interesting david mcwilliams article

acontadino

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2009/03/04/we-bet-the-lot-on-casino-capitalism-and-lost

Comparing Las Vegas in the USA, to Ireland in the EU.

Sea Sharp

Interesting read.
Although currency devaluation won't have an effect if every country in the world is trying it at the same time.
It could work for a national recession, but a global one?

I was thinking. What about if all the countries in the world agreed to simultaneously print money. Based on each countries GDP or some more appropriate measure . If this was carried out in a controlled fashion, it would overcome the associated, Zimbabwai like, drastic drop of currency value. If every currency just prints an internationally agreed amount of cash, the budget deficits could be fixed. There would be no currency runs because all countries are doing the same thing and so the negative impliactions of a country doing that cancel out.

Currencies that are currently OK can only become richer from this proposal.
Just some ill-informed thoughts .

P. Breathnach

acontadino wrote: »

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2009/03/04/we-bet-the-lot-on-casino-capitalism-and-lost

Comparing Las Vegas in the USA, to Ireland in the EU.

Well, he is a redtop, so it's probably inevitable that his writing veer in that direction.

Flamed Diving

I'm so sick of his writing style.

Zynks

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I'm so sick of his writing style.

Funny, as a semi-foreigner I have major dificulties to understand what is the big issue so many people seem to have with him.

I personally find his thoughts and ideas pretty good, and that is what I look for in a political or economics commentator.

Singer73

He's a talking head - a soundbite artist. He has no ideas. He just keeps talking all the time putting words together into sentences that appeal to the ear and have little catchphrases like 'Pope's Children' and Breakfast roll man. He couldn't economise his way out of a paper bag.
Shane Ross is the same, but without the stupid soundbites. EGO IS All

thebman

GaNjaHaN wrote: »

Interesting read.
Although currency devaluation won't have an effect if every country in the world is trying it at the same time.
It could work for a national recession, but a global one?

I was thinking. What about if all the countries in the world agreed to simultaneously print money. Based on each countries GDP or some more appropriate measure . If this was carried out in a controlled fashion, it would overcome the associated, Zimbabwai like, drastic drop of currency value. If every currency just prints an internationally agreed amount of cash, the budget deficits could be fixed. There would be no currency runs because all countries are doing the same thing and so the negative impliactions of a country doing that cancel out.

Currencies that are currently OK can only become richer from this proposal.
Just some ill-informed thoughts .

The problem with this as I see it is someone will inevitable hold out who isn't in as poor a position as everyone else.

Then you have the countries not in crisis at all so what happens there?

nesf

Zynks wrote: »

I personally find his thoughts and ideas pretty good, and that is what I look for in a political or economics commentator.

Meh, not really he talks up the good side of currency independence while not presenting the bad sides of it. He goes yah old-school Keynesianism without justifying apart from a gesture to the 1930s while also not bothering to mention that WWII did more for the US economy than the New Deal did. He falls into the trap of only offering half the story which when he's writing for a general audience who have no background in the subject is hardly something admirable in an economic commentator. If he did the responsible thing he'd not present the world in such a simplistic black and white fashion and do everyone a favour by using his pulpit to educate people on how uncertain and complex these things are.

nesf

nesf wrote: »

Meh, not really he talks up the good side of currency independence while not presenting the bad sides of it. He goes yah old-school Keynesianism without justifying apart from a gesture to the 1930s while also not bothering to mention that WWII did more for the US economy than the New Deal did. He falls into the trap of only offering half the story which when he's writing for a general audience who have no background in the subject is hardly something admirable in an economic commentator. If he did the responsible thing he'd not present the world in such a simplistic black and white fashion and do everyone a favour by using his pulpit to educate people on how uncertain and complex these things are.

But then he doesn't get paid.