Monday, March 30, 2015

Mind's Eye Re: The new Chinese gold standard

Last time I had a killer headache and went to a conference I met my husband, so Cheers! Neil. And thanks for the link. Would very much like to see practical application come out of a moral-spiritual view. Freedom cost a buck two eighty (Team America) I hear, the price of policing.

On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 10:59:18 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote:
Low LOL Moll - some of the modules at this conference in Manchester over the next few days at least show some of us are taking a moral-spiritual view on economics.  I've had to  pull out from some workshop involvement because this flu is making my head pound.

On the Chinese aspect we should be concerned that their central bank PBoC is probably more corrupt than the FED and their system and shadow system are full of bad loans, Ponzi properties, rehypothicated (ie stolen) collateral and money-laundering.  On gold, we should remember the last big gold standard was British and based on wars we fought in South Africa after the big gold finds near Witwatersrand.  Everyone party to it cheated, not least the BoE.

Various attitudes in economic determinism make me sick to the boots, from Marx on 'niggers and slavery'  (he thought the US was the 'great white hope') to people who mouth "austerity" when it kills other people and makes even Greek kids go hungry.  These are spiritual, human rights issues and the kind of things I'd like Gabby turning her critical eye to.  I think this is what Allan's sig line is about too.  And before dismissing American power from any politically correct high ground, we also need to think through how to cope without it as part of a positive Plan B.  Guns to plough shares ain't it when Genghis is forming a plan and economics, bent as it is, has been part of the West staying ahead.  The fascist right have long known this and that various academics doing neo-classical economics and monetarism are flunkies .Sooner or later you have to 'police' freedom.

, March 30, 2015 at 2:02:24 AM UTC+1, Molly wrote:
Oh I thought that's what the Clinton's were doing (cough, cough, gaag)
COn Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 8:54:47 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote:
Actually we might do an analysis of what the Lord has provided and put some faith into nurturing and distributing it.

On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 12:44:59 AM UTC+1, Molly wrote:
Thanks, Francis. We have been watching with anticipation of positive change, although not counting on it. I know not to believe the talking heads, but was interested to see them even acknowledging the occurrence. Not sure I trust the Zero Hedge or mainstream media perspectives either. Always wondering what is really occurring. Neil is right in that in the end, as implausible as it sounds, "the Lord provides" may be the most reasonable perspective, since the rest is dog eat dog lunacy.

On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 6:51:49 PM UTC-4, frantheman wrote:
For years I have regarded that strange subject called "economics" as being somewhere on a par with that other strange subject known as "theology," and tend to see economists as belonging to the same general group as bishops, witch-doctors, mullahs and snake-oil salesmen. In their areas of so-called expertise, they regularly get things wrong - and then go on to earn vast amounts as talking heads, retrospectively explaining what they failed to see coming. Carnival fortune-tellers probably have a better record of accuracy.

The ghastly thing is that these high priests of mumbo-jumbo have such power and influence.

I have some (a very small amount) of sympathy for the Chinese leadership elite - they're riding a very powerful, unpredictable, and very dangerous tiger; trying to modernise and stabilize a population four times the size of the USA, most of whom are still leading a pre-modern peasant existence, the rest of whom are trying to gallop into a materialistic hyper-capitalism as fast as they can. The whole country seems to be living in a state of perpetual high tension. Whether they will succeed without the whole thing exploding around their ears remains an open question. Let's hope they do, for the alternative - China unravelling - would lead to the kind of geo-political instability which would make the Middle East look like a kindergarten squabble.

I see the latest moves as part of a long, ongoing process leading to full convertability of the yuan/renminbi. Within the current (lunatic) models which economists and economic commentators use, this can only be seen globally as something positive. While it may have been very convenient for the US to have the dollar as the global reserve currency, this has not necessarily been good for the rest of the world. China owns a massive amount of US debt (owing the the trade imbalance between both countries) and are thus terribly vulnerable to changes in US fiscal policy. For the world generally, a basket of around half a dozen reserve currencies (dollar, euro, yuan, Swiss franc, pound sterling, yen) is a much more stable proposition. It would force the major powers to cooperate at a deeper level than they currently do. It would also reduce US hegemony globally, which might just help provide a reality check for the US political elites (particularly those on the right) - though I'm not holding my breath about that.

Am Sonntag, 29. März 2015 15:28:24 UTC+2 schrieb Molly:
The new Chinese bank established with a gold standard is gaining momentum on the international stage. How will this effect the world economy? These quotes from Bloomberg:

China's clout has been expanding for decades, as its rapid growth allowed it to snap up a rising share of the world's resources, its exports penetrated global markets, and its bulging financial assets gave it power to make big individual loans and purchases. Now, the creation of international lending institutions is leveraging that economic influence closer to the political and diplomatic arenas, as U.S. allies defy America to back China's initiative.


"This is the beginning of a bigger role for China in global affairs," said Jim O'Neill, U.K.-based former chief economist at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., who coined the term BRICs in 2001 to highlight the rising economic power of Brazil, Russia, India and China…


Chinese President Xi Jinping's vision of achieving the same great-power status enjoyed by the U.S. received a major boost this month when the U.K., Germany, France and Italy signed on to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. The AIIB will have authorized capital of $100 billion and starting funds of about $50 billion.


Canada is considering joining, which would leave the U.S. and Japan as the only Group of Seven holdouts as they question the institution's governance and environmental standards.


China, flush with the world's biggest foreign-exchange reserves and anxious to convert them into "soft power", is building an alternative architecture. It has proposed not just the AIIB, but a New Development Bank with its "BRICS" partners—Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa—and a Silk Road development fund to boost "connectivity" with its Central Asian neighbours…



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
For more options, visit


Post a Comment