Mike Norman appears to suffer from an identity crisis. Five years ago, he appeared on TV dressed in suit and tie. Recently, he appeared several times wearing informal dark T-shirt. This video has him appearing with leather and shades as the cool guy incognito. There's something unsettling about his rapid and numerous metamorphesis. I hope is not evidence of anything organic.
after this video i get you are a complete wreck.... dude you are not 20 years old, you are not only wrong on economics you are complete clueless about verything....
No wonder the whole planet is totally lost and screwed today with respect to where the economy really is. We've been listening to this kind of stuff for how many years now...
Please Mike, too many youngsters out there for me to not intervene, please, change business, please, find yourself a new career, you could teach hockey, or start a surf shop... it hurts us all to see you damage this planet like this... you've tried, we all appreciate the effort, but this is not for you... please...
Can you explain why we are running at such low capacity? Like you pointed out, we have labor and capital. We have one of the best educated workforces in the world and yet we have all this unemployment and if you notice, all the high technology is leaving the US. Even our space program is falling behind. The newest particle accelerator isn't in the us, the ISS becoming more I than US, the latest bullet trains are somewhere else... We are clearly declining.
My best guess is that we are afraid of deficits. There are four components to GDP: Personal Consumption, Biz Investment, Government and Net Exports. The fastest and easiest way to raise output is to raise the first three--but that would entail higher deficits, because you'd need to cut taxes significantly (on individuals and businesses) and/or ramp up gov't spending and investment. Those 3 components are 87% of GDP. Exports are 13%. To grow by exports you'd have to literally trash the dollar.
The US government doesn't produce anything, why do we want them spending? Gov spending may employ us, but it doesn't give us anything to buy. Just imagine what all the men in the military could be producing for us if they weren't digging ditches and filling them back up! Look at the wasted manpower in the police! We need SOME police, but not all the police we have. Same for military. Why would biz investments create deficits?
Aren't tennis matches scored 1 point at a time up to 15 points and each match is then collectively called 1 point?
It seems to me that everything you are saying would be absolutely true in a closed economy without an exchange rate between different countries.
As we spend money, what we are essentially doing is writing IOU's in "stuff". If only Americans were buying the IOU's, it would be a zero loss system, but since we are writing them to foreigners they are going to want our STUFF.
I was referring to the scoring in an individual game. I think most people understood that. Foreign exchange values fluctuate. They are designed to do that. And why are you so dead certain that sustaining economic output and employment at the maximum leads to a weak currency? It would seem to me to be the opposite.
First of all, we don't have that problem, as your video points out. I would really like you to address the problem of the fact that as we spend money we are promising IOU's in our stuff. When the economy picks up again, foreigners are going to expect to redeem their dollars in American goods and services. It isn't the fact that we have to give them money, it's the fact that the money is redeemable is stuff.
I think I see where your confusion is. The only promise embodied in those notes (IOUs, dollars) is the promise by the government that they will accept them as payment of taxes. Other than that Americans are not legally bound to exchange anything for dollars if they don't want to. When foreigners get those notes that's really all they get, but they have faith that they can be exchanged for goods, services and financial assets because that has the been the history.
And if foreigners start exchanging their dollars for our stuff now, it's only because our leaders are telling them to do that. They have this belief that running a trade deficit is bad. They can't seem to understand that we have been exchange non-convertible currency for real goods and foreign nations, like China, have been perfectly happy with that relationship!
Why would anyone want to trade their real wealth for our dollars if they are never going to redeem them? I know they have been doing that for quite a long time but China is publicly complaining about our fiscal policy as has Russia and India. What if they decide to start spending them? What if we loose our reserve currency status as a result? Do you realize how bad that would be? Imagine if we had to sell dollars for Euros to buy oil on the open market! It's scary.
The Chinese wanted our financial assets; mostly our Treasuries as a unit of saving. There's reasons for this...because there are few social safety nets in China (like no Social Security, health insurance, etc), they need to save far more. They put their savings in the safest thing--a savings acct of the U.S. Gov't, known as a Treasury.
I heard they don't have public schools anymore (since the reforms), is that true?
How much danger is there of severe social unrest in China? Investing in China is something I somewhat disagree with Peter Schiff about. Worldwide, I think China is probably our biggest enemy, especially considering our problems with N. Korea. OTOH, there has been incredible growth in China, especially in the cities. Towns that barely had running water 20 years ago are now mega-cities.
Another thing is that while I do understand that you see money as a facilitator of trade, I see money as both a facilitator and a liability. There are far, far, far more dollars in foreign hands then there is productivity int he US. Imagine if there were a rush to trade in dollars by foreigners! There would be shortages of EVERYTHING in the US except US dollars. All of our wheat, oil, corn, cotton, coal... would be on container ships going out to the world.
There's $3 trillion in the hands of foreigners. We produce $14 trillion in output. Sure, if you had a demand surge of $3 trillion all of a sudden that would make things a little tight, I think. I'm not even sure...we're only running at 68% of capacity and we have 13 million workers ready to work.
If our GDP is 14T and consumption is 71% of that, then we really only have 4.06T in output, right? None of that ever made any sense to me since GDP is supposed to be based on value added transactions, which should only mean production.
Wrong, 14T of GDP means 14T worth of stuff produced. Say we're a group on an island. I'm the only one working. And I fish. Say I fish 10 fish a day - total GDP of the island is 3650 fish a year and say we eat it all then GDP is 100% consumption. Say however the following year I give you 3650/2=1825 fish for you to build a house, then we've used half the fish to invest, at which point GDP = 1825 fish + 1 house (consumption) + 1825 fish (investment). Total GDP = 3650 fish + 1 house).
That much I know isn't true, at least not in the US. For one, trillions of the GDP is imputations (made up transactions), then there is hedonic adjustments which even if they were right, would cause double counting and then there is the fact that much of what is sold in the US is imported and not produced by us.
You know what, I am totally with you on this point. Definition being one thing, I wish someone had the balls to simply walk up to where the gov guys compute the GDP numbers and see how the f* they do it. Hedonics and stuff - all in all GDP is surely NOT a number you want to base any metrix of valuation of a country's economy. Overall savings (rate) maybe. Debt, why not. Anyway, GDP only gives you one half (assets) of the balance sheet (doesn't give you info about liabilities) so...
If a "product" (good and/or service) is used by somebody to be invested towards some other project, it's an investment. If it's just bought and consumed then it's consumption. A 20,000$ car built goes into "C" if I buy it for leasure. Same care goes into "I" if a taxi driver buys it. A building goes into "C" if I buy it to live in it. Goes into "I" if a company buys it to use it as an office. Don't know if this answers your question. There was 14T worth of "stuff" built last year.
Warren Buffett also expect higher indexes, but there will be serious "inflation".
But I assume that inflation is worldwide.
BTW Mike, they didn't like your previous video's, because you are the only one with balls on the stockmarket, the Peter Schiffboys must be fucking angry jealous now, funny is't it.
I do agree with you that we are running way below our capacity and something needs to be done about that. So could you explain why we are running at such a low capacity? We are just as capable of building stuff as the Asians, but they are the ones doing it. Why is that?
Mike Norman appears to suffer from an identity crisis. Five years ago, he appeared on TV dressed in suit and tie. Recently, he appeared several times wearing informal dark T-shirt. This video has him appearing with leather and shades as the cool guy incognito. There's something unsettling about his rapid and numerous metamorphesis. I hope is not evidence of anything organic.
levine96629 2 months ago
this guy is a total moron. I wonder if he has the mental capacity to see all the dislikes on his stupid vids.
thiscreepingmalaise 3 months ago
WHAT ARTIFICIAL LENDING STANDARDS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!?????
ImAud1 11 months ago 2
after this video i get you are a complete wreck.... dude you are not 20 years old, you are not only wrong on economics you are complete clueless about verything....
thenanook2 1 year ago 3
Those are cool shades. I want a pair.
That's capitalism.
caltrop69 1 year ago
No wonder the whole planet is totally lost and screwed today with respect to where the economy really is. We've been listening to this kind of stuff for how many years now...
Please Mike, too many youngsters out there for me to not intervene, please, change business, please, find yourself a new career, you could teach hockey, or start a surf shop... it hurts us all to see you damage this planet like this... you've tried, we all appreciate the effort, but this is not for you... please...
ulysseinvest 2 years ago
You look like some 60 year old creep that hangs out in South Beach, trying to pick up on 18 years old girls with the fake boobies!
PETER FOR PRES!!!!!
You are causing Norman Bates to loose his mind Pete!!!!
We love you!!!!
DeathOfTheDollar2010 2 years ago
I want my 7:27 back.
GreenrushCapital 2 years ago
ya...............but we are smarter than fish and we dont like like fish
jarachenyuan 2 years ago
Yep, I think the USA needs to use all its resources and capital, like OIL.
Let's drill baby drill.
katiatomsk 2 years ago
utter rubbish, every word. analogy of fish?
mikeTaKEitDoGGYstYle 2 years ago 4
Can you explain why we are running at such low capacity? Like you pointed out, we have labor and capital. We have one of the best educated workforces in the world and yet we have all this unemployment and if you notice, all the high technology is leaving the US. Even our space program is falling behind. The newest particle accelerator isn't in the us, the ISS becoming more I than US, the latest bullet trains are somewhere else... We are clearly declining.
WHY IS THAT!?!?
christo930 2 years ago
My best guess is that we are afraid of deficits. There are four components to GDP: Personal Consumption, Biz Investment, Government and Net Exports. The fastest and easiest way to raise output is to raise the first three--but that would entail higher deficits, because you'd need to cut taxes significantly (on individuals and businesses) and/or ramp up gov't spending and investment. Those 3 components are 87% of GDP. Exports are 13%. To grow by exports you'd have to literally trash the dollar.
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
The US government doesn't produce anything, why do we want them spending? Gov spending may employ us, but it doesn't give us anything to buy. Just imagine what all the men in the military could be producing for us if they weren't digging ditches and filling them back up! Look at the wasted manpower in the police! We need SOME police, but not all the police we have. Same for military. Why would biz investments create deficits?
christo930 2 years ago 6
Isn't the dollar right now being trashed by govenment spending which you now say you want more of?
"To grow by exports you'd have to literally trash the dollar. "
Less consumer spending will lead to more saving and thus more investments. Investments and less consumer consumption should lead to more exports.
Why should this trash the dollar?
BarrySlisk 2 years ago
Aren't tennis matches scored 1 point at a time up to 15 points and each match is then collectively called 1 point?
It seems to me that everything you are saying would be absolutely true in a closed economy without an exchange rate between different countries.
As we spend money, what we are essentially doing is writing IOU's in "stuff". If only Americans were buying the IOU's, it would be a zero loss system, but since we are writing them to foreigners they are going to want our STUFF.
christo930 2 years ago
I was referring to the scoring in an individual game. I think most people understood that. Foreign exchange values fluctuate. They are designed to do that. And why are you so dead certain that sustaining economic output and employment at the maximum leads to a weak currency? It would seem to me to be the opposite.
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
First of all, we don't have that problem, as your video points out. I would really like you to address the problem of the fact that as we spend money we are promising IOU's in our stuff. When the economy picks up again, foreigners are going to expect to redeem their dollars in American goods and services. It isn't the fact that we have to give them money, it's the fact that the money is redeemable is stuff.
christo930 2 years ago
I think I see where your confusion is. The only promise embodied in those notes (IOUs, dollars) is the promise by the government that they will accept them as payment of taxes. Other than that Americans are not legally bound to exchange anything for dollars if they don't want to. When foreigners get those notes that's really all they get, but they have faith that they can be exchanged for goods, services and financial assets because that has the been the history.
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
And if foreigners start exchanging their dollars for our stuff now, it's only because our leaders are telling them to do that. They have this belief that running a trade deficit is bad. They can't seem to understand that we have been exchange non-convertible currency for real goods and foreign nations, like China, have been perfectly happy with that relationship!
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
Why would anyone want to trade their real wealth for our dollars if they are never going to redeem them? I know they have been doing that for quite a long time but China is publicly complaining about our fiscal policy as has Russia and India. What if they decide to start spending them? What if we loose our reserve currency status as a result? Do you realize how bad that would be? Imagine if we had to sell dollars for Euros to buy oil on the open market! It's scary.
christo930 2 years ago 2
The Chinese wanted our financial assets; mostly our Treasuries as a unit of saving. There's reasons for this...because there are few social safety nets in China (like no Social Security, health insurance, etc), they need to save far more. They put their savings in the safest thing--a savings acct of the U.S. Gov't, known as a Treasury.
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
I heard they don't have public schools anymore (since the reforms), is that true?
How much danger is there of severe social unrest in China? Investing in China is something I somewhat disagree with Peter Schiff about. Worldwide, I think China is probably our biggest enemy, especially considering our problems with N. Korea. OTOH, there has been incredible growth in China, especially in the cities. Towns that barely had running water 20 years ago are now mega-cities.
christo930 2 years ago
Another thing is that while I do understand that you see money as a facilitator of trade, I see money as both a facilitator and a liability. There are far, far, far more dollars in foreign hands then there is productivity int he US. Imagine if there were a rush to trade in dollars by foreigners! There would be shortages of EVERYTHING in the US except US dollars. All of our wheat, oil, corn, cotton, coal... would be on container ships going out to the world.
christo930 2 years ago
There's $3 trillion in the hands of foreigners. We produce $14 trillion in output. Sure, if you had a demand surge of $3 trillion all of a sudden that would make things a little tight, I think. I'm not even sure...we're only running at 68% of capacity and we have 13 million workers ready to work.
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
If our GDP is 14T and consumption is 71% of that, then we really only have 4.06T in output, right? None of that ever made any sense to me since GDP is supposed to be based on value added transactions, which should only mean production.
Thanks for the video and all the replies.
christo930 2 years ago
Go watch my Pitbull Economics Lesson 1, What is the Economy. It explains all of it.
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
@christo930,
Wrong, 14T of GDP means 14T worth of stuff produced. Say we're a group on an island. I'm the only one working. And I fish. Say I fish 10 fish a day - total GDP of the island is 3650 fish a year and say we eat it all then GDP is 100% consumption. Say however the following year I give you 3650/2=1825 fish for you to build a house, then we've used half the fish to invest, at which point GDP = 1825 fish + 1 house (consumption) + 1825 fish (investment). Total GDP = 3650 fish + 1 house).
ulysseinvest 2 years ago
That much I know isn't true, at least not in the US. For one, trillions of the GDP is imputations (made up transactions), then there is hedonic adjustments which even if they were right, would cause double counting and then there is the fact that much of what is sold in the US is imported and not produced by us.
christo930 2 years ago
@christo930,
You know what, I am totally with you on this point. Definition being one thing, I wish someone had the balls to simply walk up to where the gov guys compute the GDP numbers and see how the f* they do it. Hedonics and stuff - all in all GDP is surely NOT a number you want to base any metrix of valuation of a country's economy. Overall savings (rate) maybe. Debt, why not. Anyway, GDP only gives you one half (assets) of the balance sheet (doesn't give you info about liabilities) so...
ulysseinvest 2 years ago
@christo930,
If a "product" (good and/or service) is used by somebody to be invested towards some other project, it's an investment. If it's just bought and consumed then it's consumption. A 20,000$ car built goes into "C" if I buy it for leasure. Same care goes into "I" if a taxi driver buys it. A building goes into "C" if I buy it to live in it. Goes into "I" if a company buys it to use it as an office. Don't know if this answers your question. There was 14T worth of "stuff" built last year.
ulysseinvest 2 years ago
thanks for the post
PestControl02 2 years ago
Thanks for watching!
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
Thanks for the new GREAT video.
Warren Buffett also expect higher indexes, but there will be serious "inflation".
But I assume that inflation is worldwide.
BTW Mike, they didn't like your previous video's, because you are the only one with balls on the stockmarket, the Peter Schiffboys must be fucking angry jealous now, funny is't it.
LenovoFightsPoverty 2 years ago
It is funny. You're right! Thanks for the comments!
mikeydoggy 2 years ago
I do agree with you that we are running way below our capacity and something needs to be done about that. So could you explain why we are running at such a low capacity? We are just as capable of building stuff as the Asians, but they are the ones doing it. Why is that?
christo930 2 years ago