A reader sends in his photo of his very own Zimbabwean one hundred trillion dollar bill.
This is what the Greens propose for New Zealand.
I think it will buy you chips, Big mac and a Coke these days.
It sounds like instead of the gold standard, Russel wants the Big Mac Combo standard
Yup, sure does sound that way. If you’re listening to a nutter like WO that is.
I dont think the hundred trillion dollar isnt used in Zimbabwe any more. It was revalued in early 09 taking a lazy 12 zeroes off. At the time, 300 trillion bought you one USD. So, at 33c US, a Big Mac and a coke is a bit out there…..
Inflation was only running at 89,700 million trillion percent at the time (I kid you not). Maybe this is what the Greens have in store for us?
In the end Zimbabwe threw out their currency & adopted the neighbouring South African Rand – maybe that is Aussie Wussel’s plan – he is a sleeper sent here by Juliar Gillard to trash what is left of the NZ economy & we will then be flat arsed broke & will have to adopt the Aussie Dollar. Very cunning Wussel – gives “gimmie back my flag” a new slant doesn’t it.
But think of the jobs were could create by having hundreds of people manning the printing presses at the reserve bank 24 seven to print our new quadrillion dollar bills. Think of the fame New Zealand would get when we become multi quadrillion billion millionaires. We could even abolish taxation.
The printing of our currency is done offshore.
And wheelbarrows to carry it.
Buy shares in Bunnings and Mega Mitre.
And may I ad the massive increases that you would see on the New Zealand stock exchange, everyone would want to get their money out of cash and into hard assets ASAP.
Privately owned banks create money from nothing now today right here in NZ via the fractional reserve banking system…………. Nationalise banking – govt creates money out of thin air instead of privately owned banks – low int loans to businesses and home owners – economy stimulated.
and, and……. inflation goes up. Savings are eroded. Cost of living increases faster, and hey presto, poor people cant afford to buy anything any more. Banks would become awash with cash and start lending, and that would, let me see, allow Joe Punter to borrow more, buy bigger more expensive houses and stuff, more debt. So Joe would replace savings with debt driven spending. Yep, that’d work.
On nationalisation, good idea. Except for the fact that there’d be no overseas investment in anything since there would be no confidence that assets would be safe. NZ could then become not only isolated physically, but financially. Then we could all wallow in misery, instead of just the few.
IVV stop sacremongering. I am not saying to do anything more than is being done right now today. If inflation even looks like a problem you simply raise the OCR just as you do now.
You have what basis for saying overseas investment would dissappear. If anything it would attract more because of the lower rates on borrowing available coupled with a growing economy. Doing this allows people to get mortgages to build new houses, do renovations that aren’t being done now all creating business and jobs for the construction sector. It gives businesses access to funds for expansion creating more jobs. It enables money to be sent overseas to pay off our debt once and for all.
You could even leave interest rates around where they are now and lower taxes with the additional profits over time.
Or you could use the profitrs to invest in infrastructure for this country.
….but hey, we could just keep sending profits overseas from banking like we do today….That is really helping the economy
Polish. I think a short course in Economics and Finance might help you. On what basis? N-a-t-i-o-n-a-l-i-s-a-t-i-o-n. Try that basis. Polish, reading your initial post is a bit like reading the Herald. Only half the story is there.
Hmmmm Interesting comment IVV My Major at University was financial Economics IVV …..yours??
I understand why you have made the comments that you have. They are typical responses from the right when anything is mentioned around Nationalisation. They are though nothing more than fear mongering and not based in reality or common sense. Prime example is If you Nationalise this or that all overseas investment will dissappear. This simply isn’t correct. Yet it never stops it being rolled out as an opposing argument.
If you truely believe in your argument (and I’m sure you do) then perhaps you can explain piece by piece why what I have stated will not happen remembering that I am not proposing changing the system. Just the ownership of it.
Was it Reagun who said “A socialist has read Marx, but it takes a capitalist to understand him”???….idiot.
Reagan remembered most of the lines fed to him by his handlers-Merrill Lynch.
and still took a lame duck economy and turned it into a world beater!!!! Go figure…man must have known something!!!
yes he really laid the foundations for the ….GFC…Fuld and co adored him!
BULLSHIT……….it laid the foundations for the most prosperous period in generation…..1999-2004…you know when a blind dog with a note could have run the NZ economy but labour still managed to fuck it up!!!
you really have no idea do you!Generated the most interest bearing debt …of course debt was/is treated as an asset.Labour was thanked by the Nats for handing over with NZ’s finances in such good shape.
really and the recession we had been in for 12 months prior to the global financial crisis…..culminating in them buying the lame duck Toll Rail for 3 times what it was valued at….did they thank them for that?
I don’t believe they did thank them for that.Just remember the ‘efficiency’ of private enterprise…Fay, asset stripped NZ Rail,spent nothing on maintenance…and Toll basically greenmailed the govt re future investment needed for the public transport role of rail .
Are you serious?
If not, we can head back to the Gipper for one more:
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so”
as opposed to our right wing warmongers/economists who quote the laughable….’unknown….unknowns’!
Can’t say I’ve heard of too many right wing warmonger/economists.
Are they like opera singer/hairdressers?
Getting back to the question you are trying to evade, on what basis do you tie Reagan into the GFC? or was that just random verbal discharge?
not evading anything.Reagan LAID the foundations for the GFC with his ramping up of ‘defence’ spending ,Starwars.etc and his kowtowing to Wall St re the deficit .Greenspan ,if you want to sheet home responsibility to one individual is the real culprit.
Had nothing to do with Reagan.
You are partially right about Greenspan.
But only in combination with the original Community Reinvestment Act and the beefed up version, visited on us by Carter and Clinton respectively.
Add in the repeal of Glass-Steagall (also Clinton) and SEC peccadillos and you have the ingredients of the cluster**** we have today.
That’s what you get when you have Government screwing with what some people wrongly referring to the “free market” of current time.
‘Reagan remembered most of the lines fed to him by his handlers-Merrill Lynch.’…had nothing to do with Reagan, if you accept that most presidents are figureheads and esp in America ,proxies/stooges for big business.
Which is why you minimise the role of the State so that they have as little influence to wield as possible to their potential crony capitalism/socialism courters.
an ideological wet dream I’m afraid.
So was the concept of state-backed gay marriage, till recently.
I take it then, if the Big Government mindset was reversed and much smaller Government evolved over time, you would be all for it, then?
So you are backing away from your earlier linking of Reagan to GFC then?
Reagan was the messenger if you want to be technical.
Onelaw, nail on head. The repeal of Glass Steagall was one of the main drivers of the GFC. For eg: AIG wouldnt have been able to deal in securities and Citicorp would never have reached the size it did under G-S. Clinton forgot the lessons learned in the early thirties that gave rise to G-S and the US has copped it for that.
‘warmongers’ always maintain ‘defence’ spending is an economic stimulus…
Perhaps you are confusing economists with politicians?
Russell Norman has the same problem.
Norman is not alone then is he?ECB and Bernanke at the Fed.And the Pommie chancellor.
Yes, there are many economic illiterates in the world.
Also, beware of any so-called economists who think of any excess Gov spending as “stimulating” to the economy, i.e. idiots like Paul Krugman.
my guess is the Clinton administration & their manipulation of lending polices of Fannie May & Freddie Mac had more to do with the GFC than anything Reagan did 20 years previously. One Mr Barak Obama was a democrat senator that opposed a senate bill to reign in the excesses of these two lending institutions, funny how he now has to put up with the shit he contributed to (spending trillions on a war that can never be won doesn’t help) Check out US Dept of HUD & their change of policies in the Clinton administration
Fannie and Freddie’s problems were containable.It was DERIVITIVES,and other creative financial chicanery ,indulged in by Wall St that caused the credit crunch and the GFC.
Did you complete?
If so, then you may one day rise to the lofty heights of a certain Paul Krugman.
Here’s an easy one for you:
Do you believe that programs of government spending such as the US ’09 stimulus have any long term economic benefit?
Do you practice stupidity or does it come naturally?…….These things have been tried and FAILED (quantatative easing, nationalisation)………As for your fobia of fractional banking….since fractional banking was instigated and reliance on commodity based finance (gold standard)….the world has become a far richer place…(over the past 100 or so years). Ever since the realisation that it is the SPEED at which money changes hands, that creates wealth, not the physical amount of money available.
oops missed out ….”reliance on commodity based finance was reduced…”
Sigh……John…. again you have completely failed to understand the point.
So John let me break it down for you.
1. This post was NOT saying get rid of Fractional reserve banking. It was also not saying anything about shifting to commodity backed banking.
2. Fractional reserve banking enables the creation of money out of thin air and the ability for banks and their owners to profit from interest charged on the money they create out of thin air.
3. Fractional reserve banking is happening now with our foreign owned banks here in NZ.
4. The profits from fractional reserve banking in NZ go offshore not helping the NZ economy at all.
5. By shifting the ownership from foreign owned banks to the Govt.the profit instead goes to the Govt. as does the ability to create money out of thin air.
6. having the government benefit from it enables a myriad of beneficial options including but not limited to investing in infrastructure from profits and money created from nothing. Paying off overseas debt from profits and money created from nothing. Lowering of tax rates from profits and money created from nothing.
Lastly John if you think the world has become a far richer place then you have a lot to learn about what it is to be ‘rich’ in life.
But if it helps you sleep I still believe very firmly that the best solution is to get rid of money all together and move towards a true democracy backed by a constitution with the goal of the system to free people from having to work anywhere near as much, thus giving them more time to actually live life and do important things such as spending time with friends and family.
I see your back to firing insults in your posts too – always a sign of a distinct lack of intelligence, I thought you had broken that habit..!!
BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!! On all counts.
1. All your posts re fractional reinforce my opinion…you have conspiracy theory fobia.
2. Ignorant bullshit……Fractional banking is basically about moving the money about and using it quickly….NOT “creating it from thin air” IDIOT.
3. and has been happening globally for close to 100 years. But definately post WW2.
4. SOME of the profits…Kiwis also own shares in these banks….also the govt. taxes the profit, kiwi’s are paid wages, services are bought from NZ companies etc etc ….IDIOT.
5. Nationalisation means the govt. can do what labour did with the power companies, raise the prices to cover their financial incompitance. Corruption at political level would be rampant, should labour get the treasury benches ever again. Decisions made for political not economic reasons etc etc .
6.BULLSHIT!!! see above answers.
lastly you are a real idiot not to notice that today (as against 100 years ago)…even africa has the internet, people have more of everything, work less hours, have more leasure time, more toys to play with more food to eat, higher education opportunities etc etc etc and the freedom for idiots like you to have a voice.
re #5……….refer to first BNZ bail out in the 80′s and how it was caused by rediculous, politically motivated marginal lands developemnet loans!!!!When the govt. (lange/labour) approved loans for marginal land developement when all the information said that the loans could NEVER be paid back!!!
John you have just shown you don’t have the first clue about how the fractional reserve system works at even a basic fundamental level. Your opinions are always blinkered by your national party brainwashing so much so that you fail to grasp simple concepts. Your insistence on insulting people shows you to be nothing more than a small minded simple bitter old man who is out of touch and has no answers for the problems of the world and Nz today. It is ver sad.
No doubt it will take an entire financial collapse for you to realise the folly of the dogma you continue to spout and even then you will still apportion blame to the left whilst failing to grasp that it is all part of the one system which is in and of itself the problem.
I have way more grasp of fractional reserve banking than you. Your blatantly stupid socialist, central govt. control dogma is blinding you to the fact that ….since fractional reserve banking was introduced the WHOLE planet has become a wealthier place. All countries that encourage PRIVATE enterprise are the wealthiest and have improved the most! MARX was WRONG and has never been shown to improve peoples lot, since it was first attempted to be put into practice (on any scale) post the October revolution (ie people still living as victorian era peasants in the 1980′s).
quick contact Bernanke and Geithner…Einstein!
easy to make everyone a millionaire that way!
Brilliant Idea, just wait for a while so I can borrow several million dollars first then print away.
If you are a net saver then your retirement fund would be wiped out. What was designed to see you comfortably through your retirement years would very quickly only buy a loaf of bread.
If you are a beneficiary the Government would just print more money for you.
If you were heavily indebted. You would be able to pay off your debt much quicker.
Politically more acceptable than massive austerity, cutting expenses to live within your means. Even now in NZ that would mean massive layoffs in the Public sector slashing of wages of those left and big reductions in pensions and benefits.
Increasing the money supply (printing money) would devalue the economy and be a slow race to the bottom. Death by a thousand cuts and a longer recovery.
How many of you and the likes of the Greens lived in the 80′s where interest on home loans was 24% from a bank. Inflation at that level. destroys savings and capital.
In the mid 70′s massive immigration into NZ from the UK to excape socialist policies of Darling ‘arold and the pound was worth1.7 NZ$ today it is basically 2NZD. Inflation was rampant.
I am afraid when we have kiddies in Parliament like Gareth wet behind the ears Hughes and Jacinda whatsit and Holly what’s er name and Julieee Ann Stars and Stripes ;loom out
I bought one of their 1 Million dollar notes when they came out – thought that would be something worth keeping. Imagine the look on my face when my paltry Meganote became overshadowed by the 100 Trillion note.
I now have one of each in my display case, to remind me of the lesson:
When the government starts printing money, at any instant the heights of folly that you are witnessing will become molehills in the very near future. That is the “hyper” part of hyperinflation. The first moment when you say to yourself “This can’t be true”, you should get rid of all your cash, buy durable goods, and take out as many fixed-interest loans as people are stupid enough to give you. (Of course, turning the money from the loans into durables immediately.)
The above advice will only be followed by the rich. The poor and mindless (traditional Labour/Green voting base) will lose the little they have. Unfortunately the great balancing act of “one idiot one vote” will eventually deprive many of the wise of the wealth gathered due to their prudence in the fiscally surreal times.
Looks like my Cook Islands $3 bill might come in handy here soon.