conservation of Euros
in [Design]
|
Prev: Which type of volatile RAM has the least duration of data remanencewhen power-offed?
Next: Analog Circuits (world class designs) B. Pease
From: Bill Sloman on 18 May 2010 04:54 On May 17, 10:48 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On May 17, 3:09 pm, John Larkin > > > > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 17 May 2010 12:57:38 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com > > wrote: > > > >On May 17, 12:29 am, John Larkin > > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> On Sun, 16 May 2010 21:09:07 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com > > >> wrote: > > > >> >On May 15, 9:27 am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> On May 14, 10:52 pm, John Larkin > > > >> >> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> >> > On Fri, 14 May 2010 11:29:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > >> >> > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> > >On May 14, 5:18 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > >> >> > >> On May 14, 9:51 am, John Larkin > > > >> >> > >> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> >> > >> > On Thu, 13 May 2010 22:16:49 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com > > >> >> > >> > wrote: > > > >> >> > >> > >On May 13, 5:02 pm,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> > >> > >> On May 13, 8:20 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> >> > >> > >> The argument for progressive taxation is usually put in terms of those > > >> >> > >> > >> with the broadest shoulders carrying more of the load. > > > >> >> > >> > >Right. That's how the Little Red Hen got a hold of all the other > > >> >> > >> > >animals' bread, greedy thing that she was. She had broad shoulders. > > > >> >> > >> > >> This falls a > > >> >> > >> > >> long way short of Marx - > > > >> >> > >> > >Marx was kind of an idiot. > > > >> >> > >> > >"The average price of wage labor is the minimum wage, i.e.., > > >> >> > >> > > that quantum of the means of subsistence which is absolutely > > >> >> > >> > > requisite to keep the laborer in bare existence as a laborer." > > >> >> > >> > > --The Communist Manifesto > > > >> >> > >> > > See what I mean? > > > >> >> > >> > Yeah, he wouldn't understand a female plumber making $150K.. > > > >> >> > >> > What created our modern wealth was engineers applying science. > > > >> >> > >> Yep. They made machines to relieve human toil, to improve the human > > >> >> > >> condition. > > > >> >> > >> Evil capitalists. Marx the Moocher should've stopped 'em. > > > >> >> > >Some of the capitalists were quite evil, as Martin Brown has pointed > > >> >> > >out elsewhere in this thread. Trade unions were one of the mechanisms > > >> >> > >that reigned in the greedy, evil, short-sighted minority. > > > >> >> > No. Competition did. > > > >> >> Comptetion was one of the other mechanisms, once anti-trust > > >> >> legislation had forced the greedy, evil and shorted sighted > > >> >> capitalists to compete rather than conspire. > > > >> >Conspiring is harmful. Why, though, is it bad for capitalists, yet > > >> >infinitely good for labor? > > > >> >Conspiracies among competing capitalists are inherently unstable. Like > > >> >OPEC, the players have competing interests; squabble, the alliances > > >> >fall apart, and they resume competing for advantage. It's a beautiful > > >> >thing. > > > >> >James Arthur > > > >> So we don't so much need anti-trust laws, as long as murder is > > >> illegal? > > > >To the contrary--anti-trust should apply to labor, too. E.g. > > >government unions. > > > Agreed; all unions. > > Sure. A union is nothing more than an attempt to monopolize labor. True. But non-unionised labour is almost always in a hopelessly weak negotiating position vis-a-vis employers. By definition, employers have capital, and are better placed to survive a strike or lock-out than the workers and their families. Futhermore, the employer is often a single organisation, which can practice divide-and-conquer on non- unionised workers in a way that the workers can only dream about. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: Bill Sloman on 18 May 2010 05:03 On May 18, 6:35 am, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On May 17, 10:27 pm, John Larkin > > > > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 17 May 2010 13:48:28 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com > > wrote: > > > >> >To the contrary--anti-trust should apply to labor, too. E.g. > > >> >government unions. > > > >> Agreed; all unions. > > > >Sure. A union is nothing more than an attempt to monopolize labor. > > > Sad day: > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clayton_Antitrust_Act#Exemptions > > The AFL-CIO can only be seen as monopolists. They'd have taken over > the country, except that they killed all their hosts. Don't be silly. Unions are alive and tolerably healthy in Europe, and are quite sensible enough to function as benign symbiotes. The one time that I got to function as a - very low level - trade union representative, most of the - very limited - time I spent acting in that capacity was devoted to persuading the personnel department that some foreman or boss had treated a subordinate badly or irresponsibly. There were two cases that i can recall, spread over a period of about a year. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: Bill Sloman on 18 May 2010 05:13 On May 17, 3:40 pm, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: > > On Sun, 16 May 2010 17:43:32 -0700, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > > >>Bill Slomanwrote: > > [...] > > >>> Huh? If the competent people who worked hard end up as dirt poor as > >>> the idiots who didn't, it wouldn't be fair. I'm not saying that the > >>> productive minority is entitled to hang onto everthing that they > >>> managed to accumulate - there's not a lot of tax to be collected from > >>> idle incompetents, and the administration does have to collect enough > >>> in taxes to keep the machinery of society turning over - but since > >>> society consists of non-identical individuals, there's nothing fair > >>> about reducing the best to the same condition as the worst. > > >> Shazam! I would have never imagined that this sort of statement would > >> come from you. While we disagree on just about anything else, there you > >> were right on. > > > Where have the aliens taken Slowman? > > He must have gone to one of the tea parties and woken up :-) No way. There are elections coming up in the Netherlands, but the local right-wing nitwit is Geert Wilders whose "party of freedom" is mainly interested in being nasty to Muslim immigrants and making sure that more of them don't get into the country. Sort of like Arizona, but with added extra religous prejudice. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: John Larkin on 18 May 2010 11:19 On Tue, 18 May 2010 01:20:40 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On May 17, 5:18�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:01:48 -0700, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Bill Slomanwrote: >> >> On May 16, 1:11 am, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Bill Slomanwrote: >> >>>> On May 13, 5:59 pm, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>>>> Bill Slomanwrote: >> >>>>>> On May 13, 3:46 pm, John Larkin >> >>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 02:34:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >>>>>>> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> On May 12, 7:57 pm, John Larkin >> >>>>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 12 May 2010 10:13:56 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >>>>>>>>> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> I don't harvest; I think. >> >>>>>>>>>> An unconvincing claim. Your "thinking" reflects your indolent habit of >> >>>>>>>>>> picking up predigested �nonsense that fits your fat-headed >> >>>>>>>>>> preconceptions. >> >>>>>>>>> I've been calling you a fathead for years. You can't even design >> >>>>>>>>> original insults. >> >>>>>>>>>> In this thread you've claimed that the euro can't be stable currency >> >>>>>>>>>> because it shared across several countries with different economic >> >>>>>>>>>> strengths and weaknessess, while failing to note that the US dollar is >> >>>>>>>>>> shared across the united states of America - running from Alaska to >> >>>>>>>>>> Wyoming (neither of whose economies look much like California's). >> >>>>>>>>> But we only have one government. >> >>>>>>>> Your states don't have legislatures and governors? >> >>>>>>> They aren't allowed to print money or regulate big financial >> >>>>>>> institutions. Most must balance their budgets. The trouble that >> >>>>>>> California is in now will be fixed by California. The trouble that >> >>>>>>> Greece is in now will be fixed by Germany. >> >>>>>> Do pay attention. The trouble that Greece is now in will be fixed by >> >>>>>> Greece. The EU - as a whole - will under-write Greek borrowing until >> >>>>>> that happens. The Germans have had quite a lot of influence on the >> >>>>>> requirements imposed on the Greeks in return for the guarantees, but >> >>>>>> the Greeks have to do the work. >> >>>>> Do pay attention: >> >>>>>http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2010/05/german-parliament-clears... >> >>>>> Quote: "Members of the Bundestag, Germany's lower house, approved a >> >>>>> state-backed guarantee for the loan ..." >> >>>> It's you who needs to pay attention. The EU - as a whole - is under- >> >>>> writing the Greek borrowing. The individual memebers of the EU have to >> >>>> pass legislation to approve their particular country's part of the >> >>>> package. The Dutch lower house approved the Dutch component recently. >> >>>> It's still a collective decision. >> >>> So, what exactly does "state-backed" mean in your opinion? >> >> >> That the individual states guarantee that their particular portion of >> >> the loan will be paid by that particular loan if Greece goes bankrupt? >> >> What else would it mean? >> >> >Ah, now you are beginning to get it. You wrote above, quote "The EU - as >> >a whole - is underwriting the Greek borrowing". Which is wrong. For >> >example if Greece fails to service the debt it now has in Germany the EU >> >won't pay the Germans back. Their own taxpayers will. And those are >> >rather pissed right now and for good reason. >> >> >>> Your notion that "The trouble that Greece is now in will be fixed by >> >>> Greece" will IMHO not come to pass. >> >> >> You are making a prediction, based on the little you know about the >> >> situation, heavily influenced by what you've read in the US mass >> >> media. As opinions go, it doesn't carry a lot of weight. >> >> >Check the facts. Greece has no industry to write home about, tourism is >> >declining because countries like Turkey are cheaper, and they can't >> >print Euros. Did I forget anything? Guess not. >> >> >>> They are unlikely to be able to fix the >> >>> damage that living beyond their means for years has done. >> >> >> Why? The US - which has been running a hugge balance of payemnts >> >> deficit since Regan was president - would suggest that you might be >> >> right, but the money market hasn't yet got around to labelling US >> >> treasury bonds as risky investments. >> >> >We have an industry. Greece doesn't. HUGE difference. Open your PC or >> >whatever else electronic and see how many components in there are from >> >Greek companies. Open the hood of your car and do same. In fact, open >> >just about anything. >> >> >> The Greek credit rating has now gone through the floor, and they've >> >> got no option but reform. >> >> >But torching the bank buildings isn't going to achieve that. >> >> Their option is to carry on as before, and let the Germans pay for >> this round. Reform after this shot of money runs out, and party for a >> few more years. > >That's not an option. The EU support ws condtional on painful and >immediate reform, and if the Greek goverment doesn't deliver on that, >the support goes away. > >> >>> It's other European countries who will fix it, also countries >> >>> overseas such as the US (via IMF). >> >> >> The IMF has a one-size-fits all solution for every country that gets >> >> into serious debt. It does seem to be based on the prescriptions of a >> >> group of particularly unrealistic US economic theorists, and tends to >> >> do serious damage to the real economy in the process of restoring the >> >> credit rating, but international credit rating never did have much to >> >> do with reality, as we got to see when the sub-prime mortgage crisi >> >> hit the fan. >> >> >And your alternative would be? >> >> >> Be that as it may, the Greeks have run out of options, and they will >> >> do what every other government has done when they fall into the hands >> >> of the IMF, which is to follow the - stupid - prescriptions. >> >> >Obviously that will be much better than what they did so far, and what >> >got them into this mess in the first place. >> >> Sloman doesn't approve of stupid prescriptions, like producing as much >> as you consume. >> >> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100517/D9FOHKGO0.html > >Although the article doesn't make this explicit, its all about the >economics of "pump-priming" stimulation of the economy, to compensate >for the damage done by the collapse of teh US housing price bubble, >which had conjured up an immense amount of credit out of thin air. > >National governments have had to conjure up comparable amounts of >credit by deficit financing to keep the economy running at a >respectable fraction of its potential productivity. The Greeks didn't lack credit. They lacked productivity. Credit just let them party hearty and run up debt, with the French and the Germans picking up the tab. Thay won't be able to repay the assistance unless they get to work. (Hint hint) > >The alternative do-nothing approach, as practiced by Hoover in 1929, >leads to vast tracts of industry standing idle with 25% unemployment, >dramatically reducing production and consumption. > >The argument isn't about "producing as much as you consume" - it's >about maintaining consumption and production under circumstances where >both would otherwise collapse. > >Managing the transition back to balanced budgets without crimping the >level of economic activity too much isn't a trivial job, and the banks >don't help by bleating about financial responsiblity as if their US >colleagues hadn't created the problem in the first place by being >totally irresponsible. With your understanding of dynamics, it's a good thing you don't design electronics. John
From: Joerg on 18 May 2010 11:21
Bill Sloman wrote: > On May 17, 4:01 pm, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> Bill Slomanwrote: >>> On May 16, 1:11 am, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>> Bill Slomanwrote: >>>>> On May 13, 5:59 pm, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> Bill Slomanwrote: >>>>>>> On May 13, 3:46 pm, John Larkin >>>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 02:34:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >>>>>>>> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On May 12, 7:57 pm, John Larkin >>>>>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 12 May 2010 10:13:56 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >>>>>>>>>> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't harvest; I think. >>>>>>>>>>> An unconvincing claim. Your "thinking" reflects your indolent habit of >>>>>>>>>>> picking up predigested nonsense that fits your fat-headed >>>>>>>>>>> preconceptions. >>>>>>>>>> I've been calling you a fathead for years. You can't even design >>>>>>>>>> original insults. >>>>>>>>>>> In this thread you've claimed that the euro can't be stable currency >>>>>>>>>>> because it shared across several countries with different economic >>>>>>>>>>> strengths and weaknessess, while failing to note that the US dollar is >>>>>>>>>>> shared across the united states of America - running from Alaska to >>>>>>>>>>> Wyoming (neither of whose economies look much like California's). >>>>>>>>>> But we only have one government. >>>>>>>>> Your states don't have legislatures and governors? >>>>>>>> They aren't allowed to print money or regulate big financial >>>>>>>> institutions. Most must balance their budgets. The trouble that >>>>>>>> California is in now will be fixed by California. The trouble that >>>>>>>> Greece is in now will be fixed by Germany. >>>>>>> Do pay attention. The trouble that Greece is now in will be fixed by >>>>>>> Greece. The EU - as a whole - will under-write Greek borrowing until >>>>>>> that happens. The Germans have had quite a lot of influence on the >>>>>>> requirements imposed on the Greeks in return for the guarantees, but >>>>>>> the Greeks have to do the work. >>>>>> Do pay attention: >>>>>> http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2010/05/german-parliament-clears... >>>>>> Quote: "Members of the Bundestag, Germany's lower house, approved a >>>>>> state-backed guarantee for the loan ..." >>>>> It's you who needs to pay attention. The EU - as a whole - is under- >>>>> writing the Greek borrowing. The individual memebers of the EU have to >>>>> pass legislation to approve their particular country's part of the >>>>> package. The Dutch lower house approved the Dutch component recently. >>>>> It's still a collective decision. >>>> So, what exactly does "state-backed" mean in your opinion? >>> That the individual states guarantee that their particular portion of >>> the loan will be paid by that particular loan if Greece goes bankrupt? >>> What else would it mean? >> Ah, now you are beginning to get it. You wrote above, quote "The EU - as >> a whole - is underwriting the Greek borrowing". Which is wrong. For >> example if Greece fails to service the debt it now has in Germany the EU >> won't pay the Germans back. Their own taxpayers will. And those are >> rather pissed right now and for good reason. > > Germany is part of the EU. If the Greeks fail to service the debt it > has in Germany, it won't be servicing the debt held in France, the UK > or the Netherlands either, and their taxpayers will be equally pissed. > What is pising off the German taxpayers is that the rescue package is > seen as a source of inflation, and the Germans have been terrified of > inflation since 1923. > And rightfully so. Because there are numerous other countries that have overspent and are now teetering. We have only seen the tip of the iceberg so far. Mark my words. >>>> Your notion that "The trouble that Greece is now in will be fixed by >>>> Greece" will IMHO not come to pass. >>> You are making a prediction, based on the little you know about the >>> situation, heavily influenced by what you've read in the US mass >>> media. As opinions go, it doesn't carry a lot of weight. >> Check the facts. Greece has no industry to write home about, tourism is >> declining because countries like Turkey are cheaper, and they can't >> print Euros. Did I forget anything? Guess not. > > Greece has the world's largest shipping fleet. This may not be an > industry, but it is certaly a source of revenue. Try not to guess this > sort of information - Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it's more > reliable than your imagination. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece > GDP is around $30k per capita. And that's the problem, that doesn't support the lavish perks like early retirement, too many gvt workers, and so on. Other Western countries with lesser perks are around 1/3rd higher. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita Combine that with rampant tax evasion in Greece and a tax authority that was asleep at the wheel and you'll know what I meant. >>>> They are unlikely to be able to fix the >>>> damage that living beyond their means for years has done. >>> Why? The US - which has been running a hugge balance of payemnts >>> deficit since Regan was president - would suggest that you might be >>> right, but the money market hasn't yet got around to labelling US >>> treasury bonds as risky investments. >> We have an industry. Greece doesn't. HUGE difference. > > You've exported a lot of your industry to China. Greece is a small > country - about 11 million people - and it's industry, such as it is, > isn't widely publicised. It is a developed country, and the GPD per > head is about the same as that of France, Italy and Germany. > It is not, the GDP is lower. >> Open your PC or >> whatever else electronic and see how many components in there are from >> Greek companies. Open the hood of your car and do same. In fact, open >> just about anything. > > So what? There's nothing there from Australia either, or Switzerland. > Australia largely lives off of its minerals and other goodies, as long as they have some. Switzerland, well, we all know what they do besides making watch movements and precision machinery :-) [...] >>> Be that as it may, the Greeks have run out of options, and they will >>> do what every other government has done when they fall into the hands >>> of the IMF, which is to follow the - stupid - prescriptions. >> Obviously that will be much better than what they did so far, and what >> got them into this mess in the first place. > > Obviously. But it's applying bang-bang control where proportional, > integral and derivative control would let the economy transiton to the > desired state rather faster. Because the IMF is run by American > educated monetarist economists, whose "economic science" has very > limited predictive power, they haven't a hope of implementing any kind > of feed-forward control strategy. > There comes a time when bang is needed, not bang-bang. Meaning someone has to hit the emergency stop button because the system that was entrusted with running the place has gone out of control. Just like you don't keep pulling the yoke on an aircraft to maintain altitude when the stall horn is blaring because that would end in a fiery crash. You have to prepare everyone for an "off field landing" and then land as soon as possible. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. |