See http://tarpley.net/ View the short video "Casino Economy of Globalisation" Webster Tarpley raises some really crucial issues confronting our economies.For those who find this difficult to understand,we have two economies.We have the bubble economy made up of derivatives,credit default swaps,hedge funds etc created by the production of too much money and the real economy that produces goods and services.

Presently we are sacrificing the real economy via bailouts and stimulus packages to try and save the bubble economy.As Tarpley has noted the German Govt has taken action to ban credit default swaps and bring in a Tobin tax on speculative market practises such as derivatives.

Tarpley argues that the free market has failed and we should like the Chinese Govt intervene spending money on infrastructure.This is well and good Govt does have a role in such things.I don't think it has been a failure of the free market.The free market must operate within the confines of a set of fair rules.These rules have been stripped away and we should not fall for total Govt planning of our economies as a reaction to this financial crisis.

I think that the prime function of Govt is to be a referee and not a player in our lives driving us to this nanny state,which is so obiviously a failure.

If a game of footy decends into chaos because the referee does not know the rules or fails to implement them,it does not mean that the ref should become a player to remedy the situation.

Dear Arjay

you seem to be on the right track...almost.

But it's not about the 'right system' mate..it's cold hard brute power and lust for money-power-money-control-money-power etc.. among a clique of people who are intent on using all that you mentioned as a means of total control.

They are working through or, are part of (or both) the U.N.

But you already knew that didn'tcha :)

My only criticism of your efforts is that you think you need to dig up and oncover some vast conspiracy ..perhaps Bilderberger/illuminati/masons related ?

No mate..you don't need to go that far.. its quite out in the open now.. you just need to know where to look and how to connect the dots.

More to come on this.....

I think that the prime function of Govt is to be a referee and not a player in our lives driving us to this nanny state,which is so obiviously a failure.

Sounds like an endorsement for the return to "Thatcherism" and "Reaganomics"

which would be a good thing

AiR (AlgoreisRich)I know about the so called illuminati but let's leave them out of the debate.We need solutions to this Depression that work.We in the West have oligarchical system whereby large corpotates have got toether with Govt to enslave the masses.I would not call this a free market.It is an odd mix of socialism and capitalism.It is as you say,about the power of a few.Ron Paul is a free market man but if you have absolutely no tarriffs then there will be even less industry in western economies.The large Corporates need to be broken up.Their object is not competition but monopolies and cartels for power and an easy ride.They need to be broken up and made to pay workers in poor countries a decent wage.

Stern,I don't like labels such as Thatherism,because is is too simplistic and don't think Reagan or Thatcher got the ground rules right.Labour does need to organise itself into a political force but we also need rules to curb their excesses.

Tarpley does get a lot of things right and so does Ron Paul but is all about the degree of implementation.

They all agree that the US Federal Reserve must go.It is a corrupt unaccountable organisation.The bubble economy must tbe allowed to fail but many have their super interwoven into these derivatives via the share market.We are in the second stage of collapse and the right decisions have to be made.If the real economy of goods and services falls in a heap,then no one will win.

I wonder Arjay how we can get the emphasis back into the real economy and reduce the relevance and impact of the gambling economy. Even retirement income is now wholly dependent on this cowboy economy.

Free trade is a furphy and just opens up new opportunities to exploit the poor. Competition under FT rests solely on labour which risks other variables such as quality, innovation, governance (labelling, hygiene, chemicals etc).

Not to mention the absurdity of food imports which have to travel long distances - how can this be better in the long term.

Pelican,I agree.To transport a kiwi fruit to Aust it uses up 3 to 4 times its weight in greenhouse gases.Here is the the hypocracy of the Globalists who want carbon taxes and want even more free trade to burn more carbon.

Part of the answer is in what Germany is doing at the moment.Limit or ban derivatives.Greece's GDP to debt ratio is less than many other countries in Europe but they can pick on Greece because it is a small economy.Tarpley says that Spanish banks are now in strife.When the IMF creates more money for bailouts,it dilutes the value of the Euro.This is why they are going for the $ US but it is also in poor shape.Perhaps the Yuan is the way to go,but China is holding too many $ US.The Central Banksters have certainly created an huge mess.

We have to aim at production and the creation of usable infrastructure.Instead of the Schools building programme,Rudd should have built infrastructure we all need,and instead of borrowing from China,much of this money could have been created here.We are locked into these global financial arrangements that keep us in debt to these global reserve banks.If they create money from nothing ,then why can't sovereign Govts do likewise? Fractional Reserve Banking is a huge scam.It steals from the population by creating too much money and diluting everyone's wealth.

When Gough Whitlam went to the Arabs for loan,the sin was not the loan,his sin was he did not borrow from the global reserve banksters.They have it sewn up.

Arjay..I was not suggesting we discuss the "Illuminati"...as I said.. it's all out in the open now anyway. There is no 'secret' agenda to expose..they are speaking on a daily basis about it.

SOLUTIONS.. for me, with my small aussie frame of reference.. the ONLY solution I can think of must have the following outcome.

**Thwart the capitalist networks on BOTH sides of politics, connected to the major parties.
**Thwart the insidious and perfidious agenda of the Orwellian GREENS

STRATEGY.

With 2 elections coming up..and Krudd in a downware spiral.. we need to work at State and Federal level in marginal seats to reduce the impact of the GREENS..who could (with preference deals) swing the elestion.

There are enough issues and marginals in my area to acheive this with some targeted door knocking and public information events.

Of the 3 evils.. the coalition is the lesser. Labour bad..the Greens the worst.

Family First is yet to be tested in a House of Reps role at state or federal level. They might have something more by way of true national interest to offer... I'll give them my support for this time.
Even they have become a bit too PC for my liking though.

*Free trade is a furphy and just opens up new opportunities to exploit the poor. Competition under FT rests solely on labour which risks other variables such as quality, innovation, governance (labelling, hygiene, chemicals etc).*

Not so Pelican, because of course the poor in Australia are the
major beneficiaries of cheap clothing and other goods. If these
were all made locally, at local cost, their standard of living would
drop dramatically.

Yes, the Chinese have benefitted, tens of millions of Chinese are
now no longer poor, as they once were. Would you like them to
starve once again, as they used to?

Despite all this, a country like Germany still remains right near
the top of exporters, as they focus on quality, value for money
and innovation. Price is only one section of the market, which
is something that you continue to overlook.

The whole idea of globalisation is that we do things where we
have a comparative advantage and things that we are good at.
Everyone benefits.

Arjay, it doesn't work like that.

>>instead of borrowing from China,much of this money could have been created here.We are locked into these global financial arrangements that keep us in debt to these global reserve banks.If they create money from nothing ,then why can't sovereign Govts do likewise? Fractional Reserve Banking is a huge scam.It steals from the population by creating too much money and diluting everyone's wealth.<<

One part at a time.

>>instead of borrowing from China,much of this money could have been created here<<

How would this be done, in your world? Printing?

>>We are locked into these global financial arrangements that keep us in debt to these global reserve banks.<<

In the same way as you and I are "locked into" repayment of our credit card debt. We keep borrowing, we keep repaying - it's an essential part of the deal.

>>If they create money from nothing ,then why can't sovereign Govts do likewise?<<

Two things. Money is not created from nothing. It is created through incurring a debt. Exactly as you do when you use your credit card. It may seem to you that money is magically brought into being at the checkout, at the exact moment you need it. But that is only because a debt is being recorded against your account at precisely the same moment.

Not magic, at all.

As to "why can't sovereign governments" etc. They do.

With the same lack-of-magic caveat as above, of course.

>>Fractional Reserve Banking is a huge scam.<<

You keep saying this. But as "scams" go, it is all pretty open and above board, is it not? "Scams" are generally thought to be illegal. Lending money against an agreed level of tangible reserves, on the other hand, is quite legal.

>>It steals from the population by creating too much money and diluting everyone's wealth.<<

We've been through this before, and you have never succeeded in getting past the "slogan" level, and showing any results that would illustrate your point.

I somehow doubt, given you are still using the same slogan, that situation is about to change.

Pericles,If the IMF, Federal Reserve and European Centarl banks can create money from nothing using the fractional reserve system,then why can't our own Govt do likewise? The end result of creating world inflation is the same only we don't get the double whammy of a depreciation currency plus the debt.The RBA has had to increase rates due to inflation.Where has this inflation come from? Yes Kevin's borrowing from China.China probably loaned us their US monopoly money which they hold at least a $ trillion.The Euro is collapsing and so will the $ US.

We should be allowed to create our own money to equal pop increases and productivity increases.To borrow from OS to equal wealth we have already created is economic enslavement.We would be then be paying a tax on our own productivity to international banks.This is why we are in so much debt and unable to build our own infrastructure.If the RBA creates all our needs,they can quite easily keep inflation under control via interest rates.

I would like to know the detail international financial agreements that limit countries from creating their own currency.ie What % of our currency can we create before we contravene international finance agreements?

You ask very good questions sometimes, Arjay.

>>Pericles,If the IMF, Federal Reserve and European Centarl banks can create money from nothing using the fractional reserve system,then why can't our own Govt do likewise?<<

Ignoring for the moment the "money from nothing" part, the answer is that they 'sort-of' can, and they 'sort-of' do.

What you really need to do first, though, is to get your head around is the entire concept of debt. Until you do, you will continue to confuse yourself with terminology.

Debt is created when people, businesses or governments borrow money. There is essentially no difference between the three - all have interest rates attached, all require repayment at some future date.

The major change over the past century or so has been a general shift in focus away from "ability to repay principal", towards "ability to repay the interest".

"Principal repayment" was the underpinning of lending in Dickensian times, where "calling in the loan" was the prerogative of the lender. "Notes" used to be traded informally, so you could find yourself being pursued for a debt by someone completely different from the guy you originally borrowed from.

But these days the lender views the loan more as a stream of future income, rather than a temporary position which will "right itself" once the loan is repaid. This has led to the separation, in financial terms, of the interest portion from the underlying asset. Actually "calling in" the loan was also separated from the interest coupon, which was packaged up with others into a "security".

If you look at the entire recent "toxic securities" fiasco, you will see that it came about because the income-stream part had become even further detached, via CDOs etc., from the asset part. Governments, institutions (such as some local councils here in Australia) were buying financial instruments that were far distant from the security (securities) upon which they were based.

Have a think about that, I hope it helps with some of the broader issues.

It is actually a very fascinating topic, even for amateurs like me.

Pericles,the problem with our financial system is that there is too much emphasis on debt.There are too many rent seekers and not enough producers.Our economy is cushioned by the sale of resources and energy and thus we have too many public servants and too many dependant upon state handouts.

The nanny state creates decay.Few aspire to greater goals than amassing money for the least amount of effort,or just doing nothing for dole money.We could have the most amazing country on the planet,yet are lead by fools and parasites.

It is time for a new political party that is based on libertarian philosophies with a keen sense of social justice.Pauline Hansen knew something was wrong but had not the intelligence to define the problem.Right now the communists and Greens are growing by default because people dislike both the major parties.

The mono-culture of Globalism is dead,and we need a new way that repects individual sovereignty.

That's fine, Arjay. What you say is perfectly true, as a philosophical observation.

>>Pericles,the problem with our financial system is that there is too much emphasis on debt<<

Two things, though.

One is that we would not have the standard of living that we presently enjoy, had it not been for the existence of debt, and debt instruments of various levels of complexity and sophistication.

Not all of them were over-engineered. Just some.

Two is that you cannot simply wish it away.

Any "new system" has to take history, and reality, and the law of the land into account. Social justice needs to apply to all, don't forget.

*We could have the most amazing country on the planet,*

You miss the point Arjay, and a new political party is not going
to do it for you.

The thing is, live is relative. I've been out the back of WA,
where people lived and struggled for years, in the back of
shearing sheds. Their life's philosophy and appreciation of what
they have, is completely different.

Most Aussies only know a relatively cushy lifestyle. They have
never been in the third world, to see what life can be like.
They don't really appreciate what they have, how relatively easy
they have it or why they have what they have.

You are not going to change that, by forming a political party.

That is why adversity, the odd recession etc, are not such bad
things. They bring back balance and make people realise, just
how lucky they are, to have what they have.

Expectations in Australia are today sky high, because people
have essentially had it too good, for too long. We learn from
hard times, not easy times.

Pericles,I went to the demonstration at the Town Hall in Sydney against the attack on the flotilla by Israel.Guess who were there?Many communists and the Greens heralded by Lee Rhiannon NSW, who at a national level will return Labor via the donkey vote.I was handing out info for ae911truth but there was no measured logic from many of the Turk and Lebanese.It was mostly rage without reason.

I was having second thoughts about giving out info to people who were no better than the Zionists whom they hated.

Yabby,"Most Aussies have a cushy life style." A few do, but the majority don't.Looking at over inflated house prices, bloated Govts and their waste,the future does not look bright.

Globalisation is a failed philosophy.John Raulston Saul attests to this.We must move back to national sovereignty and quality of life with quality products.How long do Chinese products last? Local products are the way to go,with less CO2 created by their transport and real jobs created in local communities.There would be also far less debt since the money from real production remains in the local community.

*A few do, but the majority don't.Looking at over inflated house prices, bloated Govts and their waste*

Ah Arjay, but there are two sides to every coin. What % of the
population are buying a house right now at today's price? Only
very few. Those like yourself, who bought years ago, are benefitting.
Pensioners can cash in on their house, move to a retirement village
on the coast and still have plenty of money to burn in the bank.
Hardly hard times.

All those bloated Govts have bloated workers on bloated wages, hardly
hard times. How many countries have holiday leave loading, double
overtime, etc? Then if a company is going to sack some workers as
they can't afford to keep them on, those workers get severance pay,
often enough to sink the company. You think that is being tough
on workers? Come on. Tell me a country where people have it better.

*quality of life with quality products.How long do Chinese products last?*

Well then don't buy Chinese products Arjay. It is your choice. You
can buy a cheap frying pan for 5$ from China, or a Scanpan from
Denmark for 200$. The Scanpans are selling like hotcakes. The
same applies with just about everything else. Our shelves are full
of German, French, Swiss, Japanese and American products, for those
who want quality.

Your problem, the way I understand it, is that you would like to
make it compulsory to buy Australian, by the way of high tariffs.
What we would land up with, is what we had before. Shoddy locally
made products, at great expense. We are far better off, just as
we are, with global competition. Consumers benefit. They can choose.

Some of your points used be my stance Yabby; however today there is a difference. Correct me if I am wrong, are you generally referring to public service wages and disregarding many Australians earning under $40,000K; some of whom share this as a joint income with no assets behind them? Friends of mine who have not wasted their incomes on alcohol, cigarettes, drugs and not enjoyed overseas holidays or annual holidays earning a maximum income of $40,000 with children to raise. Admittedly enjoying luxuries of Electricity/heating, Food, clothing [forget the weekly take-away and 6 monthly dental visits; that disappeared 2 years ago], a roof over their heads and a vehicle to share; too costly now running two vehicles in a household.

When I compare the quality of living standards between 2005 to date, as an example, many people with children earning $0-50K have not had it good at all. Stress as a result of paying high revenue, electricity, water and heating bills, in addition to meeting the basic needs of their children, takes a toll on parents' health and marriages. Notice the increase in suicide and child murders recently? You can bet your bottom dollar that most of these were 'income stress' related

WEA, I find it interesting how you judge "doing it tough".

No overseas holidays, no 2 cars, no 6 monthly dental vists etc.

Two points. First, as a nation, we are doing it easy. We live in
world's largest houses, some of the world's highest average wages,
some of the world's cushiest bells and whistles when it comes
to working conditions. We blow 20 billion a year gambling, most
of it at the pokies, making us the world's largest gamblers.
We are right up top when it comes to buying electronic gizmos.
From widescreen tvs, mobile phones, ipods etc, air conditioning
today is pretty well standard, the list goes on.

No matter what you pay people some won't be able to manage and
spend it faster then they earn it. No matter what you pay people,
some will want more and think that they are hard done by.

Yet in this same country, we see pensioners who do ok, learn
how to budget, learn that sometimes doing without something is
not the end of the world.

In a way you've made my point for me. Today Australians have
such high expectations, that some are convinced that they are
"doing it tough".

That said, some actually are, but I judge "doing it tough" by
rather different standards then you do. I think we are a spoiled
nation really and people will forever just want "more"

"Certain people" yes Yabby not a collective "We" is my point. I agree with you in entirety regarding many people who are middle to high income wage earners always wanting more and most other points you raise. However, I mix with an approximate 40%, among others, who are lower income earners doing it tough. This was the point I was making, to make people aware that the current economy has changed for those people. Kindest wishes Yabby and for the record, you do deliver mostly validated points of view.