chilly, and some people, especially at the top, would never entertain the notion that they are inept, and would take strong measures to maintain the status quo.

"Now is come the Winter of our discontent"....but the National Guard have muskets primed and ready to contain any expressions of lack of Government confidence, so it's back to the workplace with picks and shovels polished to do another days work, but with belts tightened to cater for the loss of remunerations....nothing changes.
Ian.

[fizzissist]

But what's heating up ISN'T the temperature!!!

Some smart folks have demanded an audit!

Announcing a formal request for the Auditor General to audit the Australian BOM « JoNova

Artificial temperatures will generate huge money for the government.

[jhowelb]

Good talking with you, HW. Pleasant conversation.

And now fizzissist brings in more insanity to add to the mix

[handlewanker]

Hmmmmm, huge amounts of money "for the Government"...and we're classed as a nation with Socialistic tendencies...Hmmmmm....so we'll all get some money too, I'll buy that...I'm retired so I might get some more in my allowance...Hee Heee....win win all the way from the bank.

Now that's what I call sharing the money around.

Probably comes out of BHP's profits....I hear thay just made a 72% increase in profits for the half year, that's 10.5 billion dollar.....for HALF a YEAR!!!!!, (wait till the end of the year and it'll probably double that).....on the scale of the USA deficit, 10.5 billion dollars would keep B'OB in chewing baccy for a couple of weeks...LOL.

Huh, it just goes to show you, those rat bag no good Alchemists are a devious lot....I wonder if'n this crap is being noted at the Cancun Conference, (is it still being conferred?..I haven't seen any reference about the progress in any news articles anywhere).
Ian.

[TomB]

I don’t know why we are talking economics and budget deficits on an Environmental and Alternate Energy forum but it seems to be something that interests the readers and contributors at the moment. There are several things being said that are often repeated in the general discussion that to me do not seem valid.
Tom

A couple of days ago I wrote a note on economics for the forum. It was fact based and I tried to be unemotional. I expected more criticism but I was careful to research every fact and implication presented so there was not much room for factual argument. This is the second part. Here I’m going to be more emotional and the arguments presented will not be nearly as fact based. However, from studying there comes insight and this note is based on that.

There was one of criticism that was not valid but I can understand why it was posited. I said taxes were the lowest since 1952 and HW argued that I was picking a war recovery year and that was not fair. HW’s argument would be valid if taxes had been lower in any year since 1952 but they were not. While constructing the sentence I literally had a graph of year-by-year tax revenue and I mentally drew a horizontal line from now to when it intersected history. Since 1952 tax revenue has been higher in every year than it is now. HW also argued that we have changed the economy by allowing massive cheap labor imports since 1952. That is obviously true but it does not imply we are better or worse for it. Said simply a rising tide floats all boats so improving the wealth of China, India, etc. will help both the US and Oz. Said more complexly, one should not be spending $25 per hour labor stitching tee shirts when the task can be done by $1 per week peasants in the third word. But if you can replace 1000 peasants with an automated sewing machine that only requires one $30 per hour operator there can be a competitive advantage. That tax, depreciation and energy costs might negate that advantage is an argument for some other day. I agree with the underlying thesis a highly developed nation with very skilled labor must figure how their skills and capital can be exploited or they will fail.

HW and JH and I don’t remember who else, argued that there is a political conspiracy to enrich somebody at the expense of the majority. I agree in general but disagree in detail. I will focus on the US because I don’t have visibility into other nations and for that I apologize to international readers. Currently in the US we have Tea Party Republicans, mainstream Republicans, the seemingly incompetent Democrats and the Obama administration (Isolated because it seems to ignore Democratic Party positions). The Tea Party guys, i.e. the followers of Rupert Murdock (FOX owner), Charles and David Koch (billionaire chemical industrialists), have focused on repeating the economics of 1927 so as to create another Great Depression. The Democrats can’t agree on anything. Obama, the community organizer, seeks the middle ground on every argument so he compromises half way between where he is and the Koch brothers’ unmoving viewpoint, no taxes for guys that make millions. The compromising process is recursive. (Several months ago I think I read that the Kochs were indicted for tax evasion. Something about putting all their money on some Caribbean island, except for the amount they repatriated for organizing the Tea Party.) The mainstream Republicans have adopted the Tea Party guys because those views will create 12 to 15% unemployment by 2012 thereby assuring Obama’s defeat. What will come as a surprise to the mainstream Republicans is that they have married the devil and they will have to continue the Tea Party 1927 economics. By 2016 expect there will be 20-25% unemployment and Republicans will get the blame. It may destroy the party for 30 years or until the next world war completes as demonstrated by the Roosevelt era.

JH argues that the debt is significant. The argument is that a country like a family must balance in and outgoing revenue. A sovereign nation is not a family, they print their own money. JH argues the total deficit it equal to the GDP. The solution is obvious, deflate the value of money by a factor of ten. Then the debt will only be 10% of the GDP but we will have to pay $30 rather than $3 for a loaf of bread. But wages will be 10x so what difference does it make to most of us. But the banks will be pissed, China will be pissed and they may not sell us more cheap good. All the companies that are sitting on $1T in savings will likely be looking for an investment opportunity. Nations are not like families; we can manipulate our economy and we all need to be intelligent about how we do it. Am I missing something that might help us?

HW always argues that at Cancun we have signed up to give 3rd world nations all of our wealth. Nobody even pays for what they promised Haiti so why is worth commenting on what we will pay to 3rd world countries when nobody agrees with the thesis. It warrants no comment beyond that truism.

To come back to the international reader, if the US is pushed into a 1929 style depression or 10x inflation it will also bring down the world economy. If we can find a way out of it we will end up with a 1940’s world economy. Yes it is a conspiracy but it is a conspiracy driven by ruthless manipulation of media and economics for short term gain. The public does not seem to recognize how they are being manipulated. I fear that mainstream Republicans like the public are being sucked in and that end result will be the destruction of the wealth that the conspirators sought to protect, but with that will go my children and grandchildren’s future.

I’m an old man that is suffering from some sort of metabolic affliction that will kill me before 2016 so when I predict outcomes I really don’t have the validity that comes from being involved. I’ve spent a lifetime studying and understand a lot. I could argue the mathematical validity that leads to the Higgs boson, the validity of Austrian, Keynesian or Friedman economics or what is happening in my metabolism. In the first paragraph I argued that advanced nations need to exploit skills yet I see modern western youth deciding that journalism, lawyering or political science is way better than Mechanical Engineering (my education). I’m not particularly good with my hands and could not turn a shaft that did not have miniature threads or pick a guitar in a rhythm that anyone else but me likes. But to me nothing makes sense so at this point I’m going to stop thinking about economics and all the related s**t and start turning and picking, both in my own private style. I’m going back to not reading this forum.

[Mariss Freimanis]

Actually fizzissist brings up an interesting point. In the 30's and 40's cloud chambers were used to visualize cosmic ray particle degeneration. Cosmic rays would enter the cloud chamber, encounter an atomic nucleus and produce secondary particles whose path could be seen seen from the condensation trails they left.

The salient point is cosmic rays leave condensation paths, the very same thing that happens in our atmosphere miles above our heads. If the conditions are right, if the air is super-saturated, it is just like a jet contrail leaving a growing path of alto-stratus clouds in the wake of the passing plane.

Unlike a jet plane that leaves a focused point of origin contrail, cosmic rays bathe our atmosphere with their microscopic contrails. These manifest themselves as a general cloud cover increase that otherwise wouldn't be there were the sun more active. Low solar activity increases cloud cover and cools the earth because of the cloud's albedo (reflecting sunlight away from earth).

Mariss

[handlewanker]

Thank you TomB for that very interesting and enlightening synopsis of the last 60 years in the "days of our lives", you have the potential to be best seller if you write a book on it.

I would add to my previous observations that in the 50's China and the other 3rd World countries were not even able to feed themselves let alone compete on the World stage.

It was in the 60's that "made in Japan" caught the eye wherever you went to buy cheap tools, clothes motor cycles etc, and became a password for Japanese Junk, mass produced, "never mind the quality feel the width", but Japan excelled in the Camera market as no other country, and competed with Germany and Switzerland very well when the SLR cameras became a household word.

The whole point of the China story is that they can take a peasant off the paddy field and in five minutes, (metaphorically speaking) by way of the CNC revolution put him/her into a production mode simply by deskilling the operation to that effect.

A highly skilled operator fetching $30 per hour is a recipe for disaster due to the amount of complex training and skill tied up in that one person, to not only keep the operator but look for another at a moments notice when they up and go down the road, and the term "rare as hen's teeth" fits the bill nicely here.

BTW, having a stable economy is a recipe for disaster as any Economist will tell you....interpreted as a "state of stagnation", low growth......indicated by low interest rates in an effort to get someone,anyone to borrow money and so pay back the interest.

You cannot buy low and sell high in the stock market if the economy is stable, but when the roller coaster ride of the Bulls and Bears rips it up...the "economy is booming"...LOL....for whom?

BTW again, if you want to "compete" against China, forget about the bowl of rice and settle for the dollar a day only.

Now that the Climate Change groundwork has been done by people who should have more ethics and morals than agendas to pursue, and with pockets bulging with tax payers research dollars that ensure lots of Hypotheses can be researched, even if the outcome is nill, for as Einsteins said, "If we knew what we were doing we wouldn't have to do research".

I have come to the conclusion that given the choice, doing research is a most pleasant way to pass the time, especially if after many years the research proves that the hypothesis was unfounded, but the wages still get paid for nill result.

I would go so far as to say that ALL hypothetical research on subjects that do not warrant a second thought generally, should be funded by the originator of the hypothesis, and only when the research data proves beyond doubt to be of inestimable value, then, like computer software should be licensed to whomsoever requires to use it.

This would cut out all the useless data gathering for reasons only known by a few.

Climate Change study is all very good if'n it is serving a purpose, as opposed to creating a solution and then seeking a problem that might apply to it.

You can of course "create" problems that only the very learned understand and influence other very learned advisors to decision makers to act on their advice.

The Cancun Conference isn't just an informal tea party to celebrate a variation in the weather discussion, it's a directive in the formative stages to pay a large sum of money to other nations that don't have the ability to make clean and green products to the Enviro Nuts and Greens liking

All of this will pass over the heads of the man in the street, and the only effect that can be applied by Government is to not do the things they have the mandate to do, because the money is needed to make greener products in a 3rd World country, that might be imported by your country one day.
Ian.

[fizzissist]

Cosmic rays linked to rapid mid-latitude cloud changes

"...However, the results of the GCM experiment are found to be somewhat limited by the ability of the model to successfully reproduce observed cloud cover. These results provide perhaps the most compelling evidence presented thus far of a GCR-climate relationship..."

ACP - Abstract - Cosmic rays linked to rapid mid-latitude cloud changes

(the paper itself: http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/10...10941-2010.pdf )

You'll note the admission that the HadAm3 GCM fails to reproduce the observed clouds? That is the SINGLE greatest problem with ALL the general circulation models in use today.

Significant too is this little bit buried within the paper.....

"Based on the relationships observed in this study, and assuming that there is no linear trend in the short-term GCR change, we specu- late that little (∼0.088 ◦C/decade) systematic change in tem- perature at mid-latitudes has occurred over the last 50 years. However, at shorter time-scales this phenomenon may contribute to natural variability, potentially reducing detectability of an anthropogenic signal."

But WHAT makes it into the mainstream media??

“This is a short-term effect. This has nothing to do with a long term climate trend. We are not saying that this process has had an affect on the climate in the last 20 to 30 years,” explained Laken. “We have found no evidence of a relationship between long term changes in cosmic ray flux, variability of the sun and recent climate changes. What we have found is statistical evidence of a link between cosmic rays and clouds which appears to operate over certain regions and in certain conditions.”
Definite link found between cosmic rays and clouds

Anyone's BS meter pegging here??

Short term effect? Well, if you consider that a cosmic ray is, like, uh, really, really fast, and POOF! ...it's gone.... But the effect of the cloud seed formed remains long enough to allow the process of cloud formation to begin...

So while their disclaimer that it doesn't prove a long term climate effect is technically correct, from a legal standpoint. I think infantry would agree, from a legal interpretation.

But this happens every second of every minute of every hour of every day...24/7, 1000yrs/millenium.

A short term effect, that happens continuously.

[dufas]

Cosmic rays linked to rapid mid-latitude cloud changes

A short term effect, that happens continuously.

This same argument was used by the climate wizards in the 60s global drought, the 70s global cooling and it is used again now. As long as they can eliminate a major engine of climate effects, their arguments can remain politically valid [ truth be damned...]

As far as taxes are concerned. Although the upper tax rates during the 50s and 60s were around 95 percent, the effective rates on the wealthy were closer to 30 percent due to extensive tax deductions. Many of these same deductions could also be used by the low and middle income.