Posted by: graemebird | April 17, 2011

Dyson-Harrop And Tesla: Energy At Last.

Energy at last.  The first time an easy solution to an impending glacial crisis has come to light.  And we now even have a way of bringing terra-litres of fresh water to the deserts of the world in a cost-effective way.  Energy to burn. And a reason to get hundreds of thousands of people up and working in space. We ought to get moving.

So how are we going to do all this? Well we aren’t doing any of this unless we can defeat the fractional reserve banking network. Libertarianism and all other Isms can wait. The Northern Hemisphere banking system needs to be busted up by any means necessary and subsequently fractional reserve banned. And anyone who tries to do this has to realise that they are coming up against covert ops resources and the people who have had more medium-term influence on government then anyone else.

There is no point making the point that none of this would be necessary under capitalism, since this is a true point but a pointless point just the same. Once banking becomes the senior partner of the banking-government racket, then no good policy can so much as be hoped for until we break up their act any way we can.

Digression.  Here is a real treat for some of my foreign readers. And particularly for you insolvency-enslaved American children with your cartoon voices.

ITS AN ELECTRIC UNIVERSE.


AND THE FOREIGN CHILDREN NEED TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ELECTRICITY.

Pretty conclusive proof that we can transport electricity down from low earth orbit. Tesla was able to make lightbulbs light up 26 miles away. Now that we know that there is awesome electrical power up in the ionosphere, using Tesla’s technology ought to present little problems insofar as massive amounts of cheap electricity is concerned. The electricity ought to be sent down to a tall tower on a mountain or on an island, and then sent elsewhere, in all directions, through the wires.

Or perhaps the Tesla tower could bring the energy down from the ionosphere without even a satellte, being as it would seem easier to reach the ionosphere than a light-bulb 26 miles away.

Anyway others are certain it can be done, even though I don’t yet know the details of how. I’ll be finding that out from James McCanney’s work on the subject.  He said the bankers took the Tower down. He said that the oil and nuclear age never needed to happen.

But the details of how Dyson-Harrop satellites will work are much clearer to me.  The only problem with them is whether or not we can get the laser technology to direct the power to sufficiently small an area.

So Dyson-Harrop presents us with a surprising fact:  Its easier with Dyson Harrop to bring unlimited fresh water to the deserts of the world, and stop the next glacial period, then it is to provide awesome amounts of cheap electricity.   Because we can make a boiling lake of fresh water in the Antarctic, the landed Arctic, and in Greenland. We can do these things no problem. But can we catch that energy in a tight enough circle to produce electricity?????

Thats a slightly harder gig. When I get time I’ll explain how Dysson Harrop works, and why we must get past the stupidity of NASA in order to access this technology.

More later

Advertisements

Responses

  1. “Energy at last. The first time an easy solution to an impending glacial crisis has come to light. ”

    NO LYING ON THIS SITE BIRDFOOL. THE QUOTE STANDS, AS ANY INVESTIGATION BY EVEN YOUR STUPID SELF WILL REVEAL. THIS IS A SITE OF DISCERNMENT AND INSIGHT AND NOT A PLACE TO BE POLLUTED BY YOUR CONSTANT UNTHINKING MINDLESSNESS. YOU MAY HAVE GOT LOST AND THOUGHT YOU WERE ON AN INTERNET SEWER LIKE THE ONE PZ MYERS RUNS. I ASSURE YOU THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

    THE SORT OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS AN UNCONTESTED AND PROSAIC REALITY

  2. Here is the wiki link for your fucking-information. Don’t you dropouts from the PZ Myers cess-pool ever get sick of always being wrong?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson%E2%80%93Harrop_satellite

    Using this system to reverse a glacial onslaught is the easy, barely technical part. Using this system to provide incredibly cheap energy will require some improvements in laser technology, in all likelihood. Thats the hard part. The energy available is astonishing. The ability to direct it that far with great precision is the harder ask.

  3. “I would add that Budget Surpluses are not always wrong but usually are.”

    Just think of the credulity in the face of conventionalist error, and the conceptual confusion which it would take to come up with a statement as divorced from the real world as this one.

    The situation under recession is as follows:

    the economy is rife with investments that make no sense from a cash-flow perspective, nor from the point of view of the need to allocate scarce resources wisely.

    These investments have to be sold at a discount and subject to renovation for them to be reasonable business undertakings and therefore for the economy to heal.

    So what do the thief-economists advocate? The taking of the necessary real resources to effect this investment renovation …… and the squandering of these real resources on frippery.

    Now while it is true that extra government spending will restore accounting profits, the priorities of The Great Turgot, and the thinking mans priorities more generally, lie elsewhere.

  4. YOU IDIOT. THE STRONGER WIND IS OUTSIDE THE ECLIPTIC, AT ABOUT 1000 KILOMETRES. HENCE THE DIFFICULTY OF GUIDING DIRECT PRECISION LASER.

    NO SUCH DIFFICULTY IS THERE AT THAT DISTANCE WHEN IT COMES TO ENDING A GLACIAL PERIOD. SINCE ITS DEAD EASY TO FOCUS ON A CIRCLE OF ICE OF 100 KILOMETRES.

    FUCKING THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE FUCKWIT.

    NOW AS TO PRECISION FOR ELECTRICAL ENERGY GENERATION ….. THATS FINE IF YOU CAN EVEN GET AS FAR AS THE IONOSPHERE. YES YOU WILL HAVE GREATER ENERGY POTENTIAL ABOVE OR BELOW THE ECLIPTIC AT ABOUT 1000 KILOMETRES.

    BUT YOU DON’T NEED THAT AWESOME POTENTIAL WHEN THERE IS SLIGHTLY LESS AWESOME POTENTIAL AT ONLY 100 KILOMETRES. EITHER WAY I CANNOT TELL WHAT EXTRA PRECISION IS NEEDED FOR SOLVING OUR ELECTRICITY CRISIS. BUT NO FURTHER PRECISION IS NEEDED TO SUPPLY FRESH WATER OR TO STOP A GLACIAL ADVANCE IN ITS TRACKS.

    YOU ARE ALWAYS FUCKING WRONG YOU MORON.

    CAN YOU NOT JUST ONCE GET SOMETHING RIGHT???????????????????

  5. Look at this. Joseph Cambria getting things perfectly right under economic science. And a good thing too. The Great Turgot was not ready to stoop to speak to the terminal moron sdfc. So Cambria said pretty much what the Great Turgot would have said had the Great Turgot decided to slum it:

    “SDFC

    “You continue to raise this crap about incomes. The only problem is if the C(entral)B(ank) doesn’t move to raise the N(ominal)GDP.

    Nothing else works and spending money on pink batts will not do much other than have a temporary effect of aggregate income.

    Stimulus has a multiplier less than 1.”

    Apart from the last sentence, which is terribly ambiguous and something Mark Hill might say ….. its really a rather good effort from Cambria.

    And pretty unassailable as a logical argument. A competent central bank, using the reserve asset ratio and the printing press alone, can hit any nominal business revenue level it chooses. Someone ought to take a blow-torch to the gentleman sdfc and get a definitive answer out of the gentleman as to how much spending that gentleman wants and why he thinks you cannot get it from monetary policy.

    He’s a dirty lying gentleman. He’s probably the criminal Leigh or the criminal Gruen. And if Catallaxians are to be men, they must persist and get straight answers out of this dirty smelly vandalising gentleman.

  6. And check out Mark Hill. Terminally deranged. And like Birdcretin, one of these guys who cannot seem to get anything right:

    “Even Keynesians consider them a problem, especially at the wrong time – but they are required for their demand management aims.”

    So the idiot Mark Hill STILL thinks that fiscal policy can be used to manage demand. Yet nowhere has this low wattage fool been able to show this.

  7. It could not be more clear under logic, and in practice that ONLY MONETARY POLICY can be used to manipulate demand. Only monetary policy can be used to hit nominal business revenue targets. And when I say monetary policy I mean only the setting of the reserve asset ratio and the addition of new cash.

    There is no economist in the world who can rightly contradict me on this. And anyone who says otherwise is ignorant, a liar or a fool. The logic of this is totally beyond question.

  8. “My two cents – without really thinking much about this or even knowing anything about it, I am attracted to the idea of governments running deficits, but only if they are funded by the domestic non-government sector and only if the funds are used for the expenditure for genuine investment rather than so-called “stimulus” in the form of bribes. What is your response to that?”

    Fisk. My response is, that this is an important matter, and that if you had wanted to know the right and definitive answer, than you were remiss in not asking me, and not asking me several years ago.

    There is never an excuse for deficit spending. And the fact is that there is so much existing fat, that whatever your pressing investments, you can finance them from spending cuts.

    Furthermore deficits bring precisely no more resources to the society. They transfer asset value directly from the non-bank sector to the bank sector, thereby impoverishing the real economy. So that therefore excellence in infrastructure is not to be sought through this measure.

    Rather a rule of thumb ought to be that for every dollar you spend on infrastructure investment now, you set aside two dollars for the future maintenance of that infrastructure.

    The above implies that where you see massive deficits you ought to expect to see infrastructure in an utter shambles. The opposite of what the Keynesians would tell you. With few exceptions, and those to be put down to high savings rate, deficits are twinned with shambolic underinvestment (in real resources terms) in infrastructure.

    To get down to brass tacks, the cost over-runs you saw in the stimulus package were normal and in accordance with economic law, and not JUST about Labor incompetence. Had big infrastructure been budgeted out of a proportion of a large surplus people the world over would wonder at the effectiveness of the government of the day, and assume it was all down to them chasing bargains.

    You are a smart guy, but you’ve got to find the right person and ask him a bunch of questions if you want to find out stuff. And you will never get a straight answer at Catallaxy.

  9. “So the idiot STILL thinks that fiscal policy can be used to manage demand.”

    No I don’t Graeme and that is nearly slanderous.
    NO THATS WHAT YOU CLAIMED I never have believed that. YOU ARE LYING. YOU STILL CLAIM THAT GOVERNMENT SPENDING INCREASES RATHER THAN REDIRECTS SPENDING ….I was pointing out that even Keynesians would reject this suicidal “Modern Monetary Theory”.

    NO YOU WEREN’T. YOU ARE LYING. YOUR ARGUMENT IS “BARRO SAID SO”. THATS YOUR ARGUMENT CLAIMING THAT FISCAL POLICY CAN RELIABLY BE USED FOR DEMAND MANAGEMENT. WHICH IS WRONG UNDER ECONOMIC SCIENCE AND LOGIC.

  10. It’s amazing you believe that a multiplier of zero is a better argument against Keynes than a negative multiplier.

    WHAT? YOU FUCKING DOPE. THERE IS NO KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER SHIT FOR BRAINS. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHAT THE BEST ARGUMENT AGAINST THE KEYNESIANS IS WHEN ITS A FACT THAT THERE IS NO KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER YOU BRAIN DAMAGED TWAT.

    Of course, you think Robert Barro ought to be stripped of his degrees.

    THERE STILL IS NO KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER. AND THE ARGUMENT “BARRO SAID SO” IS NO GROUNDS FOR YOU TO BE LYING OF FUCKING IT UP WITH YOUR TERMINAL IDIOCY ABOUT THERE BEING A KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER.

    WE ALREADY KNOW THAT BARRO’S MISTAKE WAS USING THE INVALID METRIC OF GDP AS A STAND-IN FOR SPENDING. BUT GDP IS ONLY A SUBSET OF SPENDING. AND IN NO WAY SPENDING AS SUCH.

  11. I’m starting to think you must be Joseph Cambria (scientist).

    • Thanks for your input. But it makes no difference either way since your words no good.

  12. Look at how criminally inept American financial sector bigshots are:

    “Sounding the alarm about the country’s deep fiscal problems, Standard & Poor’s on Monday downgraded its outlook on the U.S. credit rating to ‘negative,’ raising the likelihood the U.S. will lose its coveted ‘AAA’ rating.”

    The Federal Government of the US is manifestly insolvent. And these dropkicks in Standard And Poors, the bosses in which will be paying themselves millions in salaries and bonuses …… these dropkicks in Standard And Poors are giving the Federal Government a AAA-rating. This is simply astonishing incompetence. The US government will not be paying its debts. And yet these dummies, these fuckwits, still give the Federal Government a AAA rating.

    We can see as each year passes, bigshot salaries are getting to look less and less valid under fractional-reserves version of pseudo-capitalism.

  13. Also consider the stupidity of the PZ Myers crowd. One and all they contended that they would be paying their debts. Not one of these brainless hangers on to a brainless blog-owner came forth and admitted I was right.

    The US is not paying off these debts. Not ever.

  14. WHAT? I LIVE IN A PRETTY HIGH QUALITY APARTMENT COMPLEX, WITH ITS OWN SWIMMING POOL AND OWN SOME LAND ELSEWHERE. I DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DOPEY.

  15. Here is the dimwitted PZ Myers:

    “Design flaws support evolution
    Category: Evolution
    Posted on: March 31, 2010 10:41 AM, by PZ Myers

    This is a nicely done lecture on design flaws in our anatomy and physiology, to refute claims of intelligent design…..”

    That seems to be the limit of his potential explanations for the design flaws. Of course we have more “design flaws” then most. The human species suffers from an abnormal amount of genetically-based diseases. Now why would that be?

    One reason could be to do with the freak chance of evolution. Usually a design flaw would be put down to a careless designer who needed to do a job in a hurry, and didn’t give a shit about the product he was making on the fly. Near enough is good enough. Whereas natural selection on its own would tend to iron out design flaws in favor of those individuals somewhat less flawed.

    I was actually trying to retrieve this idiots view of economics. But he may have gotten rid of it as a result of my relentless taunting. While thats a good sign we must never forget we are dealing with a real fuckwit here.

  16. Right, but I think we were almost always in deficit in the 50s and 60s and didn’t governments issue bonds to build projects? I don’t see a huge problem with that, and if private citizens are the bond-holders, then even better. I don’t know about this multiplier business either, however I could still think of a theoretical case for stimulus in a scenario of a demand shock: which is that prices and wages generally don’t adjust, or if they do, only with great pain and trauma. Ever tried to cut someone’s pay in absolute terms? It’s really, really difficult. It almost can’t be done. Most firms would probably rather just go for the layoffs and keep wages high for existing staff. Which means a larger hit to output and employment as a whole. So maybe, theoretically, given the inflexibility of prices and costs, stimulus might be justified. But there are probably better ways to do this than fiscal policy.

  17. The projects were good. But the way they were financed was a disaster. The reasons are not obvious. But before I explain the scenario re-examine the logic of what you are saying here:

    “I don’t know about this multiplier business either, however I could still think of a theoretical case for stimulus in a scenario of a demand shock:”

    No you could not. But try anyway.

    See you’ve got to at least attempt to explain the logic of wild claims like this. Or you can never click to where the logical error lies. Either fiscal policy increases nominal spending or it doesn’t. Either a country on a fiat currency can hit any level of nominal business revenue it chooses …… or it has no such capacity.

    While you are sussing this out ….. every ten minutes say to yourself WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM. And every half hour say to yourself WHERE IS THE SPENDING COMING FROM .

  18. Back to the ratings agencies and the stupidity of the efficient market ideologues. Standard and Poors, clearly inept, despite their high pay, ought to have dropped the AAA rating pretty early on under Bush. Then dropped the rating again every month that the lunatic Paulson was doing his thing, and again two or three times under the first two years of Obama.

    Note that if they had acted competently, then part of the Bush stupidity and all of the Paulson-Obama lunacy may have not happened.

    What does Sinclair Davidson say about this efficient financial market? It hardly matters does it? He’ll jump from foot to foot and say its a purely theoretical thing, and that I don’t know the doctrine and all that jive. Then he’ll go on mis-applying this fools doctrine on some future date.

    There are conditions under which the financial markets would be powerfully effective but they have nothing to do with the status quo.

  19. Check the gook with the flat learning curves. After five years minimum he cannot yet tell the difference between credit and ponzi-money creation. Or he wants to morph one to the other by using the word “credit”.

    “credit exists because people demand it. it doesn’t arise and then get forced onto people”

    The Gook is a liar. New money creation is forced upon the community. Never is this voluntary except where the money is mined, refined and shaped into a medium of exchange.

    Who volunteered for their money to be depreciated as the Gook with the flat learning curves alleges????

    Oh I see. He said the word “credit” and thereby managed to fool himself. Well thats alright then. Onward.

    Thats like changing a cat into a dog by the following methodology …..

    cat cat cat cag cag cog cog dog.

  20. The fucking moron Mark Hill. Unbelievable. He will never understand economics. He didn’t understand money creation when he was an undergraduate. He doesn’t understand it now. Look as this stupid cunt:

    “So we should stop people consensually lending and borrowing money but we should print as much money as possible and not produce resources?

    This just fucking bonkers.”

    So Mark Hill is saying that the money creation benefit must go to the banks, and not to reduce taxes, nor to amortize the cost of mining non-monetary metals.

    But why???

    Well the dumb cunt cannot say. Because he’s a deranged lunatic.

  21. It’s amazing you believe that a multiplier of zero is a better argument against Keynes than a negative multiplier.

    WHAT? YOU FUCKING DOPE. THERE IS NO KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER SHIT FOR BRAINS. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHAT THE BEST ARGUMENT AGAINST THE KEYNESIANS IS WHEN ITS A FACT THAT THERE IS NO KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER YOU BRAIN DAMAGED TWAT.

    Shorter GMB: 0 > -1

  22. Clearly I meant 0 < -1

    Please do not concede this faux pas

    • You have three honorable choices. Come up with evidence for the multiplier. Concede you are wrong and a stupid cunt. Or kill yourself. BARRO SAID SO is not a logical argument. You might think it is but its not. The Gook with the flat learning curves may think BARRO SAID SO is a solid argument, but it isn’t just the same.

      • NO NO. “BARRO HAS THE EVIDENCE” IS NOT A VALID ARGUMENT. YOU MIGHT THINK IT IS BUT IT ISN’T.

        AND YOU ARE A FUCKING INSANE LYING CUNT ANYHOW. BECAUSE YOU KNOW FULL WELL BARRO DID NOT SHOW THAT SPENDING WAS INCREASED. HE SHOWED THAT NOMINAL GDP WAS INCREASED.

  23. From elsewhere:

    Right. So the ABC has decided that pointing out that our most important ally has a usurper in the White House is information to be censored.

    This is disgraceful behavior, which matches the disgraceful behavior of the author.

    Listen Tim:

    The next time you decide that the evidence doesn’t matter STOP TYPING. Don’t lie and project your own deficiencies onto Trump. Just stop typing. I don’t think thats too much to ask.

  24. “See you’ve got to at least attempt to explain the logic of wild claims like this. Or you can never click to where the logical error lies. Either fiscal policy increases nominal spending or it doesn’t. Either a country on a fiat currency can hit any level of nominal business revenue it chooses …… or it has no such capacity.”

    No, not over a longer time period, but my understanding is that it might bring future spending forward and avoid a prices collapse in the short term, just as I could buy my plasma now by reducing my future spending. Total spending over the two periods remains constant. But there is more spending now and less later.

    I’m not endorsing that line of reasoning at all (if you really want prices to remain stable you’d probably use monetary policy), but just thinking out loud about how it might be possible to use fiscal policy to avert a shock in the short term. As I said before, that reasoning assumes that it is more difficult to cut wages than to lay people off.

  25. No no look . How can fiscal policy POSSIBLY increase spending in the short term.

    Don’t talk about your understanding. WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM …..

    WHERE IS THE SPENDING COMING FROM.

    You see you did not repeat these things every 10 and 30 minutes, as I suggested for you to do. I wasn’t just mucking about.

  26. Ah, ok. You’re arguing that fiscal policy cannot increase spending even in the short term. Like I said before – I can increase my own spending right now, by reducing my future spending. If an individual can do that, why can’t a government?

  27. Go through the exercise. I would face having to repeat the former post over. There is no way to click without just going over and over and over it until you do.

    Again….. either a fait currency country can hit what spending it aims at via monetary policy (new cash creation combined with increasing the reserve asset ratio) or it cannot. Either fiscal policy increases nominal spending or it doesn’t.

    If you are claiming fiscal policy can increase nominal spending in the short run then WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM …. WHERE IS THIS SPENDING COMING FROM.

  28. “If an individual can do that, why can’t a government?”

    How can it? We are talking about NOMINAL spending. How can the government increase nominal spending. Not of itself. But of the economy.

  29. I guess they are borrowing money from other people with excess savings.

  30. You keep asking yourself over and over.

    WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM

  31. Or by printing money.

  32. “I guess they are borrowing money from other people with excess savings.”

    In what way can that even POSSIBLY increase nominal spending in the economy.

  33. By borrowing from a foreigner?

    • How can borrowing from a foreigner even POSSIBLY increase NOMINAL spending in the economy. WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM the foreigner has no Aussie printing press and must enter the local money market to effect the loan.

  34. By the way – how do you define nominal spending? What is included in that? Do you just mean G+C?

  35. Nominal spending …… I define as NOMINAL TOTAL BUSINESS REVENUES not including financial trading volumes. This is a much larger figure than GDP. Note that salaries and wages are paid out of business revenues. They are business costs.

  36. That we attempt to borrow from a foreigner under a fiat currency, in order to deal with a demand shock, is the most compelling evidence since the molten iron streaming from the South Tower that the banking cartel has taken over defacto.

    These fuckers, must enter into our own money market to make the loan, a clear zero sum game from a nominal spending point of view. In a recession part of the proper adjustment is to go from trade deficits to trade surpluses. But all the borrowing from foreigners does is prevent this from happening.

    That these bastards are systematically impoverishing, enslaving, and disinheriting us …….. is a reality so big and out there, that its not open to question. The stupidity of people like Mark and Jason is hardly a valid argument to the contrary.

  37. Is it beginning to dawn on you now North? The enormity of the fraud of it all and the sheer hard-to-believe stupidity of people like Davidson who keeps this horrible story alive.

    In practice the deficit would increase nominal spending by a disgraceful mechanism. By providing a “sure thing” wherein the bankers could rebuild their balance sheets, creating new money when they were supposed to be skint. Thus extorting a new double loss off the non-banking populace when they were hurting the most.

    Consider new money creation combined with increasing the reserve asset ratio instead!!!!! New spending of any level can be contrived, and no wealth distribution to the banks.

    In the former situation the central bank criminal enabler, will actually swap ACTUAL CASH for ponzi-money whenever this is needed (usually through the obscurantism of these wealth-destroyers buying government debt off the public and then selling to the reserve bank) So the actual effect is equivalent to the mint simply handing cash to the banks. But with added wealth destruction and instability.

  38. Jason Soon and Mark Hill are bought and paid for useful fools.

  39. I’m finding it hard to keep up with everything to read, particularly economics stuff.

    This is interesting.

    http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/04/19/economists_start_probing_their_own_ethics

  40. You really would like to hope they got something out of it. And I guess they have. They have jobs after all. In economics you have to be stupid to be a mainstreamer and pretty smart to be a maverick. So you have Kates. But Kates must have had to soft-pedal his colleagues for years. And that affects your ability to think straight. So by being restricted in this way he is now coming out against his dumb colleagues in an appropriate way. But he hasn’t started turning the tables on the ponzi-money charlatans yet.

  41. Check your email

  42. FROM ABC UNLEASHED

    If he’s been hired to support the global warming fraud of course he’ll be hard to ignore. I’ll be blue-in-the-face at him until he recants.

    The propaganda has been laid on so thick for so long that people have forgotten the real reason for the effects that we wrongly attribute to greenhouse.

    So for example people get all mixed up between temperature and heat content. They forget about specific heat capacity and the latent heat of evaporation/condensation.

    The above explains adequately what we see and experience and its very hard to see why people would worry about an effect so insignificant that no-one can quantify it.

  43. I think you are an intrusive, stupid, racist, sexist, misanthropic, sadistic fool and loser who adds nothing to the sum of human knowledge.

    I think you are obsessed with Graeme because he is a better, kinder, more successful, happier and smarter man than you and you resent and hate him for that because of your own self-loathing and the absence of meaning and joy in your own miserable useless life.

    I hope this helps, Bird Flaps.

    • Truth is in the eye of the beholder.

      Albert Einstein.

  44. Graeme, pls send me something to cheer me up. I just lost a best friend and constant companion and a sad bear with no brain today.

    Last Words To A Dumb Friend

    Pet was never mourned as you,
    Purrer of the spotless hue,
    Plumy tail, and wistful gaze
    While you humoured our queer ways,
    Or outshrilled your morning call
    Up the stairs and through the hall–
    Foot suspended in its fall–
    While, expectant, you would stand
    Arched, to meet the stroking hand;
    Till your way you chose to wend
    Yonder, to your tragic end.

    From the chair whereon he sat
    Sweep his fur, nor wince thereat;
    Rake his little pathways out
    Mid the bushes roundabout;
    Smooth away his talons’ mark
    From the claw-worn pine-tree bark,
    Where he climbed as dusk embrowned,
    Waiting us who loitered round.

    Strange it is this speechless thing,
    Subject to our mastering,
    Subject for his life and food
    To our gift, and time, and mood;
    Timid pensioner of us Powers,
    His existence ruled by ours,
    Should – by crossing at a breath
    Into safe and shielded death,
    By the merely taking hence
    Of his insignificance–
    Loom as largened to the sense,
    Shape as part, above man’s will,
    Of the Imperturbable.

    As a prisoner, flight debarred,
    Exercising in a yard,
    Still retain I, troubled, shaken,
    Mean estate, by him forsaken;
    And this home, which scarcely took
    Impress from his little look,
    By his faring to the Dim
    Grows all eloquent of him.

    Housemate, I can think you still
    Bounding to the window-sill,
    Over which I vaguely see
    Your small mound beneath the tree,
    Showing in the autumn shade
    That you moulder where you played.

    Thomas Hardy

  45. Graeme Bird :
    20 Apr 2011 4:47:40pm
    “Well he is wrong. Jobs are cut from the public service regularly and there are recruitment freezes. Programs are dropped and new ones created.”

    When? It doesn’t happen. Public servants playing make-believe or running a fake recruitment freeze is not the same as mass-sackings, or a sinking lid.

    Don’t say things that are not true. When was the last general culling of the public sector? It could not be more recent than Costello’s first term as treasurer, and probably didn’t happen then.

    But it ought to happen and it ought to happen tomorrow. Tomorrow is Thursday before the Easter break.

    Reply Alert moderator

  46. Bird you disgusting racist pig, do you call your wife a “gook” to her face? How about her relatives?

    Answer this question you coward, I’ll be reposting this until you do.

    LISTEN YOU STUPID CUNT, I’LL ANSWER THIS JUST ONCE. YES I DO CALL HER THAT SOMETIMES BUT SHE UNDERSTANDS WHY, ITS BECAUSE I’M NEVER WRONG AND I’M NOT A RACIST. SHE’S OK WITH IT, SO FUCK OFF YOU MORONIC CUNT

  47. ““So we should stop people consensually lending and borrowing money but we should print as much money as possible and not produce resources?” I agree.

    • Note the stupidity of the Hill question. Most of it wrapped up in:

      “as much money as possible….”

      As much money as possible hey you mentally deranged IDIOT. How many zeros can you fit on a note you dumb cunt Mark? How many trees can we grow to turn into notes. You are just such a dumb cunt mate.

      No we need to print enough cash money to replace REPLACE the ponzi-money, and use the printed money to retire debt. An obvious unrefutable and unassailable net gain for society. Even to try and gainsay this course of action singles the negater out as an obvious moron.

  48. Bird

    answer Fyodor’s question at Thoughts on Freedom.

    GO!!

    • I’m moderated there. But I’ll try. But before I go …… You haven’t made a damn fool of yourself by imagining that Fyodor has asked an intelligent question have you?

  49. “So Bird, would you jail every Australian with mismatched assets/liabilities like say yourself?”

    The crime is not mis-matching assets and liabilities under the scenario implied.

    The crime is

    1. Fraud with malice.

    2. Counterfeiting.

    3. Fraud with a view to unjust enrichment.

    2. Conspiracy to undermine the currency.

    3. Conspiracy to reignite the business cycle, thus ruining peoples lives and creating unemployment.

    4. Conspiracy to distort the allocation of scarce capital resources during the boom phase.

    5. Conspiracy to subsidise the REAL AND NOMINAL profit share, of national income, at the expense of real wages.

    6. Subversion of the confidence that less well off people can have in the more-voluntary society as a fair and functioning setup.

    7. Conspiracy to create a national or local “prosperity delusion” thus enticing people to save less, spend more, and borrow more, than they otherwise would if price information had not been distorted.

    8. Conspiracy to normalize NEGATIVE INVENTORY SPECULATION which is an anti-social undertaking …. as opposed to POSITIVE INVENTORY SPECULATION ……. which is probably one of the most beneficial undertakings in economic life.

    9. Treason. Selling out Australia and the human species, to SYSTEMICALLY (and possibly conspirationally) EVIL networks of the Northern Hemisphere, who are fed and sustained, by the money creation function.

    If you don’t know what I’m talking about just dwell for months at a time, pacing backwards and forwards, on the molten iron streaming from the South Tower, before it collapsed into its path of greatest resistance.

    10. Conspiracy to promote Marxism and Keynesianism through social vandalism …. as opposed to promoting these philosophies via persuasion. Promoting Keynesianism via persuasion ought to get you sacked from any publicly funded economics department. But the sanctions should stop there.

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Now as to punishment. Sir Isaac Newton had a fellow hung, drawn, and quartered, for attempting persistently to undermine the pound sterling. Thats hung to his death. Then his body cut in half. Then his body cut in half again.

    This was a major undertaking for Newton to kill this fellow, and he stayed on the job year in and year out until this fellow was dead, and in pieces, …….. publicly.

    We have to have punishments for the breaking of this particular law which stops the law-breaking in its tracks. Because once there is a break-out of the breaking of this law, the pain (at setting the capital markets back to being effective) is just incredible.

    So with many other laws we can reel the buggers in well after the law has been broken and fine a bunch of them. We don’t have to be nazis about it. But you break this law THIS LAW, the consequences for the entirety of society are so bad, ………. that we have to make sure the law is never broken in the first place or found out quickly and dealt with very fast.

    This can mean harsh penalties. But it need not mean harsh penalties. After all the banks have for decades stopped their own tellers from practicing more humble forms of embezzlement, with very soft penalties but with simple vigilance.

  50. “For the next fifteen minutes or so, Sergeant Dipprasad Pun went completely fucking out of his mind batshit insane. Surrounded on all sides in a scene that makes me think of the rooftop finale for Mercy Hospital in Left 4 Dead, Pun fought off assaults from all sides of his fortified rooftop position, somehow avoiding being shot by thirty-plus guys with automatic weapons and explosives launchers as he laid down a curtain of bullets so over-the-top that it would have made John Woo jizz.

    Firing from the hip like the goddamned Terminator wasting those cop cars with the minigun in T2, Pun held back the Taliban assault on the town, blowing through all 400 rounds of ammunition for the machine gun – every single bullet in the rooftop bunker – in the span of just a few minutes. When the supply of large-caliber heavy weapons ammunition ran out, Pun ditched the MG and started grabbing grenades, two at a time, chucking them in every direction like he was dishing out beads from a Mardi Gras rooftop…”

    Another thing that is or was famous about Ghurka soldiers is their ability to change gears. They can be ripping the guts out of the enemy one minute, with bayonets, and then after having a wash you can confidently rely upon them to be perfect gentleman to the women, as if they were young Mormons overseas.

    Thats not a talent particularly thick on the ground, and given the hard yards by them and their fathers and grandfathers, its pretty churlish that Ghurka veterans are not at the head of any list to be migrants to places like Australia and New Zealand.

  51. Take care to moderate Fyodor. Fyodor is the original fractional reserve thread-wrecker and compulsive liar on the subject of monetary economics. He was the creator of the threads-of-doom over at Cattallaxy.

    Fyodor. If fractional reserve is legal than legally it cannot be fraud. So obviously it cannot legally attract punishment IF YOU ARE A BANKER.

    The rest of us will indeed be arrested if we try this on. But since bankers are given a special crony privilege it is not illegal for them to exercise this special crony privilege.

    The banks create ponzi money. Then the central bank turns this fake money into cash. This racket is the biggest ripoff in history. But it cannot legally be fraud. Since it is not illegal for this conspiracy against the public to continue.

    But if we made it illegal, and defined it as fraud, then it would be fraud. And it would be illegal.

    Now for goodness sakes someone put Fyodor on moderation before he wrecks another thread.

    Now do I need to repeat myself?

  52. I have just come across this site while doing some research for an assignment.

    I just wanted to tell Graeme, that you really are an immautre child who needs to suck it up and get over shit. Your pathetic and need to realise that there’s more going on it the world then your pathetic little ideas.

    Have a nice day 🙂

  53. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    This really is a very simple story. The global warming fraud is a transparent fraud just like Piltdown man. But unlike Piltdown man there is an endless source of funds behind the global warming fraud.

    You really don’t need to make things more complex than that.

    We are talking about a movement so fraudulent that they are yet to prove an anomaly that we ought to take to be their alleged greenhouse affect. They haven’t proven that anomaly beyond a “god of gaps” basis. And no-one here has any clue so much as to be able to find an anomaly and to make it relevant to this trifling back-radiation theory.

  54. Its a scandal that Stevens is paid anything to do what he does, since the central bank is a parasitical conspiracy against the public. But even that reality aside, one million a year is an astonishing sum just on the basis that his work ought to be considered a part time act. You could do it one day a week and spend the rest of the time drunk.

    Solon
    24 Apr 11 at 3:17 pm
    Solon,

    Are you unhappy with the RBA’s administration of monetary policy? Their advice to government? Their aiding and abetting of the bank-cash pyramiding system?

    THR
    24 Apr 11 at 3:20 pm
    I’m ecstatically happy about all these things. What on earth do you think? Their administration of monetary policy is a disgrace, their advice to government is a joke, their very existence is a scandal and running-sore.

    The banks “pyramid” (as you say) up make-believe cash, and the central banks job is to turn that into real cash. Its an unbelievable scandal. Actually paying people to carry out this dirty conspiracy is just throwing salt into the wounds. Only a sexual deviant of the gimp-masochistic kind, who likes to be peed-on, could find any of this pleasing.

    Solon
    24 Apr 11 at 3:28 pm
    My expertise on banking is rather limited, so you’ll have to bear with me. What precisely is the cure for these ills of which you speak? Does it involve changing the extent to which banks are leveraged?

    THR
    24 Apr 11 at 3:33 pm
    No leverage is the wrong word. Leverage is where you owe so much as compared with your equity. People who support this criminal behavior are always using terms which they cannot define. They say “leverage” when they mean the ratio of ponzi-money (M1) to cash. Which has nothing to do with leverage. They use “recapitalization” when they mean stealing or inflating. They use “credit” when they mean loans to create new money.

    The way to cure this is to force the reserve bank to act in the interests of the public. This means should they wish to restrain demand they must increase the reserve asset ratio and use no other method. When they want to increase demand they must add new cash to the system, and undertake no other method.

    These two methods are the only valid monetary measures. All other actions masquerading as monetary policy are both ineffective and constitute simple stealing on behalf of the banks. They are criminals this crowd. They steal from the public and give to the banks. And here we have people talking about what a great job Stevens is doing.

    There is no point some dimwitted fellow say “you are claiming a conspiracy” because this is a conspiracy. The worst sort of conspiracy. The worst, most ugly, most venal and most evil.

    “Would you prefer rates to be much higher?”

    I can answer that. And I’ve already answered that. Yes of course the Reserve Bank ought to have higher rates. Since subsidised rates is stealing. The reserve bank must raise its discount rate until this measure is no longer used.

    The two measures that are valid monetary policy are new cash creation and increasing the reserve asset ratio. Did you catch it that time JC?

    So when you need more demand you add cash directly. When you need less demand you increase the reserve asset ratio. After a few months of that you need never have a discount rate. After a few more months of that you need never have a banking cycle.

    But that would be bank impoverishment, community enrichment, and not the other way around. So Stevens would rather wear womens clothes downtown than so much as suggest to the board that everyone do their alleged job. He gets paid the big bucks to never suggest that they do their job.

  55. Pretty conclusive proof that we can transport electricity down from low earth orbit. Tesla was able to make lightbulbs light up 26 miles away in all directions. Now that we know that there is awesome electrical power up in the ionosphere, using Tesla’s technology ought to present little problems insofar as awesome amounts of free electricity is concerned. It ought to be sent down to a tall tower on a mountain or on an island, and then cabled elsewhere:


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: