F Dominicus Blog : deledefs, bureacracy

Tell it like it is

Friedrich Dominicus — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 06:08:00 GMT

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-02-16/guest-post-gun-rights-are-there-any-peaceful-solutions-left

States are always a problem and it's danger is proportianl to it's size. The bigger the more dangerous this beast is and gets.

AFAIKT free killing and killing lists were not used during MCCarthism. But now in the "most free" time and with capitalism the winner over "socialism" this lists do exist. And the states do find always enough to support the oppression through states. Just see all the NGOs and the new religion of man made climate change (well it must correctly be named man "made world heating".

If its too hot it's due to climate change is it too cold it's also due to heating. Because you know the heat will not raise everywhere and there will be places where it will get even colder And you know nature is not prepared for balance, You know between areas of heat and areas of cold there is a "barrier" nothing can get over it. And so the heat get even hotter and the cold just colder. And do not even dare to think the sun could have any influence. You know we the 7 billion men are the "heater". The sun ist just there for getting us a day/night circle.

And government is but one thing the buereacrats can not have enough from. You know if the oppression is not complete there's always room for more laws, and more law breaking. You can easily tell how "good" a country is while looking at their laws and the growth of laws. The more laws the more unfair it gets. And the faster the growth the higher the rate of law breaking from states. I guess the US is currently in the top 10 % of it's law growth. That means the times get much worse....

Thanks but no to Mrs Lagarde

Friedrich Dominicus — Mon, 23 May 2011 05:28:00 GMT

I'm against Mrs Lagard for the IMF. The IMF is just a from Politician controlled instrument, with no-failure-built-in. It's not a market instrument, because otherwise hardly any political pressure could be come from it. So short, it's dictatorship pure.

Mrs Lagard has an open dispute about corruption and all in all France is the county for centralism.

The only "right" thing would be to abolish the IMF. This will not happen so we should at least get some democratic control about it.

If we have this IMF we should have president of a country which never has gone bankrupt. France was known to default every 50-100 years in the 17-19 th century. I also am against any Chinese at the top (China is the last "big" dictatorship around with not acknowledgement for any human rights). The IMF president should come from a country with the lowes corruption rate, That is the only thing which "may" help anyone.

Here on Mises the guys have an idea on the problems with central banks http://blog.mises.org/17035/mad-men-2/ So the only "right" way is abolish the central banks, and introducing sound money. And then the debts avalanches will not be a problem. It's just the constuction of Fiat money with last lenders all over the place. Responsibility is an emtpry phrase if it comes to deledefs and bureaucrats

What signals does the EU safety chute emit?

Friedrich Dominicus — Tue, 17 May 2011 02:56:00 GMT

I'm currently reading about the report of the IMF about Greece. You can find it under:http://www.imf.org/external/country/index.htm

I'm very skeptical over any of these just be states controlled supranational institutions. I feel we think there money for doubtful outcomes. And in a way I think this are parrallel universes cycling around themselves. So the biggest problems with this organizations is that they "can not fail" whatever they do. It does not matter how much money they thing while contributing to keeping corrupt regimes running. You know there is not "market" for their offers. Theres is but one IMF. So whatever they decide to do or not is conclusive.

This is near inerrable. Yes there may be critique voices. And still one has to concede there are also clever (and surely well paid) specialists there. So we probably can learn from their findings. Unfortunately we do not have any influence on how to react on those findings. So overall I see the IMF as part of the problem not the solution.

For normal banks the "lenders of the last resort" are in that order. The own central bank, the own government, (in the EU) the EU commission, and then comes the IMF) . So quite a lot of those "taking" away the responsibility on standing on one's own feet. And still the IMF is plagued with one terrible problem. The just decide bureaucratically. They ask for papers over papers (which someone has to gather), then the follow procedures (which no the sure way a market tells whether you did right or wrong) . But if the procedures are followed, nothing can happen. They still will get their payments, and gain influence over time just because if somethings going wrong they will be the "saviors".

But back to the report. I suggest really reading it there you can find a lot of information (unfortunately in diplomatic speech) which really makes it a plagued reading. However you can see that at least something happens.

As I can see this actions still have no calming impacts. If they actions would be honored or would have a good influence on the debt situation, it should be no problem to get new credits. But still the required interests are beyond anything one really can bear. If I do have to trust supranational organizations or markets I know what side to take. But the deledefs just see their side. They never really bother thinking about markets. It's always the markets are evil (and we have to fight the markets) and they loose every time. But they do not learn anything from it.

Au contraire, they do the same mistakes over and over and over and over again. Just see "This time is different" and you can see, their fallings. Instead of not "having" some extra last lender of last resort" a new last lender is invented, every time. Now imagine a world in which this things were not their and money sound. Nobody could get that large to threaten the system and even then, there would be no one "saving" them. Would you expect the same hazardous behavior?

The realy problem we all have is that money is a monopoly of states, and they enforce it with any means. And that's where we call get caught. So let's work for freeing our money for any government influence and we'll be much finer.

So what signals can you see in the EU "safety" chute. It's the signal that wrong-doers are saved from their responsibility. And that's what sticks. Everything in EUR land just tells. Don't bother to live within your bounds. You can have party and after that you may have some hang-over but don't be afraid, you can have the next party the day after tomorrow.

This signal is understood by the markets but not by governments. The interest rate of up to 15% and higher tell exactly what one can expect a default within the next three years....