Posted by: graemebird | July 9, 2008

Market Wrapup/The Ongoing Saga Of The Reserve Bank Bashing Us All


Notice that this was written in July of last year. When no-one knew that treasury was going to go wildly into deficit like the incompetent idiots that they are:

The May monetary aggregates are out. And the monetary aggregates are basically unchanged. IN FACT M1 HAS DROPPED A BIT.

M1 has dropped another billion dollars. Its just unbelievable.

So what does this mean? If you know an individual stock very well then it may be a good time to buy it. But otherwise keep right away from the market. Yet be prepared to jump in if this craziness is reversed.

Just to recap M1 has fallen from its high of  231 billion and is now down to 216 billion. At first, since spending plans are already in place, the velocity of circulation of M1 (with regards to Gross Domestic Revenue, not Gross Domestic Product) will improve simply because people are in the middle of spending decisions. But thereafter the velocity will drop. And so the destruction of money will be exacerbated.


Last time I warned about the further drop in share prices the price-earnings ratio of the market was about 12. Now its about 11.5. It will go lower still. But it cannot go all that much lower.

When new money comes in to the system the trick to making money is to figure out where it will go first. Here we can be in no doubt about it. Since real estate is historically high and stocks are historically low the new money must go into the stock market if there is a sufficiently powerful burst of it.

It is very strange to be telling people that their Superannuation money ought to be in capital maintenance (ie the least risky type of portfolio with no shares) when the price-earnings ratio is only 11.5. But thats the only conclusion I can come to. Since these guys at the bank appear determined to bludgeon us into the ground.

When the share market rally comes however the market stands to almost double. This goes to show that our socialist monetary system is such a gyp since it amounts to a situation where the already rich have a free ride.

Its still a good time to short the major banks. Our major banks will soon be making serious losses if they are not able to get back into the counterfeiting racket. And if M1 is not growing it means they are creating no new money. Hence they will start making big losses.

I can feel the cognitive dissonance out there. This news will not compute for a lot of you. For a generation the banks have been able to make billions of dollars every year. But they will be in loss-making territory very soon.

Another prediction we can make is that the Federal budget will be thrown into deficit. I should check to see how much of their revenues comes from mining royalties before making that prediction. So with that one disclaimer only we can say that the Federal budget for 2008/2009 will surge outrageously into deficit.

If anyone figures out how I might be able to compile Gross Domestic Revenue figures let me know. Since my market commentaries can be greatly enhanced with that information.



  1. you’ll love this one Graeme. an alternative to the carbon tax

  2. I was just about to say I CAUGHT YOU. All is not lost. You can do the right thing and go back and add on an alternative.

    A privately-funded energy-efficiency prize.

    If you saw 60 minutes last night the idea for a winner presents itself.

    Mike Reynolds of Taos New Mexico makes these glorious and wonderfully spacious houses out of junk. I reckon they look pretty cool from the outside. But inside they are truly wondrous. He calls them “earthships”.

    Anyway on the road between Perth and Port Hedland and the road between Port Headland and most of the way to South Australia there is endless land to be homesteaded on either side of the road.

    You could have a cash-flow-positive scheme where you were building these opulently spacious garbage-houses that needed no complementary infrastructure. The obvious tenants would be the poorer bottom quarter of retirees who you could have living in spacious bliss and they would still have plenty of money in their kit after the rent was paid. You would also give cheap rent to the medical staff needed and the people who were building more houses.

    All it would need is about 1 million startup max plus the appropriate homesteading rules for desert houses.

  3. Its the sort of thing that me or you might not quite be able to do. But lets say JC, if he had a mind to, could get started with it more or less straight away and stay cash-flow-positive the whole time and the only requirement being that the government set the rules right.

  4. Graeme
    In my post I say it could be the government funding part of it and then inviting anyone else to fund it. They could get acknowledged as ‘good corporate citizens’ and have their names carved somewhere or something. What if the goverment invited donations up to some matching contribution so you end up with twice as much as what you started with?

  5. You would never consider it. You don’t play their silly games. Even if you made it a prize for energy efficiency you’d have to fool the participants and not hand over the prize to get others to strive for it.

    We face 30 years at least of high energy prices. Hence for energy efficiency anyone who finds a positive-cash-flow way of dealing with this energy efficiency problem he can make himself famously rich.

    Take my example. Just improving property rights would mean that JC could start this gig TOMMORROW and wind up owning thousands of acres each side of the desert road. At the same time he would improve energy efficiency and improve the lives of tens of thousands of old buggers whose piddling incomes could give them spacious housing in their old age. But what it would not do is reduce carbon usage overall.

    In fact JC, given the right homesteading rules, wouldn’t have to lift a finger. He could pay me to do it and only ever get about $400, 000 in the hole before the thing was put on a cash-flow-positive basis. All we need is the right property rights.

    Its property rights all the way down the line. Both in the desert and in the oceans. Get the rules right and the deal is done.

  6. Yea Bird that sure sounds like a great deal. Lets buy the Sahara or the little desert and make a fortune developing it and selling it into lots size. Forget about the water. You’ll just use your own urine over and over.

  7. Every one of us with the possible exception of yourself, will have to invest in energy-efficiency over the next 30-50 years. I don’t think 1 in 100 people on the free enterprise side have any clue just how bad the situation is.

    You give a prospective billionaire a 100 million dollar prize all you are doing is taking money away from Joe-Schmoe who might otherwise invest in energy-cost mitigation.

    In my own house I could put solar tiles on my roof (after putting up a big fence all the way around). And I could put insulation in my ceiling. I could rig the place up for gas and this would be an energy-cost winner so long as the government doesn’t use the gas to produce electricity.

    I may get this back in terms of the rental if the energy prices subsequently double in real terms which they will.

    But you take prize money off people like me thats detracting from what the rest of us can do.

    Energy-cost mitigation is an whole of economy problem. All of us has to get behind this. Its not just a technological problem. After all starting 30 years ago it wouldn’t be a problem at all if we went hell for leather for nuclear power.

  8. Sorry to use you as an example. I just had to think of someone that Jason knew of middling/upper income and wealth. You were the best example that came to mind.

    Try and think of what homesteading means JC. Homesteading doesn’t mean what you are implying it means.

    It means that if you are an Australian citizen you just go out and build on certain land. You don’t need to buy shit.

    Who owns the desert scrub land either side of the road between Perth and Port Hedland? The road between Port Hedland and the South Australian border?

    If its public land it can be reclassified for homesteading. No money down at all.

    Now what is your argument? Other people would take up this sort of cheap housing investment in a trice. And if homesteading this land and letting these cheap energy-producing houses to old buggers didn’t take off as an industry open for tens of thousands of people, then when the energy prices redoubled it would open up then.

    The only thing stopping it is inadequate and inadequately clear property rights.

    Can you attempt to be open-minded? You’ve become tunnel-visioned.

  9. If you’ve been on a bus across the Nullabor you would know that you can fall asleep and you wake up to an identical scene of endless desert scrub land. Not suitable for working people. But certainly no sweat to build massive energy-producing houses for poor retirees.

    Still in practice the houses built on free homesteadable land would be reasonably close to some town or another.

  10. Mike Reynolds’ houses in Taos New Mexico deal with the problem of water by recycling the same water four times. They have tropical plants growing in their incredibly spacious indoor houses and these plants help purify the water in some way. The very last use of the water is for the toilet.

  11. yeah face it JC you’ve become increasingly narrow minded.

    why couldn’t the Nullabor rival the Gold Coast as retirement paradise?

  12. You say the most foolish things JC. Mars is no rational place for earthlings to colonize. Plus its already be done to the best of the available evidence.

    You colonize for the energy resources. The rollout would probably go Antarctica, the Moon, and then a toss-up between Mercury and the Asteroid belt.

    If it is the case that Mercury’s magnetic field was no impediment to the accumulation of Helium-3 in Mercuries top-“soil” then Mercury amounts to an endless supply of energy for the human race. You would have this endless convoy of refined Helium-3 being sent to Earth. Perhaps a tonne an hour eventually. What a groovy world we would live in then.

    But aside from the energy industry pretty much all else would remain on Earth. Some metals might be refined incidentally. Perhaps if Helium-3 was refined on asteroids then it would not be that expensive to send some of the more valuable metals back to earth incidentally. Like platinum and uranium. But you only go far afield for the Helium-3 I would think. Since thats the cheap and light stuff to transport home.

  13. Humphreys and ZED liked the prize idea, Graeme. It could be done in lieu of the carbon tax.

  14. You are right Mr Bird. More importantly our enemies would find it hard to conquer us if we all lived in the middle of the desert , our houses fortified with cannons and nuclear bunkers and tool sheds full of armoury. There is no way the Chinese or Indonesians could conquer us this way. We would be the last free outpost once Oceania had spread its dominion over the rest of the weak, weak Western world, its energies sapped by quislings and useless idiots like your friend Guido.

    Bravo Mr Bird, if only you were in charge of defence policy. We would have the means to force the population to relocate. It would toughen them up for sure, these decadent. flabby city folk. And we would be able to require the performance of daily morning military drills like the Spartans used to do. Imagine that Mr Bird, you and a M15 and the vigorous desert air.

  15. Certainly your ideas have much visceral appeal Winchester. I would like the idea of leaving the first-born of former taxeaters outside behind and against a cold rock overnight to see if they lived or died. This I think would be a good thing. One way or another we don’t want the Bahnisches and Gruens of the world to dilute the gene pool with the parasite gene.

    Right SOON. I was about to tell you to stick your economists hat back on and think for a change. But then you told me that Humphreys and John liked the idea.

    Humphreys and JohnZ like it? Oh well that makes all the difference. Why didn’t you tell me that Humphreys and John Z liked it? Well you could have just mentioned JohnZ and that would be that. After all his prestigious career abusing scaring and persecuting people for buying and selling shares makes his opinions always exciting.

    Listen here Soon. Put your damned economists hat back on because no invention can ever reduce CO2 emissions except the invention of a new tax. Thats just a fact. We have good energy without carbon emissions and its called NUCLEAR ENERGY. So do the thought experiment where we have the Continent ringed with nuclear energy.

    Would we be emitting less carbon? Not on your Nelly.

    Quite the contrary we would be liquifying the carbon and sending the diesel equivalent overseas by the pentalitre. Then this would of course make oil shales more viable. Oil shales are a little bit less energy packed then phone books. But there is so much of it. So with this nuclear/liquified coal we’d be turning all the oil shales to diesel. Then all the trash that would have been buried. All the waste wood any of us can find.

    It would be akin to a carbon carnival.

    And of course we’d all be fabulously wealthy. Everyone with three vehicles and a yacht. And of course a plane to land on that yacht. And a big apartment downtown.

    So there is no invention to reduce carbon emissions but the invention of a new tax and what a stupid goal it is.

    A smarter prize would be a yearly prize to the top ten local councils in the land. Whose policies were the most favourable to the production of huge amounts of energy efficient working and living space.

    Essentially I would have it that energy-efficient buildings come in two flavours. Pure high-rise. Which is why Manhattan is second in the US in energy efficiency only after Hawaii. And low-rise that produces enough extra to sell to the grid. The councils that made it easy to get out of the way and let this happen might get the prizes. That way they would have money to compensate some of the people put out by their neighbour leaving a shadow on their lawn.

    There is no way to buy into their bullshit. Or to pretend that you three CO2-bedwetters aren’t still on the hard-sell for CO2 deprivation. No-one on Catallaxy will even so much as be able to think of a winning prize that could possibly do the job without a carbon tax. Its an unworthy and hateful goal and you ought not play that the communists game.

    If its a tax on non-renewable resources you want to force us to be more parsimonious with our gear SAY IT. If its an energy-efficiency innovation you want SAY THAT.

    But if you want to reduce emissions then the three of you morons sit down to another drinking session and fucking find the evidence.

    Alright then Jason. Just look what you Amigo Nick Gruen has in the paper today. Your bud. I just get the early morning paper. And what do I see:

    “YES TARIFFS CAN BE TOO LOW” by Nick (I let the computer wipe the babies ass) Gruen.

    He’s justifying this not on reasoning as much as on a computer model. The exact same Nutballaria as the climate racket. Do you now doubt it that in the last decade or two the stupid have become upwardly mobile in our society? I’d accept it from a non-economist who was worried about our loss of industry because your crowd has been leading people astray. But for Gruen to pull this JIVE is another matter.

  16. “You don’t have to convince me that burning coal isn’t a great idea. Though I’m more concerned about the CO2 than Hg. ”

    When it comes to STUPID fatfingers never lets us down.

  17. Winchester. I just get a bit disillusioned that when these guys are shown a great idea it will get a great big yawn from them. Taking the Mike Reynolds concept and running a cash-flow-positive expansion of the idea would be magnificent. And yet these dim bulbs just can barely keep awake to it. Its almost like whenever there is a truly great idea they go into insulin shock. And then there is SOON running off with this daft idea of setting up a prize (FIRST DAFT ASPECT) for whoever comes up with the idea that might reduce CO2 emissions (2ND DAFT IDEA) when the fact is only a tax could do this and its a malevolent goal.

    So the dumb idea excites them. The good stuff almost puts them to sleep.

    Sure its lack of brainpower. But then again its really stupid ideas driving out the good. Here these guys are. CO2-Bedwetters to a man.

    So with the stupid ideas firmly lodged in their little minds…………………………………. when something really cool, and a surefire winner comes along, they just can barely resist toppling over from narcolepsy.

  18. Well he’s come out of the closet. Jason Soon admitting that he is a CO2-bed-wetter after all and is after a carbon tax. Didn’t we know it all along. Another liars-club bait and switch.

  19. “America is fucked because it is the most libertarian of all the liberal democracies. It is so deep in debt that only its status as the world’s sole superpower stops it from sinking into the same shit that gave rise to your diseased self.” said Steve Munn.


    Steve well knows that I have for 2-3 years relentlessly contended that our financial system resembles and elephant balancing on its trunk. All this while I was being filibustered by mindless lunatics who will not face the truth. So virulent was their rebellion from reality that we wound up with 1 thread of doom after another.

    Now Steve knows all this. Steve knows that I have said that the only stable fiat money would be 100%-backing-growth-deflation. But instead of admitting that I was right all along and every other fucker was wrong he’s telling JC (in effect) that JC is almost as bad as me.

    He can get a way with it a little bit. Since JC’s own position is moronic and indefensible. Its what Sinclair misleadingly lectured an audience about and something that Jason rather tiredly accepts.

    Not being able to see the difference between proximate cause and real cause these guys are blaiming the specifics of the current regulations. The specifics of the regulations which always can be blamed after the fact. Rather than the fundamental ponzi-scheme counterfeiting nature of fractional reserve. And the massive fraction of M1 over cash that has prevailed in the information age.

    These people really are whores to fractional-mammon. Toadying brown-nosers to the serpent in the apple of capitalism.

  20. so you think it’s alright for the government to regulate to force banks to lower lending standards and this can be blamed on capitalism rather than govt?

    commo pervert

  21. Don’t fucking lie.

    The fact is you guys are being fucking idiots. You are supposed to know what you are talking about. So Sinclair shows up and gives a talk and says the problem is about THIS regulation.

    Well it WASN’T. Next time you’ll claim its about THAT regulation. Well it won’t be.’

    You are supposed to be educated and not fucking ignorant.

    Obviously if cash is the size of a golf-ball and ponzi-M1 is the size of a soccer ball thats unstable.

    Have a professional pride instead of you people like you and Sinclair bullshitting and winging it.

    No use avoiding reality by putting words in my mouth. You are the one who believes in all this regulation.

  22. well no Graeme I don’t believe in Fanny Mae. I don’t believe in regulating to force banks to lower their standards for poorer borrowers. You apparently say this is not a problem:

    “The specifics of the regulations which always can be blamed after the fact.”

    In other words, you are saying these shouldn’t be blamed for the problem.

    Does regulating to force down borrowing standards create instability or not?

    Yes or no?

    Stop dodging the question.

  23. Evidence for what? If you want evidence that recessions always involve the creation and destruction of ponzi-money … or the slowing down in the growth of ponzi-money you might go to a monetary history of the United States.

    There’s no way yo u can pull yourself out of your ignorance with raw statistics though.

  24. On another note:

    Look people. It is very easy for Australia to reduce the WHOLE WORLDS greenhouse gas emissions without the burden falling on the average Australian taxpayer. If Kevin Rudd, Penny Wong and the rest of this crowd weren’t lying, and if CO2 really were a dangerous substance we would do what we do with all dangerous substances and restrict their use.

    Out of all the coal in the world that is traded internationally Australia sells 40% of it. All this talk about little Australia not being able to make a difference is therefore untrue. What is more since the commodities boom is general, for larger companies with many fingers in many pies, it would be easy for them to move resources to other activities.

    We don’t need a carbon tax or emissions tradiing to do this. And these measures won’t have any substantial effect except to impoverish the Australian taxpayer..

    If we wind down from 40% or market share by 1% each month until we only had about 15% or 10% we would have stalled CO2 output from the world economy. We go the other route the difference made would be negligible.

    As to the lost royalties to the government thats no pressure. This is a taxeaters crusade. And since public servants know (THEY JUST KNOW!) and agree that CO2 is so very very bad and dangerous and a tipping point is right on the horizon…… since the latte drinking set in the public service know this for sure they will be only too happy to take a job in the PRIVATE sector to make up for the shortage in coal royalties.

    But this is not going to happen. Because these people are liars.

    Reply Alert moderator

  25. No no. I’m not stupid and closed minded. Not true. Mark Hill doesn’t have a clue about monetary economics.

    But you do. Which makes it all very disappointing.

    You got arrogant Joe. You allowed yourself the luxury of intellectual dishonesty. You do that it halves your effective IQ. On Catallaxy you seemed the smartes person CL alone accepted. Here I’m not including myself in the lineup naturally.

    But not now. Not now. You buckled. You won’t follow the reasoning through in these cases and choose the luxury of buckling on the conclusion.

    Monetary economics is vitally important because we cannot have a just and stable liberty without getting it right. So your dishonesty when collated with the like dishonesty of others is a massive roadblock getting in the way of a better world.

    You could SEE this is you followed the logic of what you already know about monetary economics through all the way.

  26. Its particularly poor form to be thrusting Mark Hill in front of you as an excuse when we both know that you understand matters far better than he does. This is like Garnaut putting about nonsense that he can claim are the CSIRO’s nonsense and The CSIRO putting about nonsense that they can claim is the IPCC’s nonsense.

    Its like Trinifar carrying a lying graph and then saying “take it up with these guys” like she has no responsibility for passing on blatant lies.

  27. Bullshit:

    Hill is one of the smartest most decent guys around. He is able to put things together and tie them up with the various economic theories and tests that have been done that I nor you knew about.

    You ought to listen to him and you’ll learn something.

    Humphreys too.

    Soon was very generous to you. He allowed you on his site asked you not to comment on that idiot and you continued to brake his one single rule. He treated you very decently and you couldn’t give it 10% back. You should feel ashamed of yourself.

    Now back to monetary economics.

    Mark has explained to you that the problem we have is the way it’s being conducted. He’s right.
    The problem is not fractional and never has been. fractional is just a symptom of the real problem which is interest targeting and runaway money supply.

    Try and understand that for once on your life and stop being abusive to people that gave you a chance or listened to you.

  28. He doesn’t understand monetary economics. You are using him as an excuse for your own persistent dishonesty. Its no good because you do understand monetary economics. So you know that your line is just a tactic.

    Now that shouldn’t give me the shits as much as it does. But you consider the length of those threads of doom that these idiots fucking caused for me. The constant lying whenever this topic comes up. I don’t understand it. And I don’t understand why you assist it.

  29. “The problem is not fractional and never has been. fractional is just a symptom of the real problem which is interest targeting and runaway money supply.”

    Lets have your explanation for the 1870’s Melbourne real estate boom and crash then?

    I would have thought that this would have been the epitome of the fraud banking template. That time and place.

  30. So you claim that fractional reserve isn’t a problem. You’ve made the assertion. Now justify it in terms of monetary economics.

  31. Bird

    We have been trough this time and time and time again.

    The problem is a money supply problem.. NOT fractional. Get the money supply down pat and you’re fine. Stop it with this fractional shit and you’re really sounding kooky.

  32. How do you think the money supply is CREATED in the first fucking place? And how is it that you think money supply can disappear?

    How about going beyond bullshit assertions.

    100% backing commodities means the money supply can only grow slowly (transitional arrangements aside) and that money can never be destroyed.

    You cannot disaggregate a money supply problem from fractional reserve.

    And no we haven’t been through this before. Because you have always shirked.

  33. Bird you idiot.

    Only the government can create money. Not banks, not brokers , not mum or dad. Only treasury can create it.

    So stop it with this shit once and for all.

  34. Now you are just lying. The banks create the money supply. The government creates cash.

    So you’ve just decided to be a fucking lying Goth prick.

  35. “Helped along is the stupid decision by the federal authorities to disallow naked shorting in selected bank stocks.”

    Your fucking constant idiocy isn’t about to end any time soon.

  36. “Yesterday Birdbrain’s telling us how to terraform the inner solar system starting with the moon and Mercury. When I point out that that is dumb even for a twelve cent novel he responds by saying that he never said it and deletes it from the post!!!!”

    A blatant lie. Don’t be telling me that Jason has done me all sorts of favours. Because here’s Adrien telling a blatant lie. He’s caught. He’s busted. Caught lying with malice afforethought. Soon could confirm it. But the Gook cunt chooses to back Adrien up in his lying. Even though Adrien has FORM.

    There is no way in a million years I’d talk about terraforming a planet or moon without an atmosphere. The idiot lied and then he attempted to go for double or nothing. He’s caught. And the Gook bastard tries to back up the liar.

    Its not funny anymore. This is what Jason does. You have no idea of how angry I am at him for creating all this dishonest overhead.

    If he’s going to do this he ought to GO HOME!!!!! The survival and flourishing of this country is not assured. If Jason wants to leverage his act by relentlessly supporting chronic liars he is doing great harm to the situation.

    His behaviour in encouraging people to filibuster me on threads of doom about money and greenhouse was particularly filthy behaviour.

    As we now see, despite all my best efforts Jason was in fact able to neutralise me to such an extent that no cunt was able to learn anything.

    So dramatic is this principle in order that you JC, TO THIS DAY have absolutely no fucking clue whatsoever about money creation. So it goes all the way down the line. Soons proxy war technique was also successful in preventing any cunt from understanding the peak oil paradigm.

    Once again you showed this principle up dramatically. Not understanding that peak oil was about daily output.

  37. You are just pissed because all this time you have made a fool of yourself not understanding money creation. But then how is SOONS form hey? Wouldn’t correct you on this matter.

    Its been two years now and he hasn’t corrected a single person on this matter.

    Thats just dishonest. And you’ve gone native.

  38. Still the fight to get back JC from the clutches of the stupid continues. He has not been there long. He still can be saved.


  39. Stirrings in Zombietown:

    “John Hasenkam Says:
    July 19th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
    I read that piece in the Australian. I’ve previously argued that we shouldn’t do too much about GW but now I’m wondering if we should be doing anything. Even if we accept the AGW argument the economic modeling is so suspect that acting on the basis on those models appears fraught with peril. After all, we can’t even predict next year’s surplus.
    The rider is that CO2 levels are now so high that we probably should do something about that anyway. Unfortunately the debate has shifted attention away from some very real and well substantiated environmental issues.”

    Someones been feeding this zombie salty food and he’s coming around out of his death-induced torpor. But Hasenkam had the spare parts to know that this was a racket all along. Yet it takes someone with many letters on the end of his name to shake him out of it.

    Whereas he ought to have been able to break ranks with the goose-stepping on the power of reason alone.

  40. I SEZ:

    “How could the crisis have happened in a situation of (for example) 100% backing fiat growth-deflation?”

    No one had any serious answer to that. But still SOON sez:

    “You’re right, Bird, it couldn’t because we’d all be too poor to rent or buy houses.”

    Its a problem when people lay forth in total ignorance like this. We are currently experiencing MONETARY DEFLATION. Since December our money supply has collapsed. From memory M1 has collapsed from about 231 billion to about 216 billion. This is totally unacceptable under a fiat system. And for sure it will impoverish us. This is MONETARY DEFLATION.

    But growth deflation is different. Under growth deflation average nominal business revenues are always growing. So how can such a situation lead to poverty? It cannot. Soon is full of shit.

  41. “Adrienswords Says:
    July 19th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
    I just spent the night drinking red wine with a crazy priest. Very smart fellow. Kept bellowing Latin at me. One of the really funny things about this guy was he kept wanting to know if I was a Franciscan or an Augustine.”

    He’s a Franciscan is Adrien. But Adrian is such a compulsive liar that he would have told the old man that he was an Augustinian. He would have drunk all the old mans wine while swearing black and blue that he was Augustinian on first principles of lying all the time and especially to harmless old men. He would have been spruiking all sorts of Franciscan claptrap at the same time as he was swearing black and blue that he was Augustinian. Its a fucking miracle he wasn’t struck down by a thunderbolt on the occasion. Or hit by that meteor that showed up to punctuate the presence of an esteemed visitor.

  42. “JC you are forgetting one very important thing: given the current economic climate the last thing we should be doing is introducing policies that might scare away overseas money from Aus. So the ETS scheme is not only ill conceived the timing could hardly be worse.”

    But not a lie, a racket, a ridiculous science-fraud, treason and pure idiocy. Hasenkam just cannot get there. Like JC he has buckled and for moral rather than scientific reasons.

  43. He’s a Franciscan is Adrien. But Adrian is such a compulsive liar that he would have told the old man that he was an Augustinian. He would have drunk all the old mans wine while swearing black and blue that he was Augustinian on first principles of lying all the time and especially to harmless old men.

    I didn’t tell him I was a Franciscan or an Augustinian Graeme. I told him I was a lapsed Catholic who isn’t a Christian (doesn’t believe JC is God on Earth etc) and disregards many of the doctrines of the Church especially those regulating our sexual behaviour.

    At first the guy told me I was a Franciscan, then he said I was Augustinian. Then he realized that I was actually hard to classify. Personally I don’t think I’m either. If I adhere to any ‘theological’ position it’s that of the Stoics. Spiritually in the West you’re either a Greek or a Jew; I’m a Greek.

    And speaking of classifications how come JC is the Goth now? I thought I was. 😦

  44. Well just look at this:

    “Yeah that’s fair enough. But I wonder when you have an obtuse argument doesn’t it breed same. Mr Bolt seems to cherry pick facts to portray the whole AGW scenario as the product of the eshatologically batshit. To be sure there are Apocalyptic nutballs shouting slogans over this but that’s not the whole story either. There is a certain deal of good sense there as well.”

    Thats undercover for the energy-deprivation crusade or what?

    No you are lying. Its all batshit and if you can find any good sense in it at all WHY DIDN’T YOU SUPPLY WHAT THE FUCK EVER YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT AND COME GOOD WITH THE EVIDENCE.

    This is not a two-sided argument. One side is lying and misleading the public and thats it. On the other side you have people slowly climbing their way out of the lies that have been thrust upon them.

    You are such a bullshitartist Adrien. You know full well you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever. And that doesn’t stop you from casually lying at Catallaxy.

    So you are running cover for the lying side of the argument. And as an energy-deprivation crusader you are more on the Franciscan camp.

  45. nice handbag lady man.

  46. You are such a bullshitartist Adrien.

    Yeah. I’m a professional bullshit artist Graeme. I did supply you with evidence you faied to convince me when you retorted with no you are lying, no you are lying, no you are lying squawk. Did you change your surname from ‘parrot’?

    Anyway now I’ve wiped all the ‘Bird is poufter’ stuff from your homepage. You can thank me later.

  47. hello little dicky bird. you still sucking and fucking with those rudey boys?

  48. Well if its not FDB then its someone who is really trying to frame up FDB.

    I think its the anti-economist nutball John Humphreys in that case. Closet homosexual that he obviously is. Its a terrible tragedy that the countries only nominally libertarian party has a founder who takes a cargo cult mentality to economics and who is a CO2 bedwetter. There’s a fellow who has no understanding of economics whatsoever. Or science. Or anything else.

    Speaking of CO2 bedwetters:

    I read this at Catallaxy and its an interesting title:

    “Can energy efficiency save (some of) the day?”

    Well we are in serious trouble due to energy-deprivation. And we will be for 30 years minimum. so if energy efficiency could make the energy that we can get hold of 2 or 3 times more efficient than that truly is someone to be happy for.

    “Can energy efficiency save (some of) the day?”

    This presupposes a problem. And the obvious problem is energy-deprivation. Caused by environmentalists and other leftists for their behaviour going back 30 or 40 years. Having robbed us of property-rights and nuclear power and maneouvred us into a parlous state three years after peak oil has hit.

    But no. Thats not the problem that anti-economics moron Jason Soon is talking about. He’s talking about industrial-CO2. Which is good for the environment and has no effect on the climate. So he thinks the problem is the blatant science fraud. Rather than the fact of the blatant science fraudsters denying us energy with carbon taxes and worse.

    “In the open forum, commenter Fatfingers links to a recent study which definitely deserves wider discussion – a it claims that some major CO2 emissions reductions can be achieved simply by energy efficiency measures:”


    When at first you choose irrationality than it extends all the way to your field of speciality.


    Energy efficiency INCREASES and does not reduce energy use. This is a basic law of economics.

    Just another stupid-tree Jason is climbing up because he has chosen irrationality.

  49. This is a repeat performance of the idiocy John Z, Jason Soon and John Humphreys came up with not long ago. Still insisting on pushing the science-fraud that CO2 is warming, and that the planet is warming, they came up with this idea of a prize. They wanted to steal money off us and reward the billionaire who found the best way to reduce carbon emissions?

    What for?

    No fucking answer.

  50. But fraud banking implies more regulation. Whereas 100% backing makes a total deregulation possible. If we are not equal before the law this implies tacit regulation or regulation via the courts. And in any case fraud banking will attract regulation by its very nature.

  51. That post has short legs. Since you know full well I’m after comprehensive deregulation apart from 1 or two very clear rules. So in fact you were lying.

  52. No fraud banking involves implied regulation prejudicing the banks. And it involves actual regulation and regulation via the courts. Since a conflict of interest immediately arises.

  53. Really rather good what the ABC is letting through:

    Graeme Bird :

    06 Mar 2009 4:15:44pm

    Really Alan. The CIS and the IPA have to change their ways. You guys are posing as intellectuals of liberty but all I’m seeing is you guys acting like blood-sucker-centrals loyal opposition when it comes to important strategic matters.

    We are not free men without cheap liquid hydrocarbons. Simple as that. You just have to take a long look at yourself and develop a more strident attitude. And for goodness sakes make sure that attitude is beefed up whenever you walk into meetings at the IPA.

    One the one hand you alleged free marketeers would have us sell all our electricity to the communist chinese and on the other hand you would make formerly free men all dependent on the grid.

  54. Lets get a little bit of fucking analysis here:

    “Getting back to the main event, if assets dont appreciate or at least hold value banks will need to nationalised and as homer has just pointed out, they hold 94% of australian debt there will be no real distinction between private debt and govt debt.

    So the taxpayer will have to find more cash to sustain the already proven unsustainable.

    I cant see how aust banks are any different to US banks (except wall st) or others, its a global market. OK they might have better risk management but if it all gets nasty that wont matter too much.

    The market sentiment is of desperate fear and by using mark to market valuation fear is driving assets further down to the point where dudes are wondering how to grow pumpkins.’



    “”Getting back to the main event, if assets dont appreciate or at least hold value banks will need to nationalised and as homer has just pointed out, they hold 94% of australian debt there will be no real distinction between private debt and govt debt.””””””

    What that means you fucking dumb stunned mullets is that if all the banks go bankrupt, under perfectly fair bankruptcy laws……………… we get rid of all but 6% of our debts you simple stupid dumb mother fuckers.

  55. “I think it is very hard to pinpoint whether the payout caused more spending. For example it could be that spending declined at that time (due to crisis all around us) compared to previous year, but would have declined even more without this payout.

    As I said before, this question has mainly academic significance (if any). A much more interesting and pertinent question is whether this has helped the economy. Again, for sure, economy has declined duw to unrelated factors. The question is whether its declined would be even sharper without the stimulus”

    Boris here reinvents Misean praexeology. Basically a priori thinking. Neoclassical economists n Australia seem incapable of thinking in this fashion, although to anyone not so handicapped Boris appears to be merely stating the obvious.

    Austrian economics is really a formalisation of the process that Boris starts here.

    Notice that our Australian economists are so useless that Boris is forced to freelance outside of this area of expertise. Thats a good thing. Because our economists will ruin everything unless we take matters into our own hands.

  56. Although Boris is being a bit coy here. Obviously there will be more CONSUMER spending than there otherwise would have been. We can say this with great assurance. This is how you manage to lose arguments to lunatics like Nick Gruen. If you cannot suss out apriori that consumer spending will have been higher than otherwise even an idiot will sound more convincing to the laity.

    But though we can be sure that there would have been more CONSUMER spending than otherwise it in no way follows that there will be more NOMINAL SPENDING overall.

    In fact there won’t be. It will simply be nominal spending taken out of business-to-business spending.

  57. world website xnxx film

  58. generous website consumer electronics online

  59. select resource

  60. cards – credit cards, buy dumps woth pin online

  61. best dumps – cc 2017, buy dumps track 1 and 2

  62. Is this now a porn website?

    • No I might edit it soon. I might dwell on what music people become after they die young. Jim Morrison became Rush Limbaugh. But Jimmy Hendrix may have become philosopher Cornell West. One of the people playing Janis Joplin may have become leftist news operator Amy Goodman. Mamma Cass may have become Bette Midler. Sharon Tate became her own little sister.

      Its just one scam after another.

  63. Birdy are you coming back to twitter???

    • They kicked me off. I appealed but they said it was forever. I am trying to confirm the Jim Morrison story. By the way Momma Cass is Bette Midler. I asked a photographic expert who looks into these matters and he blamed an agent calling himself Dallas Goldbug for putting it about, but he did not present an attempted facematch to show where the faces don’t match.

      Bill O-Reilly and Bobby Fuller (I fought the law and the law won) are a perfect match and look the same except for O’Reilly having a jutting forehead.

  64. They have a lot of other things to apologise for

  65. can’t you just find another email address and come in under a different name? btw check out Taleb defending Trump

  66. the world needs your tweets,, Graeme

    • Maybe some time. I was confronting Pamela Geller, Spencer, and talking to many world leaders. But it was when I had the dope on Jimmy Limbaugh/Rush Morrison … Gone and gone for good.

      So far I have not been able to get the expert to give me evidence either way on Rush. Which makes me think that I’ve stumbled on another “limited hangout” and if so I’m going to take it as further evidence that they are the same person …. although because I don’t think the forensics have yet been done carefully enough, I of course realise I could be proven wrong at any time.


  68. dude since you got booted off Twitter I’ve had to settle for reading Mark Latham’s tweets. He;s OK but he’s not you

    • Ha ha ha. Actually I’m such a luddite it would take a real effort to get the new email and sort things out. And I’m a bit afraid of losing my former tweets for all time. Are you able to access my current tweets? Its important because I want to be able to access them when I have a new handle?

  69. sorry man no trace of your tweets, not even on notifications. the Deep State has truly wiped out all trace of you

  70. excellent resource

  71. a hefty site dumps shop – buy cvv, buy cvv dumps verified seller.

  72. best ICO – money ico, ico meaning.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: