Global Economic Manipulation?

Mr. Incognito

The absolute hilarity of the fact you cannot differentiate liquidity and capital, yet you attempt you assert your point so vehemently. You said "inject capital." Central Banks do not inject capital, they provide liquidity. Show me where the ECB has provided capital for a bank. They don't, the central bank does not take an equity stake in a bank when it provides money; they are short term loans based on a weekly bidding procedure. Go read about how central banks operate. Even the first link you provided, the title is "ECB_injects_US170BILL_liquidity_to_Euro_banks-1"

Capital ≠ liquidity

So again: You're wrong. The original post is about a gold standard, with a gold standard you can manipulate markets by hoarding gold--case in point the U.S. in the 1930s.

You know what,

I am. This is the exact type of Economic cirle jerk I was expecting from you two. You do not address the point, instead you come along. OMG!!! You used the wrong word!! Ha ha, your point is invalid.

My point was about central banks shoring up banks, you do not refute this, you merely drag in eye bleed semantic arguments, hense our good chums attempt to lower this thread with his bait question earlier.

The original post is about manipulating the markets. I said this cannot be done with gold. Then you talk about a gold standard economy that does not exist at the present time.

I have been foolish to even bother entertaining this rubbish argument. Arguing over semantics, is just that. You're right. I'm wrong. No-one cares and as predicted, exactly three pages of eye bleed. I'm off.

Économiste Monétaire

I think the difference between liquidity and capital is actually relevant to a conspiracy theory. If central banks were to inject capital (which they don't ) one could say it's an attempt by the lizzzzards/NWO to take control of the financial markets by buying the banks on the cheap, and they were being directed by the BIS.

The original post is about the possibility of a world currency backed by gold. So, a discussion on a gold standard is relevant, in my opinion.

Just to be extra pedantic, central banks don't "shore" up banks, they help them meet their deposit liabilities. Governments are the ones who inject capital and shore banks up by helping them meet their capital requirements. Maybe there's another conspiracy theory in that...

You really need to relax the playing up as a victim of the evil economists. You're the one saying "economic circle jerk", "the economist is a rag", and that I was living on the moon I actually don't live on the moon, just to clarify. No real need for the jibing when you were asked a pretty basic question.

Mr. Incognito

Just to be extra pedantic

QED

Run_to_da_hills

Financial Times: Privacy will end by 2013.

According to a lead researcher on CSC's Digital Disruptions report unveils his predictions for the future How will IT change.

Information will become more transparent. I envision something like a software RFID like tag for securities that allows the world at large to track every detail of what is going on in the financial markets, in the same manner that Wal-Mart tracks products from initial order to production, sale and re-stock.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/acd2c66c-c0da-11dd-b0a8-000077b07658.html

Gareth37

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Financial Times: Privacy will end by 2013.

:rolleyes:

Privacy ended a long time ago and you and I both know it. Don't be reading this dribble. Sorry but you know its true

WhaLofShi

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/acd2c66c-c0da-11dd-b0a8-000077b07658.html

How will IT be used by individuals beyond 2013?
We will be able to print out toys, parts, furniture, designs and more from the net using three-dimensional printers. Today 3D printers cost $20,000 and can only print prototypes. But maybe beyond 2013 you'll actually be able to print a pair of sneakers in your size.

Is he talking Star Trek stuff here?

Computer: Nike Air. Blue Trim. Size 42.
And throw in a shell suit to go with them.
Oh, and givvus 20 John Player Blue and a loi'er.

Time Magazine

I wonder what's the difference between "an eye-bleeding of an economics circle-jerk, written by people young enough to write for a rag" and "correcting a poster who's making completely inaccurate claims about market mechanisms."

Can we get a ruling on this, Mahatma? How wrong does someone have to be before we can correct them?

Mahatma coat

its about tone Ibid, no problem correcting someone, but, no need to be nasty either.

that goes for both sides BTW, calling it an Economic circlejerk is not going to promote a civil discussion.

no infractions handed out YET, but lads play nice.

oh and Capital/Liquidity, its not just the use of a wrong word, it chnges the meaning completley

Time Magazine

Tone? Surely everything's fair game once it's attack-the-post, not the poster?

Also I'm almost sure you can't infract me.

Mahatma coat

yeah if it was simply attackin the Post, but, ya know what nevermind, I suggest that the poster goes to Ibids forum and takes up the discussion there, then ye can argue semantics all ye want.

I had some questions I also wanted to ask our esteemed 'Economic Experts' about the Bailout/shoreup but I can see I wont get a civil or straight answer.

Mahatma coat

Also I'm almost sure you can't infract me.

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

Mahatma coat

:o:o:o:o:o:o:o:o:o

OOOPS

I have no Idea how to Unban someone

tis only a 24 hour ban, but still if someone wants to PM me how to undo it twould be apreciated

thecommander

Mahatma coat wrote: »

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

I see your at the power thing again.

Économiste Monétaire

To be honest Mahatma, if the inference you're making from this thread is that you won't receive a civil response from either The Economist or I then I'm baffled. The regular CT poster was the person whom deemed it necessary to get personal and petty. I tried to play and steer to the overall theme of conspiracy theories several times.

Also, that's an incredibly abusive use of moderator status to ban someone like that, and for that reason. Probably the worst modding of any forum I've seen.

conceited

Mod you should maybe mature a bit before taking on such a job....:rolleyes:

Mahatma coat

Right so, sorted out, and now I've learnt another bit about how to use the ModUtils

conceited

Thats lovely.
Come back when you 13 we will give you a job.:pac:

Time Magazine

Mahatma coat wrote: »

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

That's fucking disgraceful modding, MC.

1. I should not be banned so you can prove a point - a point which you have not proven because a ban is not the same thing as an infraction.

2. I should not have to PM you to show you how to unban me.

3. After I PM you within ten minutes of you asking for help, I should not have to wait another 30 minutes to be unbanned.

4. I shouldn't have to ask for an apology, not yet received.

Shocking.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

its about tone Ibid, no problem correcting someone, but, no need to be nasty either.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

yeah if it was simply attackin the Post, but, ya know what nevermind

Make your mind up, please.

calling it an Economic circlejerk is not going to promote a civil discussion.

...

I had some questions I also wanted to ask our esteemed 'Economic Experts' about the Bailout/shoreup but I can see I wont get a civil or straight answer.

Placing your description of us in scare quotes and claiming you will not get a civil or straight answer is not going to promote civil discussion either. That's extremely hypocritical of you. Économiste Monétaire very politely responded to three posts at the start of this thread. Before attacking a post, I gave Mr. Incognito an opportunity to clarify his position. I then told him what I was doing, and complied with your request to say it again. We may be ruthless when someone claims economic fallacy as fact, but we are both very civil.

And as for accusing us of not giving a straight answer? How about

The Economist wrote:

I want you to explicitly state what "prices" and what you'd "do" to them, please.

Mr. Incognito wrote:

No

There's only one person on this thread whose uncivil behaviour warranted moderation. I'll give you a hint. It's the person who repeatedly accused others of baiting while spouting beauts such as "P.s The Economist is a rag.", "[your post] is eye-bleed economic theory rubbish", "Have you been living under a rock, on the moon?", "This is the exact type of Economic cirle jerk I was expecting from you two" and "I have been foolish to even bother entertaining this rubbish" even though he accepted he had been wrong all along.

Learn how to moderate. A good place to start would be discovering meaning of the the adjectival sense of the word.

Mahatma coat

enough room in the back seat for all of ye?

I should have made it clearer that I didnt Expect Civil or Straight answers from diferent posters.

that comment was not aimed at the same people

as for you Ibid, you laid down a direct challenge, what did you expect me to do?

Mahatma coat

also I'd like you to edit that last post of yours to put your response in between my 2 posts, I think you'll find that it will make a lot more sense that.

thecommander

Mahatma coat wrote: »

as for you Ibid, you laid down a direct challenge, what did you expect me to do?

Being a moderator is meant to used for the good of the forum, not for you to settle personal differences/challenges.

Mahatma coat

Mahatma coat wrote: »

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

That makes you a total tool and a disgrace of a mod.

I thought you were a tool of a poster, but people like that have gone off and made good mods. You however, are just a tool outright and are a disgrace to boards.ie

WhaLofShi

:D:D ROFLMAO :D:D

---

r3nu4l

Zaraba, MC, Ibid.

Lads calm down.

Zaraba, just because MC did something wrong doesn't give you the right to be abusive towards him.

MC, I lolled! It was a silly and childish thing to do but then to have to get Ibid to show you how to reverse it, classic I do think an apology is in order, no resignations or any such melodramatic rubbish, just an apology andholding your hand up to say you were wrong.

Ibid, fair play to you for showing him how to reverse it

Can everyone just agree to play fair now?

Time Magazine

Mahatma coat wrote: »

enough room in the back seat for all of ye?

God forbid the passengers complaining when the driver has lost control.

I should have made it clearer that I didnt Expect Civil or Straight answers from diferent posters.

that comment was not aimed at the same people

You should focused your moderation on one poster; you should not have banned me; you should have apologised. There's a lot of thing you should have done, and there remains others that you have yet to.

as for you Ibid, you laid down a direct challenge, what did you expect me to do?

For the third time, I did not lay down a direct challenge. It is a bug in the boards.ie software that mods cannot infract other mods. I am not absolutely certain that this applies to HMods like yourself, thus the "almost sure" part of my post, I gave you a little tip to help you in your modding. That's why I put it in a small font, as if to whisper it.

Trust me, if I lay down a challenge for you, you'll know about it.

also I'd like you to edit that last post of yours to put your response in between my 2 posts, I think you'll find that it will make a lot more sense that.

I think you'll find I won't be giving you the steam off my piss until you apologise.

Good moderators have the respect and support of their community; they do not try and instill fear in them. You're not going to have to do a lot to earn that respect after this little episode. Walking in and acting like you've done nothing wrong is not a good starting point.

Best of luck on the learning-curve.

Red Sleeping Beauty

I saw some publicity for this forum in Feedback. This has been a fun read, I think I'll frequent here more often

Mahatma coat

OK Ibid, Sorry, I took that statement initially as, Feck you MC you cant touch me as I'm a proper mod and you're onlya Hmod.

so I probably shouldnt have done it until I had figured out how to unban you first.

what I would like to point out to the other Posters here is that it was meant to be a tongue in cheek thing

Nick_oliveri

Mahatma coat wrote: »

what I would like to point out to the other Posters here is that it was meant to be a tongue in cheek thing

Exactly what it came across to me as. Well at least now you know how to properly use the modutils.

The Economist wrote:

2. I should not have to PM you to show you how to unban me.

3. After I PM you within ten minutes of you asking for help, I should not have to wait another 30 minutes to be unbanned.

MC could have asked anyone to show him the modutils. He could have fecked off to any forum and see what mod was active, he chose you to make sure you knew it was "tongue in cheek".

30 minutes? Omg, 30 mins of denied access to the Conspiracy forum. Get over it. You'd think it was the end of the world the way your army of supporters started three threads about it. Or rather, the people who disagree with MC's outlook or theories and constantly argue with him.

Now, heres hoping i dont get banned for going off topic or continuing this discussion, but after reading your post-30 minute ban rant i feel like its needed.

bonkey wrote:

And so it should become a popularity contest? Because make no mistake...that's what it will mostly be, if it comes to a vote. Those who are pro-conspiracy will mostly vote for keeping MC, and those who are anti- will mostly vote to get rid of him.

Hmmm...maybe that is a valid reason to have an open vote...we could see that my prediction is right, then whoever didn't like the result could argue that it should be thrown out on the grounds that the forum policy shouldn't be "mob rule" by "pros" or "antis".

This can also be seen in the thanked by posts.

I know im just elongating this discussion and it is OT but my god, this has to be the worst witchunt i have ever seen. Power trip me arse tbh, the amount of personal abuse on this forum and others towards MC is appalling.

You wouldnt be nearly as quick if it was Bonkey or Muji that made the MISTAKE. Ill take the ban for this post, its worth it.

WhaLofShi

Great post Nick.

Very well put.

bonkey

OK...can we get back in topic? The issue is being dealt with in enough places as it is.