A caller to the excitable Max Keiser's show (htp: Nathan Martin) quotes from a statement by Bob Janjuah at Royal Bank of Scotland, warning clients to cash in and hunker down while the market tests "new lows". (And Jesse says "wealthy insiders are increasingly trying to liquidate investment positions to raise cash and diversify their holdings into cash and hard assets.")
Keiser got wide attention in July when he referred to Goldman Sachs as "scum" and (I think, not incorrectly) said that the practical results of some of their activities were worse than terrorist atrocities. Protests like this make no difference, except that they may relieve hearts clogged with helpless anger: what we've learned recently is that the shameless tenacity of politicians and bankers will outwear public indignation.
But society may change when everyone gives up looking to the the über-scum to help, and concentrates instead on personal benefit and survival. I think I may not even bother to vote in the next General Election.
Oh, and Nathan Martin also directs us to an article by Robert Kiyosaki, who compares the market to a dead frog galvanized by ever-higher charges of financial electricity until "Pretty soon the dead frog will be fried frog." Kiyosaki cites demographic change as a major threat in the long term.
While the market tests new lows - sounds a worry and even more of a worry if everyone heeds the advice.
ReplyDeleteSeems the insiders are doing it already, no need for the rest of us to be the mugs.
ReplyDeleteAs I commented the other day, perhaps the time has come to re-define wealth.
ReplyDeletePaddington: "perhaps the time has come to re-define wealth."
ReplyDeleteWell yeah! carry on having this important philosophical discussion with yourself, in the mean time the rest of us would like to maintain our standard of living.
Anonymous: I realize that what I wrote sounds pompous. However, in the past 40 years, most of the West has tried to convert to a 'service-based' economy, which makes absolutely no sense, but has put most of the money in the hands of people who don't actually produce anything.
ReplyDeletePaddington: "I realize that what I wrote sounds pompous."
ReplyDeleteNo, just nonsensical. I write lots of crap .. often .. but I try not to draw attention to it once it has escaped to the web.
Paddington: "'service-based' economy, which makes absolutely no sense,"
It did in an environment of cheap skilled competition from the developing world. Do jobs that can't be easily outsourced. Bankers of course, are finding that other than jobs that require you to visit your client, in a 'wired' world, pretty much every job CAN be outsourced. Not so long ago they were talking of sending medical scans to China for diagnosis, Mad.
Not from an economic pov, but if one's intent is to utterly de-skill the West this sort of thing is the way to do it.
None of which gets us closer to 'redefining wealth'. I hesitate to raise the topic since this is not my blog, and don't care to clutter the comments more than necessary.
There was a Scottish economist, whose name escapes me, that suggested a different method of creating money, involving a person releasing the amount equivalent to their labour into the market. I forget how he avoids the overestimation problem.
ReplyDeletePaddington: "I forget how he avoids the overestimation problem."
ReplyDeleteMight that be by using money?
Scottish economists, aren't what they used to be.