Charlie Rose

vongleichent  02/28/2012 11:24 AM Report

If I get the change, I all be reading his book.

futurevisionaries  04/22/2011 12:17 PM Report

Barton,

Can you help or know of people or companies that can help?

I need to save global FUTURE brands for and by the global people and countries.

My name is Kent G Anderson .

I see where 12 years of my life's work and ideas can help all people in all countries. My goal is to share the global Brand FUTURE... Future is design like a country and people's ideas are the global product. For more information about me and global people FUTURE google Kent G Anderson. My web page is www.futurevisionaries.com .

FUTURE sm/tm

925 N Griffin

Bismarck,ND

58501

USA

milmntec@btinet.net

JohnGelles  03/17/2011 05:17 PM Report

I should have said the name of Keynes book was HOW TO PAY FOR THE WAR -- it was written in 1940 and sells today at more than $200 (for an out-of print paperback).

Wikipedia will do:

During World War II, Keynes argued in How to Pay for the War, published in 1940, that the war effort should be largely financed by higher taxation and especially by compulsory saving (essentially workers loaning money to the government), rather than deficit spending, in order to avoid inflation.

Compulsory saving would act to dampen domestic demand, assist in channeling additional output towards the war efforts, would be fairer than punitive taxation and would have the advantage of helping to avoid a post war slump by boosting demand once workers were allowed to withdraw their savings.

...

As Allied victory began to look certain, Keynes was heavily involved, as leader of the British delegation and chairman of the World Bank commission, in the mid-1944 negotiations that established the Bretton Woods system. The Keynes-plan, concerning an international clearing-union argued for a radical system for the management of currencies.

He proposed the creation of a common world unit of currency, the Bancor and of new global institutions -- a world central bank and the International Clearing Union.

Keynes envisaged these institutions managing an international trade and payments system with strong incentives for countries to avoid substantial trade deficits or surpluses.

The USA's greater negotiating strength, however, meant that the final outcomes accorded more closely to the less radical plans of Harry Dexter White.

According to US economist Brad Delong, on almost every point where he was overruled by the Americans, Keynes was later proved correct by events

====== end Wikipedia excerpt =====

I, Gelles, change the above to use indexed-savings accounts and zero taxes on incomes and gains. I tax only transactions to be discouraged and allow inflation in capital assets to compete with inflation protected cash as a means to prevent hyper-inflation. If hyper-inflation threatens production, I add price control, rationing and subsidized supply to come to our aid.

JohnGelles  03/17/2011 04:30 PM Report

We hold these truths to be self evident, that all of us are born unequal in talent, ambition and connection to the sources of wealth and power-- yet we are also equal to some degree in wanting to be important; and we are endowed by nature with the vital need to struggle to survive and even achieve happiness of a very personal sort.

But this is not the all of it. Some of us hear of the Golden Rule and try to follow it at all times. Others would prefer to be special and grab the lion's share of everything -- leaving scraps if there are any to family, friends and enemies, more or less as chance dictates.

Which are you? And can you do anything about it?

Barton Biggs was an English major at Yale (if memory serves). He studied creative writing -- a skill that cannot be learned or taught effectively to many who want it. Arguably, we can all talk to ourself silently or out loud; but that is less than writing art for the enjoyment of readers. Biggs has probably succeeded in that art as he did in making money. Most of us fail at both. But we still want to be important.

Charlie Rose pronounces it imp-OUGHT-ant -- I prefer im-PORT-ant. The "r" means much to me. The whole word means much to Charlie. Have you ever noticed how often he makes use of it in everyday conversation?

We may assume CR is a Golden Ruler not a selfish SOB. The latter would have died in France because God would not have saved him to save us from sin.

Niall Ferguson wants us to lower the debt and our standards; Biggs wants just the opposite. Debt is around to be restructured. Our seed corn is around to be planted.

JohnGelles  03/17/2011 09:53 AM Report

Appropro all the talk about creating jobs with government seeding of the long range Obama desire for renewed American leadership in industrial and scientific R&D; green energy systems that also protect and perfect our domestic SUPPLY; education and training for science and manufacturing; expansion of actual health care delivery that will not burden an economy as it improves the physical and mental health of people in need of care; new materials science that can end any scarcity of primary elements needed for the domestic necessities of economic democracy; etc.:

[the following mostly from Wikipedia:]

..... economists argue that, when monetary policy hits the lower bound of the ZERO INTEREST RATE POLICY (ZIRP), governments must use fiscal policy.

..... The fiscal multiplier of government spending is expected to be larger when nominal interest rates are zero than they would be when nominal interest rates are above zero. Keynesian economics hold that the multiplier is above one, meaning government spending effectively boosts output.

..... In his paper on this topic, Michael Woodford finds that, in a ZIRP situation, the optimal policy for government is to spend enough in stimulus to cover the entire output gap.

..... The output gap is the deficit in actual output compared to an estimated potential output of an advanced industrial nation.

[the above was mostly from Wikipedia.]

Paul Krugman blames the slowness of job creation on a liquidity trap from a Keynesian perspective. The Tea Party blames, not the liquidity trap, but the absence of private profit in hiring people ahead of their ability to be your customers. They would therefore export your people the same way we exported their jobs.

We do not need people who cannot work hard and buy much -- so that American employers of Americans always make a high profit -- and said workers are always expendable.

Does REMant believe in this system to guaranty oligarchy and kill off unions and economic democracy -- rather than reforming unions, by financing them the way we finance Congress, and protecting their independence the way we do for the Supreme court?

I do not think so. He seems too nice a guy. I guess he believes there is a Natural Rate of Recovery (like the Non-accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment,) that will add the jobs we need if we get government off our back and out of the bedroom.

Mark Twain and Will Rogers had it right: Congress is a den for thieves and a nest of snakes. Especially its Republicans, but also all the others. They pass an Internal Revenue Code than none of them ever read or could read even with H&R Block and Turbotax there to hold their hand.

If America is flushed down the toilet in the not too distant future it will have been the work of our Congress, bankers and lawyers aided by all the voters who never cared enough before voting to cross over the RR tracks and use enough imagination to know what Lincoln knew about money, ignorance and evil.

JohnGelles  03/17/2011 05:15 AM Report

At the end of my comment just sent is a sentence that reads: " I think under the circumstances and in the eye of the storm they did right things."

This was a quote from Barton Biggs in the transcript of this show. He was referring to the team in Washington whose stimulus and investment spending is now criticized by Tea Party know-nothings who, of given much more support, will do more than any foreign enemy to expose the American economy to deflation and destruction. Drink beer and coffee, dump the tea where we did in 1775.

JohnGelles  03/17/2011 05:01 AM Report

REMant is NOT one of our men in Washington trying to avoid deflation and desperation over a shortage of liquidity, (as well as avoid possible steep inflation -- that is, more than we will need when liquidity and growth are re-established.)

Obama, Bernanke and Geithner are three of our men -- and REMant sees them as too anxious to stop the recession and too unafraid to do nothing in the face of joblessness as enemy number one.

Well REMant, if he's wrong, would allow America to revisit the Great Depression. I lived through it. Naturally I see REMant as harboring dangerous beliefs: he thinks liquidity will arrive before he is reduced to poverty.

Bernanke is the one who has had these questions on his mind all his professional life. He and me. He from study. Me from thought and remembrance.

Were I Obama I would speak to the American people -- and explain to them our great advantage of having the potential to regain our leadership role in manufacturing and all related skills in industry and economy. I would explain that all our debt is denominated in dollars. I would explain that it is our duty to achieve full employment as we end poverty once and for all. I would explain that unemployment and fear to invest can destroy America as though they were foreign enemies. I would explain that a man without a job is as prone to depression and a man without a country.

REMant and other gun shy investors (of government dollars in our people and our culture) are not harmless critics who run off at the mouth: they represent Hoover-ville and and dreams that liquidity is self-correcting ALL THE TIME IN EVERY PLACE AND CIRCUMSTANCE.

Obama has not done that. Only Bernanke seems to fear Hoover-ville because he's studied it night and day for forty years.

Let us assume that the risk of hyperinflation is real and above zero. We know we do not have it YET. What will we have to do, if we arrive at full employment and prices for necessities are showing signs that we need more SUPPLY?

WELL, if that happens, we will have to invest in the means of SUPPLY as we did in WW II in synthetic rubber, aluminum, aviation gas, guns, ships, tanks, victory gardens and 16 mm movies (so the troops could get a laugh when it was needed).

Suppose, all that liquidity is getting in our way, we wil have to attract much of it away from markets for necessities and put it into cash savings and the purchase of capital assets or luxuries where it will not reduce our means to regain economic, industrial and scientific leadership among all our peaceful trading partners.

And suppose, our high liquidity tempts rivals to offer better money for the world's banks to hold in their vaults? WHY WE WILL reason with them. After all, if India, China, Russia and REMant's choice, can get a better act together that North America (and South America), then we will have to learn from them how to design an economic democracy for the robotic era now in sight.

REMant gets here first. But he rarely stays til last. Charlie Rose has to stay. And he has to produce. He and Bloomberg cannot fail -- the way I believe PBS is failing. They say we should trust them. Yet they have never promoted income tax reform to the degree we need it.

Our nation is handicapped by the Internal Revenue Code and Congressional ignorance and corruption like never before in its history. Bernanke is not the problem -- he is the solution -- until Congress lowers taxes, raises seed investment, reforms unreadable regulation, and closes down the lobbies that are full of ex-lawmakers who switched to making money for themselves and trouble for the rest of us.

REMant, get out of bed tomorrow on the side of people out of work and out of money. They have not all of a sudden become LOSERS. They worked all their lives. The system was coming apart at the seams. Bernanke is the voice of Keynes among us whose job it is to prevent Hoover-ville from coming out of nowhere to close our central bank from rescuing our economy. Thank God he is in that job. George W Bush put him there. And George W Bush put the idea of democracy in the oil patch before a lot of people we may be letting down. Secretary Gates seems to be more afraid of economic problems he does not understand than he is of enemies he is supposed to scare strait. Give the guy an injection of Keynes' "How We Won the War".

I think under the circumstances and in the eye of the storm

they did right things.

REMant  03/16/2011 12:18 PM Report

The statement that crashes are completely unforeseen is not only patently false, but very stupid, as is his support for Helicopter Ben. No persons in or out of office are more responsible for the tragedies that have befallen this planet in the past two decades than he and Greenspan. But since Wall St runs on their inflation, I expect we'll never hear one of them saying he doesn't worship the ground they stumble on. I know, however, how Thomas Nast would picture the whole bunch of them if he were alive. It might just be that Wall St has hired far too many Ivy League English majors.