• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Economy

Thucydides said:
That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen by Frederic Bastiat

Small solar panels *might* allow you to disconnect from the grid, but you will have to accept either paying a huge premium or a decades long payback time for any solar system capable of actually powering a house (assuming you are not demanding taxpayer subsidies. A full up solar roof array and all the control electronics and power inverters can set you back anything from $50K on up. If you are not in a favourable location the amount increases astronomically, and we havn't even added any sort of power storage capabilities either).

Can you explain this a bit better?  I was under the impression that surplus power would be bought back (in Canada anyway)(not sure about the states).  I have a fairly big middle income house and was quoted at 20K approx to do my house.  8K for a water heater.  50K seems large.  How could the Gov retract more money?  Is the US Gov that fikd up?

If this is better for the Global Warming Superthread, please advise.
 
Thuc,

If I ever get the time, I will read all your posts.

Thanks very much.
Gny
 
It's been many years since it cost 50k for a solar arrray.  3k for the inverters and wiring, 3k for batteries and then the array. Unless you need over 40,000 Watts of panels 50k is excessive.

Avg household consumption for a family of 4 is 50KWh per day.  So a 6000 Watt array would do everything including hair dryers, microwaves and plasma TVs. Lets make it 8000 in case you want a fifth person. So that is 14000$ for hardware and 6k for installation. 20 k sounds right. As long as you have a decent shade free Southern exposure.
 
Imagine at a time when America needs jobs, revenues and energy independence, someone could offer all three. Now imagine what the admininstration does:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/the-smart-and-the-dumb.php

THE SMART AND THE DUMB

The smart is Harold Hamm, the founder and CEO of Continental Resources and one of America’s richest men. Hamm is one of the primary developers of the Bakken oil fields; he estimates that they contain 24 billion barrels of oil. The dumb is Barack Obama. The Wall Street Journal describes Hamm’s meeting with Obama:

When it was Mr. Hamm’s turn to talk briefly with President Obama, “I told him of the revolution in the oil and gas industry and how we have the capacity to produce enough oil to enable America to replace OPEC. I wanted to make sure he knew about this.”

The president’s reaction? “He turned to me and said, ‘Oil and gas will be important for the next few years. But we need to go on to green and alternative energy. [Energy] Secretary [Steven] Chu has assured me that within five years, we can have a battery developed that will make a car with the equivalent of 130 miles per gallon.’” Mr. Hamm holds his head in his hands and says, “Even if you believed that, why would you want to stop oil and gas development? It was pretty disappointing.”

Disappointing, indeed; but that is the story of the Obama administration, which prefers pie in the sky to economic growth. Hamm adds these comments on the administration’s energy policies:

The White House proposal to raise $40 billion of taxes on oil and gas—by excluding those industries from credits that go to all domestic manufacturers—is also a major hindrance to exploration and drilling. “That just stops the drilling,” Mr. Hamm believes. “I’ve seen these things come about before, like [Jimmy] Carter’s windfall profits tax.” He says America’s rig count on active wells went from 4,500 to less than 55 in a matter of months. “That was a dumb idea. Thank God, Reagan got rid of that.” …

Mr. Hamm believes that if Mr. Obama truly wants more job creation, he should study North Dakota, the state with the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 3.5%. He swears that number is overstated: “We can’t find any unemployed people up there. The state has 18,000 unfilled jobs,” Mr. Hamm insists. “And these are jobs that pay $60,000 to $80,000 a year.” The economy is expanding so fast that North Dakota has a housing shortage. Thanks to the oil boom—Continental pays more than $50 million in state taxes a year—the state has a budget surplus and is considering ending income and property taxes.

It’s hard to disagree with Mr. Hamm’s assessment that Barack Obama has the energy story in America wrong. The government floods green energy—a niche market that supplies 2.5% of our energy needs—with billions of dollars of subsidies a year. “Wind isn’t commercially feasible with natural gas prices below $6 per thousand cubic feet,” notes Mr. Hamm. Right now its price is below $4. This may explain the administration’s hostility to the fossil-fuel renaissance.

Yes: the Obama administration doesn’t like wealth creation and economic growth because they are a threat to its cronyism. It would be hard to think of a more perverse set of economic policies than Barack Obama’s.
 
Here's some food for thought.

Cozy relationships and ‘peer benchmarking’ send CEOs’ pay soaring

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/cozy-relationships-and-peer-benchmarking-send-ceos-pay-soaring/2011/09/22/gIQAgq8NJL_story.html?hpid=z1

It wasn’t until recently, however, that its pervasiveness and impact on executive pay became clear. Companies have long hid the way they set executive pay, but in late 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission began compelling companies to disclose the specifics of how they use peer groups to determine executive pay.

Since then, researchers have found that about 90 percent of major U.S. companies expressly set their executive pay targets at or above the median of their peer group. This creates just the kinds of circumstances that drive pay upward.

Moreover, the jump in pay because of peer benchmarking is significant. A chief executive’s pay is more influenced by what his or her “peers” earn than by the company’s recent performance for shareholders, according to two independent research efforts based on the new disclosures. One was by Michael Faulkender at the University of Maryland and Jun Yang of Indiana University, and another was led by John Bizjak at Texas Christian University.
 
The cause and the end state in a nutshell:

http://www.lesjones.com/2011/10/04/california-dreamin-is-becomin-a-reality/

California dreamin’ is meetin’ with reality
Posted on October 4, 2011 by Les Jones

Michael Lewis in Vanity Fair – California and Bust:

    At that point, if not before, [San Jose] would be nothing more than a vehicle to pay the retirement costs of its former workers. The only clear solution was if former city workers up and died, soon. But former city workers were, blessedly, living longer than ever.

    This wasn’t a hypothetical scary situation, said Reed. “It’s a mathematical inevitability.” In spirit it reminded me of Bernard Madoff’s investment business. Anyone who looked at Madoff’s returns and understood them could see he was running a Ponzi scheme; only one person who had understood them both­ered to blow the whistle, and no one listened to him. (See No One Would Listen: A True Financial Thriller, by Harry Markopolos.)

    I ask [the San Jose mayor] what the chances are that, in this pinch, he could raise taxes. He holds up a thumb and index finger: zero. He’s recently coined a phrase, he says: “service-level insolvency.” Service-level insolvency means that the expensive community center that has been built and named cannot be opened. It means closing libraries three days a week. It isn’t financial bankruptcy; it’s cultural bankruptcy.

    “How on earth did this happen?” I ask him.

    “The only way I can explain it,” he says, “is that they got the money because it was there.” But he has another way to explain it, and in a moment he offers it up. “I think we’ve suffered from a series of mass delusions,” he says.

    I didn’t completely understand what he meant, and said so.

    “We’re all going to be rich,” he says. “We’re all going to live forever. All the forces in the state are lined up to preserve the status quo. To preserve the delusion. And here—this place—is where the reality hits.”

The stories from bankrupt Vallejo, California ain’t pretty. It’s like a scene from a zombie movie minus the zombies.

    Welcome to Vallejo, city of opportunity, reads the sign on the way in, but the shops that remain open display signs that say, we accept food stamps. Weeds surround abandoned businesses, and all traffic lights are set to permanently blink, which is a formality, as there are no longer any cops to police the streets. Vallejo is the one city in the Bay Area where you can park anywhere and not worry about getting a ticket, because there are no meter maids either. The windows of city hall are dark, but its front porch is a hive of activity. A young man in a backward baseball cap, sunglasses, and a new pair of Nike sneakers stands on a low wall and calls out an address:

    “Nine hundred Cambridge Drive,” he says. “In Benicia.” The people in the crowd below instantly begin bidding. From 2006 to 2010 the value of Vallejo real estate fell 66 percent. One in 16 homes in the city is in foreclosure. This is apparently the fire sale, but the characters involved are so shady and furtive that I can hardly believe it.

    The lobby of city hall is completely empty. There’s a receptionist’s desk but no receptionist. Instead, there’s a sign: to foreclosure auctioneers and foreclosure bidders: please do not conduct business in the city hall lobby.

Like Glenn Reynolds says, government cheerleaders like to pretend that all of your tax money goes to teachers, police, and firefighters. The reality is that cities like San Jose and Vallejo are paying so much to retired government workers of all kinds that they’ve had to lay off teachers, police, and firefighters.

That’s what happens when government becomes a pension fund that serves the unions instead of a civil agency that serves the taxpayers. The retired government workers become the zombies that terrorize the city.
 
Looks like the Senate Republicans are going to create jobs by turning the clock back and party like it's January 2009.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-republicans-offer-jobs-package/2011/10/13/gIQAKZg5hL_story.html?hpid=z1


The plan, whose sponsors include Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and has been embraced by most other GOP senators, would impose a temporary moratorium on new government regulations until the nation’s 9.1 percent unemployment rate drops to 7.7 percent, its level when Obama took office in January 2009.

Even then, any regulation projected to cost businesses $100 million a year would require congressional approval.

The 2009 federal health-care law would be repealed. So, too, would the Dodd-Frank Act imposing new rules on the financial sector after the 2008 economic meltdown.

Congress would initiate a balanced-budget amendment to the constitution, designed to dramatically reduce government spending; the president would receive a line-item veto of future congressional action.

Corporate and individual tax rates would drop from 35 percent to 25 percent. Congressional committees would be instructed to overhaul the tax code within 90 days to eliminate deductions and loopholes, using the new revenue to pay for the tax cut.

Corporations would get a tax break for bringing offshore earnings back to the United States.

And the plan would lift restrictions on offshore drilling.



It's like they are trying to undo everything the Obama Administration did since he took power.

I'm beginning to think these guys are sore losers.
 
But the courts seem to be sending a message to Wall Street.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/hedge-fund-billionaire-gets-11-year-sentence-in-fraud-case/2011/10/13/gIQAa0PZhL_story.html?hpid=z2

Raj Rajaratnam, the hedge fund billionaire at the center of one of the largest insider trading cases in history, was sentenced Thursday to 11 years in prison.

It was the longest prison term ever for insider trading, according to the Justice Department, and was the culmination of a years-long federal probe of cheating in the stock market.
...

Rajaratnam’s crimes “reflect a virus in our business culture that needs to be eradicated,” U.S. District Judge Richard J. Holwell said at the sentencing in New York.
....

Rajaratnam was ordered to forfeit $53.4 million and pay a fine of $10 million. Out on $100 million bail, he is scheduled to report for prison on Nov. 28.

 
There is a massive infographic on the link, which is worth looking at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/10/who-besides-solyndra-got-loan-guarantees/246637/

Who Besides Solyndra Got Loan Guarantees?
By Megan McArdle

Oct 13 2011, 2:40 PM ET 68
Solyndra CEO Brian Harrison just resigned, as the controversy stubbornly refuses to go away.  Seems worth revisiting the loans once again, since I've spent a little time looking more deeply at the program over the past few days.

Supporters of these programs claim that they're a necessary part of winning the green future because these are investments that are too risky, or too big, for private capital to take on. 

Of course, if the government is going to be a VC, supporters say, they have to expect a high failure rate. There's a lot of talk about the manufacturing "Valley of Death", where startup manufacturing firms may have difficulty getting capital to commercialize their prototypes.  According to proponents of this theory, there's plenty of money for early stage ventures, and plenty of bank loans for established firms, but no money for mass commercialization of new manufacturing ideas.  (Hence the "valley").  This valley, they say, is especially wide for energy firms, because the capital costs for starting up are so high.

I've been somewhat skeptical of those claims--why are people pouring money into manufacturing startups if they're inevitably doomed to die at the commercialization stage?  But say it's true.  I thought it was worth looking at who got the money from these programs, and for what.  How well is the government doing in its role of VC/valley of death sherpa?

So I went to the DOE's website and manually copied the data on the loan programs.  I didn't scrutinize all of the projects--I've already spent more time on this than is probably justified.  But I looked at the biggest ones.  I put all the number into pretty graphs.  And then I thought I'd share those graphs with you, because hell, I have them. 

What I'm trying to say is, I just made my first infographic. 

I know what you're thinking: "But Megan, infographics are so July 2011!"  Yes, it's true: I only adopt trends when they are hoary with age.  And I know what else you're thinking: "But Megan, you have the design sensibility of a blind person!"  Also pitifully true.  In my defense, however, I confined myself to pie charts.

Hell, I can't really defend it.  I was in the grip of forces beyond my control.  Anyway, here's the breakdown of where the money went:

doeloaninfographic.png

I thought about adding a breakdown by state, but figured that I'd already subjected you to enough.  However, I couldn't help but notice a distinctly heavy Nevada presence, including $343 million for a transmission line that has no obvious "clean" application, except for some vague promises that it could be used to carry clean Nevada energy to California.

Obviously, there's a point to this.  That is, I hope that the infographic will be broadly useful to people who support the program: I figure everyone should be interested to know where the money went.  (And here's a spreadsheet for those who want to trundle through the data themselves). But I have highlighted what jumped out at me: most of the money has gone to enormous companies that should have no trouble accessing capital.  Established utilities, large multinational auto manufacturers, a global warehouse owner.  The bulk of these funds are not going to rectify some gap in the capital markets.  They're straight subsidies to huge corporations.  Even some of the smaller firms/deals are owned by large corporations like Total SA.

Giving large, established companies extra-cheap loans to build power plants, run transmission lines, and fix up the roofs of their warehouses is, in the immortal words of P.J. O'Rourke, like paying a Dairy Queen owner to keep his ice cream freezers on.

This has implications for the default rates.  The genuine startups seem to be shaky--it's not just Solyndra, but also Nevada Geothermal and Brightsource.  In other words, the firms that actually need the money are likely to experience a far higher default rate than the overall portfolio.

Why does that matter?  Because it skews our perceptions of the usefulness of the program.  If we loan a bunch of money to firms that could easily get the money elsewhere, and a little bit of money to firms that are very risky, we can claim a high "success" rate even if all the risky firms fail.  But we won't have actually added much value, because the government wasn't addressing a genuine market failure.  It was just giving Ford and Nissan some extra-cheap money.

But if we're not really filling a gap in the capital market, this is a terrible way to go about subsidizing clean energy.  We should be subsidizing the outcome we want: more solar panels installed, more clean vehicles purchased.  If the demand is there, companies will be able to go out onto the market and borrow to fill it.  It doesn't do us much good to have a bunch of shiny new electric cars--that sit on dealer lots.  Or solar panels in the Solyndra warehouse.  We should be paying for performance.  Otherwise, we're not winning the future.  We're just sticking a green smiley face on the same old corporate welfare--and the government's less like a VC than a farmer slopping the pigs at the trough.
 
The old sage updated:

10 years ago; we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope, and Johnnie Cash. . ..

Today we have NO jobs; No hope; and NO cash. . .
 
Can anyone speak on Warren Buffet?

From what I have seen on documentaries, he seems to offer the most valid opinion available; and the fact that he is Bill Gates' mentor, only makes him that much more appealing.

Too bad he is too old and tired to lead.

I think his example is a model for all to follow.
 
What example is that?  AFAIK he has not voluntarily cut any cheques to the US government as gifts.
 
Rifleman62 said:
The old sage updated:

10 years ago; we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope, and Johnnie Cash. . ..

Today we have NO jobs; No hope; and NO cash. . .

God protect Kevin Bacon....
 
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=46849

These are the 1%, and they are all Democrat Party supporters. (So was that guy convicted of insider trading who got 11 years. Funny how that is working out).
 
Here, in an article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, is a sad story, the likes of which I predict we will see again and again:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/americas/harrisburg-state-capitals-bankruptcy-underscores-us-financial-woes/article2202142/
Harrisburg: State capital’s bankruptcy underscores U.S. financial woes

RENATA D'ALIESIO  AND JACQUIE MCNISH
HARRISBURG AND TORONTO— From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Published Friday, Oct. 14, 2011

Under a forbidding grey sky, Anthony Palumbo wraps himself in a burgundy apron to begin the morning kitchen ritual his father started 35 years ago after he emigrated from Naples, Italy, to open a pizzeria in Pennsylvania’s capital, Harrisburg.

Palumbo’s Italian Eatery has thrived despite some of the worst possible local disasters, including the fallout from the 1979 nuclear meltdown at the nearby Three Mile Island reactor and the decline of the local steel industry. One block south of the eatery, the city’s council delivered another blow on Tuesday when it voted to file for bankruptcy protection from its creditors, marking what is believed to be the first declaration of insolvency by a U.S. state capital.

Mr. Palumbo knows that times are tough in the picturesque town of 47,000 overlooking the Susquehanna River. There are fewer cars parked in the local municipal lot, crime is on the rise and customers are scarcer. Despite these setbacks, he believes the city and his family business, which now includes six restaurants, will survive the turmoil.

“Overall, I think it’s going to be okay,” he says with a shrug. “This is the state capital. When you get down to it, it’s a really nice city.”

To some experts, Mr. Palumbo’s optimism personifies the kind of resilience that will help U.S. cities weather the worst financial strains they have faced since the Depression. To others, it represents the kind of denial that has blinded citizens, politicians and investors to towering municipal debt levels that are eroding the quality of urban life Americans have taken for granted for decades.

Harrisburg is one of only a small handful of U.S. cities that filed for bankruptcy protection in recent years. Robin Prunty, managing director of Standard & Poor’s public finance unit, said she does not expect to see a significant increase in bankruptcy filings, but she expects more cities and towns will come under pressure to further cut costs because of falling revenues.

“We do see continued budget stress in the near term,” she said.

There are an estimated 90,000 municipalities in the United States, and in the past decade their total debts have increased by a third to an estimated $3-trillion (U.S.). Historically, municipalities have sold bonds to pay for local improvements such as new hospitals, schools, roads and other infrastructure projects. The financial crisis has driven many stretched municipalities to borrow for another reason: to cover their costs.

Most cities depend on property taxes to pay the majority of their bills, but these revenues have shrunk in the wake of the nation’s housing crisis and falling real-estate values. Many municipalities are restricted by local laws from raising taxes, presenting political leaders with the choice of cutting services or borrowing more to pay the bills.

Harrisburg is a poster child for cities that would rather borrow than cut costs. Debt on an electricity-generating incinerator have soared from $12.5-million to $310-million after three decades of overhauls and upgrades, burdening the city with annual interest costs that now exceed its budget.

Since she was voted into office in 2009, Harrisburg Mayor Linda Thompson has defied mounting pressure from bondholders and the state government to pay the city’s debts by slashing jobs and assets.

“To disrupt [services] because we can’t make a bond payment would just be unconscionable. As a leader, I couldn’t do it,” she said in an interview late last year.

After a year of jousting with bondholders and a state government that is threatening to take control of Harrisburg, Ms. Thompson was outgunned by the city’s council on Tuesday when a narrow majority voted to start bankruptcy proceedings. The move will give bondholders more leverage to wrestle owed debt payments.

For business patrons at a local cigar shop called the Tinder Box, the air is starting to clear in Harrisburg after years of political infighting over the city’s debts.

“Harrisburg is just a microcosm of what's going on throughout the United States,” said Richard Harper, who owns a local financial-services company. “You can't continue to burn more money than you’re bringing in.”

Now that the process has started with the bankruptcy proceedings, Mr. Harper said he has become very concerned about the quality of life in a city where nearly 30 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line, and city outskirts are flanked by abandoned homes. He recently purchased a gun permit, and he is fine-tuning plans to move his business outside Harrisburg.

Over at Royal Cleaners, Hanna Shin has no plans to leave. An immigrant from South Korea, she opened her dry-cleaning store 19 years ago. Flanked by pictures of her customers’ children and the state’s governor, Tom Corbett, Ms. Shin, 63, says her business has survived the harsh times because of her loyal clientele. She hopes to keep the store open until she retires in two years.

“I want the city of Harrisburg to be alive, not dead,” Ms. Shin said. “No matter what is happening, this is the capital of Pennsylvania.”


Message for Mayor Linda Thompson: you can, indeed, default on your debt ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
... once.


After that the bond holders will demand solid, real assets - your city property, parks for example, as surety on your outstanding debt. They may even get a court to agree that n% of city property taxes go to them - trough your receiver.

The bond market will not loan you any more money except at apparently (to you) extortionate rates. No one has to buy your bonds; neither you nor Barack Obama nor even Hu Jintao (someone with real economic muscle) can conscript the bond market.

__________
"I used to think if there was reincarnation, I wanted to come back as the president or the pope or a .400 baseball hitter. But now I want to come back as the bond market. You can intimidate everybody."
James Carville
Bill Clinton's campaign manager


 
The Obama administration is all about crony capitalism.When he took office unemployment was under 6% now its double that or may be higher,because the Obama administration is not revealing the true unemployment numbers.
 
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report (April 2011) re: 2008 Global Financial Crisis

http://cybercemetery.unt.edu/archive/fcic/20110310173535/http://www.fcic.gov/report/conclusions

“The Commission concluded that this crisis was avoidable. It found widespread failures in financial regulation; dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance; excessive borrowing and risk-taking by households and Wall Street; policy makers who were ill prepared for the crisis; and systemic breaches In accountability and ethics at all levels. Here we present what we found so readers can reach their own conclusions, even as the comprehensive historical record of this crisis continues to be written.”

Objections also noted.  Interesting read, perspectives.


Tracking tools re: bailout money and payback (?):
Broad History of US Bailouts:
http://www.propublica.org/special/government-bailouts

More Detail:
http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list/index


Domestic:
Millions of homes lurk on bank inventories, casting doubts of rebound
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/10/16/1561081/millions-of-homes-lurk-on-bank.html#ixzz1avO0l74S
 
G20 ministers back big bank capital surchargehttp://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/15/g20-regulation-idUSL3E7LF0A420111015

Finance ministers and central bankers from the world's top economies backed on Saturday a mandatory capital surcharge on big lenders of up to 2.5 percent to be phased in from 2016, dealing a blow to banks hoping for a rethink or delay.

The communique from a meeting of G20 finance chiefs endorsed a 1-2.5 percent capital surcharge on top banks like Goldman Sachs , HSBC , Deutsche Bank and JPMorgan Chase .

The aim is to make sure they have enough capital to withstand market turbulence so that taxpayers won't have to rescue banks again in the next crisis.
 


"Now that the framework applicable to G-SIFIs is agreed, we urge the Financial Stability Board to define the modalities to extend expeditiously the framework to all SIFIs," the communique said.

JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive Jamie Dimon has called the surcharge anti-American while insurers are battling against being saddled with one too, as are second tier banks.

:cdn: Bank of Canada's, Mark Carney to head Financial Security Board?

FSB Chairman Mario Draghi steps down as chairman this month to become president of the European Central Bank. Asked if he was the lead candidate to replace him, Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney told reporters: "I hope so."


From http://www.cbc.ca/doczone/meltdown/extras.html :

In 2008, the World Economic Forum rated Canada's banking system No. 1 in the world. The U.S. came in right behind — Namibia
  :cdn:

Did anyone watch the CBC 4-part documentary series, Meltdown ?  I thought it was interesting for showing ripple effects felt globally, some banks have bigger effects that way, which also seems to be on the G20 agenda:

A summit of the G20 leaders in Cannes, France in early November is set to give final approval to the surcharge plan and name the banks affected, known as global systemically important financial institution or G-SIFIs , G20 sources said.
(http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/15/g20-regulation-idUSL3E7LF0A420111015 )
 
In 2008, the World Economic Forum rated Canada's banking system No. 1 in the world. The U.S. came in right behind — Namibia.

That would explain why my National Bank of Namibia stock is outperforming my US T-Bills. ;D
 
cupper said:
That would explain why my National Bank of Namibia stock is outperforming my US T-Bills. ;D

LOL  ;D  Kind of sad though :(

I wasn't sure if to post that on the "global economy" thread, but since US Banks are mentioned, and I can also see potential conflicts with Republican/bankers (article you recently posted on), but I suppose there's timing and phasing in of changes.  The CBC documentary was interesting, for example the effects fo Lehman Brothers going down, and how that affected the textile industy in China (caused millions of job losses, homelessness for the migrant labourers).  Paul Martin (previous Liberal PM here, credited with the stronger banking regulations we have now), comments on the effects of defaults on loans in the US, affecting jobs elsewhere in the world.  Just some examples of how somethings are very interrconnected.

To the Liberal-haters  ;) -- Jim Flaherty, also made contributions in the CBC documentary.  He defended the US, WS by pointing out similar practices are also occuring world wide (in another clip, shows possibility of China's housing bubble, which can as well have worldwide, financial implications [job losses, homelessness, etc., elsewhere; there's a few around, China is a concern, because obviously, it's a big one, if it goes unstable, more global impacts on economies abroad as well).  In the global context, it shows countries need to work together on agreements, because of at least partial integration ("New World Order") among economies.
 
Back
Top