Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Kraj Dolara!?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
3824 replies to this topic

Poll: Koja je buduca svetska valuta? (535 member(s) have cast votes)

Koja je buduca svetska valuta?

  1. Dolar (95 votes [21.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.02%

  2. Evro (196 votes [43.36%])

    Percentage of vote: 43.36%

  3. Juan (67 votes [14.82%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.82%

  4. Nesto cetvrto (94 votes [20.80%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.80%

Vote

#3736 JimmyM

JimmyM
  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:08

Sinko, nisi svestan koliko ne znas, ti i dalje mislis da je ovo ciklicna kriza a ne sistemska, valjda znas koja je razlika.

 

Aham, a kao nisi pročitao. :kece:

 

Ja ne mislim sine, ja znam.  B-) Nisam te bez razloga oduvao juče. :wub:

 

Nemaš ti pojma ni o čemu pričaš ni šta da odgovoriš, jer sam te ušio, pa se vrtiš u krug B-)

 

Ja razbijam, a ti bežiš, jebiga. -_-


Edited by JimmyM, 17 December 2012 - 12:12.


#3737 brusli

brusli
  • Members
  • 962 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 13:22

Pa jel vidis da ti niko ne odgovara, ali ne zato sto si prepametan.

Ajd sad nastavi da se kliberis, ebiga nije to moj nivo.



#3738 JimmyM

JimmyM
  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 14:39

Sine, kopiraš me, a pričaš o nekom nivou. :kece:  Ono, te fore drugaricama u učionici. B-)

 

Pa šta da mi odgovoriš batice, nemaš šta, vidiš da prosipaš fore da ne čitaš, iako drhtiš zbog toga što si sve pročitao pa još prostudirao do kasnih sata. :wub:

 

Nisam tvoj nivo, druga stvar koju si ub'o :s_w:  Jer sam te izbezumio, a ti si izgubio, pa gledaš kako bezbolnije da se izvučeš.

 

Nema toga sinko, na štriku si. ^_^


Edited by JimmyM, 17 December 2012 - 14:52.


#3739 xikrk

xikrk
  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 28 December 2012 - 14:16

Postavio si toliko teza da bi diskusija, u ovom slučaju obzirom na motivaciju-natezanje, bila besmisleno skupa. Mislim da si odigrao na pogrešnu kartu, da to i sam znaš, da te plaši izvesnost repo i mosta, i da vulgarnost ne dolazi samo iz nedostatka vaspitanja, nego i iz panike. Vredjajući neistomišljenike nećeš poboljšati svoju poziciju.

USA je tehnološki pregažena. Sva visoka energetska tehnologija o kojoj maštaš se svodi na jedan proizvod kojeg u Kini još nema, ali proizvod nešto lošijeg kvaliteta prodaje se 15x jeftinije. Ako želiš da razumeš zašto, prošetaj po Tehničkom fakultetu bilo kojeg univerziteta i gledaj lica. Njihova lojalnost je bila privremena. Najnoviji mehur je bio u energetici - prirodni gas se prodaje ispod proizvodne cene, što je i dalje skuplje od onog što stiže iz Katara. Vojni budžet raste zbog lobija i zbog toga što je to jedina ozbiljna proizvodnja preostala u USA. Koliki je vojni bužet iračkih pobunjenika i Talibana? Ispada da je mrtav Amerikanac daleko jeftiniji od mrtvog "pobunjenika" ili "teroriste". Model sa podizanjem carina više ne radi. Ostavljam ti da razradiš zašto.

Kad napraviš grešku izlaz nije da ubedjuješ druge da nisi pogrešio, nego da je ispraviš. U suprotnom, može ti se desiti da zaglaviš kao dobrovoljac u nekoj nedodjiji kada USA počne da rešava problem svog duga. Ima ovde već jedan kao ti. Genetika je čudo.



#3740 JimmyM

JimmyM
  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 28 December 2012 - 16:37

Batice, nema ništa od sviranja frule. :kece:

 

Kakvo nevaspitanje i panika, pa ko je ovde pobegao? :kece:

 

Neko drugi hladi usta. ^_^

 

Ja kuliram, dok se vi ko mravi pred kišu gurkate u taborčiće. :heart:

 

Oduvao sam vas, realno.  B-)

 

Nego, je l evro postao nova rezervna valuta, ipak se to ovde najavljivalo, vidim dobili ste ga pravo u usta. :lala:

 

Mislim, ovo je sigurno bila greška:

 

http://www.spiegel.d...o-a-849747.html

 

A Rotšilda, najvećeg poverioca evra nećemo da pitamo,pošto je on krivac za NWO :wub:

 

http://www.infowars....-euro-collapse/

 

Dakle, nekom drugom je panika, vi ste ga izduvali, a ne ja! :kece:

 

Mlaćenje slame ne prolazi. :wub:

 

 

Model sa podizanjem carina više ne radi. Ostavljam ti da razradiš zašto.

 

Misliš kao što ne radi evro? :lol+:

 

Ček, ček, da obiđemo ovu temu, jesi bio u pravu do sada u nečemu... Noup, hebiga,nisam ti ja kriv što nemate pojma, poziciju dobiješ po delima, ne po ustima. :kece:

 

Btw, Kina svakog dana sve manji suficit sa ostatkom sveta, čak i sa Amerikom, a zakon još nije ni stupio na snagu. :s_w:

 

Nego shebo si se, on tek kreće da radi, izgleda sa još jednim gratis paketom, onako džabakis :kece:

 

http://www.salon.com...ic_partnership/

 

 

Vojni budžet raste zbog lobija i zbog toga što je to jedina ozbiljna proizvodnja preostala u USA.

 

I Rusi imaju još veći lobi, još od SSSR-a, pa ga duvaju sa $60m. :blush:

 

Džaba batice, kad je kriza, budžet se smanjuje, nema odakle da se poveća. :kece:

 

Ono, stativa. :rant:

 

Nego, kad smo kod toga, još jedno gaženje, ali za razliku od propalih SrBenda, ovaj je od strane još jednog investitora, ovoga puta istog onog koji je tvrdio da je Azija budućnost (Morgan Stanely Investment) :kece: Sad se nešto pronećko. :angry:

 

Broken BRICs :(
Why the Rest Stopped Rising
By Ruchir Sharma
November/December 2012

Over the past several years, the most talked-about trend in the global economy has been the so-called rise of the rest, which saw the economies of many developing countries swiftly converging with those of their more developed peers. The primary engines behind this phenomenon were the four major emerging-market countries, known as the BRICs: Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The world was witnessing a once-in-a-lifetime shift, the argument went, in which the major players in the developing world were catching up to or even surpassing their counterparts in the developed world.

These forecasts typically took the developing world's high growth rates from the middle of the last decade and extended them straight into the future, juxtaposing them against predicted sluggish growth in the United States and other advanced industrial countries. Such exercises supposedly proved that, for example, China was on the verge of overtaking the United States as the world's largest economy-a point that Americans clearly took to heart, as over 50 percent of them, according to a Gallup poll conducted this year, said they think that China is already the world's "leading" economy, even though the U.S. economy is still more than twice as large (and with a per capita income seven times as high).

As with previous straight-line projections of economic trends, however-such as forecasts in the 1980s that Japan would soon be number one economically-later returns are throwing cold water on the extravagant predictions. With the world economy heading for its worst year since 2009, Chinese growth is slowing sharply, from double digits down to seven percent or even less. And the rest of the BRICs are tumbling, too: since 2008, Brazil's annual growth has dropped from 4.5 percent to two percent; Russia's, from seven percent to 3.5 percent; and India's, from nine percent to six percent.

None of this should be surprising, because it is hard to sustain rapid growth for more than a decade. The unusual circumstances of the last decade made it look easy: coming off the crisis-ridden 1990s and fueled by a global flood of easy money, the emerging markets took off in a mass upward swing that made virtually every economy a winner. By 2007, when only three countries in the world suffered negative growth, recessions had all but disappeared from the international scene. But now, there is a lot less foreign money flowing into emerging markets. The global economy is returning to its normal state of churn, with many laggards and just a few winners rising in unexpected places. The implications of this shift are striking, because economic momentum is power, and thus the flow of money to rising stars will reshape the global balance of power.

FOREVER EMERGING

The notion of wide-ranging convergence between the developing and the developed worlds is a myth. Of the roughly 180 countries in the world tracked by the International Monetary Fund, only 35 are developed. The markets of the rest are emerging-and most of them have been emerging for many decades and will continue to do so for many more. The Harvard economist Dani Rodrik captures this reality well. He has shown that before 2000, the performance of the emerging markets as a whole did not converge with that of the developed world at all. In fact, the per capita income gap between the advanced and the developing economies steadily widened from 1950 until 2000. There were a few pockets of countries that did catch up with the West, but they were limited to oil states in the Gulf, the nations of southern Europe after World War II, and the economic "tigers" of East Asia. It was only after 2000 that the emerging markets as a whole started to catch up; nevertheless, as of 2011, the difference in per capita incomes between the rich and the developing nations was back to where it was in the 1950s.

This is not a negative read on emerging markets so much as it is simple historical reality. Over the course of any given decade since 1950, on average, only a third of the emerging markets have been able to grow at an annual rate of five percent or more. Less than one-fourth have kept up that pace for two decades, and one-tenth, for three decades. Only Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Hong Kong have maintained this growth rate for four decades. So even before the current signs of a slowdown in the BRICs, the odds were against Brazil experiencing a full decade of growth above five percent, or Russia, its second in a row.

Meanwhile, scores of emerging markets have failed to gain any momentum for sustained growth, and still others have seen their progress stall after reaching middle-income status. Malaysia and Thailand appeared to be on course to emerge as rich countries until crony capitalism, excessive debts, and overpriced currencies caused the Asian financial meltdown of 1997-98. Their growth has disappointed ever since. In the late 1960s, Burma (now officially called Myanmar), the Philippines, and Sri Lanka were billed as the next Asian tigers, only to falter badly well before they could even reach the middle-class average income of about $5,000 in current dollar terms. Failure to sustain growth has been the general rule, and that rule is likely to reassert itself in the coming decade.

In the opening decade of the twenty-first century, emerging markets became such a celebrated pillar of the global economy that it is easy to forget how new the concept of emerging markets is in the financial world. The first coming of the emerging markets dates to the mid-1980s, when Wall Street started tracking them as a distinct asset class. Initially labeled as "exotic," many emerging-market countries were then opening up their stock markets to foreigners for the first time: Taiwan opened its up in 1991; India, in 1992; South Korea, in 1993; and Russia, in 1995. Foreign investors rushed in, unleashing a 600 percent boom in emerging-market stock prices (measured in dollar terms) between 1987 and 1994. Over this period, the amount of money invested in emerging markets rose from less than one percent to nearly eight percent of the global stock-market total.

This phase ended with the economic crises that struck from Mexico to Turkey between 1994 and 2002. The stock markets of developing countries lost almost half their value and shrank to four percent of the global total. From 1987 to 2002, developing countries' share of global GDP actually fell, from 23 percent to 20 percent. The exception was China, which saw its share double, to 4.5 percent. The story of the hot emerging markets, in other words, was really about one country.

The second coming began with the global boom in 2003, when emerging markets really started to take off as a group. Their share of global GDP began a rapid climb, from 20 percent to the 34 percent that they represent today (attributable in part to the rising value of their currencies), and their share of the global stock-market total rose from less than four percent to more than ten percent. The huge losses suffered during the global financial crash of 2008 were mostly recovered in 2009, but since then, it has been slow going.

The third coming, an era that will be defined by moderate growth in the developing world, the return of the boom-bust cycle, and the breakup of herd behavior on the part of emerging-market countries, is just beginning. Without the easy money and the blue-sky optimism that fueled investment in the last decade, the stock markets of developing countries are likely to deliver more measured and uneven returns. Gains that averaged 37 percent a year between 2003 and 2007 are likely to slow to, at best, ten percent over the coming decade, as earnings growth and exchange-rate values in large emerging markets have limited scope for additional improvement after last decade's strong performance.

PAST ITS SELL-BY DATE

No idea has done more to muddle thinking about the global economy than that of the BRICs. Other than being the largest economies in their respective regions, the big four emerging markets never had much in common. They generate growth in different and often competing ways-Brazil and Russia, for example, are major energy producers that benefit from high energy prices, whereas India, as a major energy consumer, suffers from them. Except in highly unusual circumstances, such as those of the last decade, they are unlikely to grow in unison. China apart, they have limited trade ties with one another, and they have few political or foreign policy interests in common.

A problem with thinking in acronyms is that once one catches on, it tends to lock analysts into a worldview that may soon be outdated. In recent years, Russia's economy and stock market have been among the weakest of the emerging markets, dominated by an oil-rich class of billionaires whose assets equal 20 percent of GDP, by far the largest share held by the superrich in any major economy. Although deeply out of balance, Russia remains a member of the BRICs, if only because the term sounds better with an R. Whether or not pundits continue using the acronym, sensible analysts and investors need to stay flexible; historically, flashy countries that grow at five percent or more for a decade -- such as Venezuela in the 1950s, Pakistan in the 1960s, or Iraq in the 1970s -- are usually tripped up by one threat or another (war, financial crisis, complacency, bad leadership) before they can post a second decade of strong growth.

The current fad in economic forecasting is to project so far into the future that no one will be around to hold you accountable. This approach looks back to, say, the seventeenth century, when China and India accounted for perhaps half of global GDP, and then forward to a coming "Asian century," in which such preeminence is reasserted. In fact, the longest period over which one can find clear patterns in the global economic cycle is around a decade. The typical business cycle lasts about five years, from the bottom of one downturn to the bottom of the next, and most practical investors limit their perspectives to one or two business cycles. Beyond that, forecasts are often rendered obsolete by the unanticipated appearance of new competitors, new political environments, or new technologies. Most CEOs and major investors still limit their strategic visions to three, five, or at most seven years, and they judge results on the same time frame.

THE NEW AND OLD ECONOMIC ORDER

In the decade to come, the United States, Europe, and Japan are likely to grow slowly. Their sluggishness, however, will look less worrisome compared with the even bigger story in the global economy, which will be the three to four percent slowdown in China, which is already under way, with a possibly deeper slowdown in store as the economy continues to mature. China's population is simply too big and aging too quickly for its economy to continue growing as rapidly as it has. With over 50 percent of its people now living in cities, China is nearing what economists call "the Lewis turning point": the point at which a country's surplus labor from rural areas has been largely exhausted. This is the result of both heavy migration to cities over the past two decades and the shrinking work force that the one-child policy has produced. In due time, the sense of many Americans today that Asian juggernauts are swiftly overtaking the U.S. economy will be remembered as one of the country's periodic bouts of paranoia, akin to the hype that accompanied Japan's ascent in the 1980s.

As growth slows in China and in the advanced industrial world, these countries will buy less from their export-driven counterparts, such as Brazil, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, and Taiwan. During the boom of the last decade, the average trade balance in emerging markets nearly tripled as a share of GDP, to six percent. But since 2008, trade has fallen back to its old share of under two percent. Export-driven emerging markets will need to find new ways to achieve strong growth, and investors recognize that many will probably fail to do so: in the first half of 2012, the spread between the value of the best-performing and the value of the worst-performing major emerging stock markets shot up from ten percent to 35 percent. Over the next few years, therefore, the new normal in emerging markets will be much like the old normal of the 1950s and 1960s, when growth averaged around five percent and the race left many behind. This does not imply a reemergence of the 1970s-era Third World, consisting of uniformly underdeveloped nations. Even in those days, some emerging markets, such as South Korea and Taiwan, were starting to boom, but their success was overshadowed by the misery in larger countries, such as India. But it does mean that the economic performance of the emerging-market countries will be highly differentiated.

The uneven rise of the emerging markets will impact global politics in a number of ways. For starters, it will revive the self-confidence of the West and dim the economic and diplomatic glow of recent stars, such as Brazil and Russia (not to mention the petro-dictatorships in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East). One casualty will be the notion that China's success demonstrates the superiority of authoritarian, state-run capitalism. Of the 124 emerging-market countries that have managed to sustain a five percent growth rate for a full decade since 1980, 52 percent were democracies and 48 percent were authoritarian. At least over the short to medium term, what matters is not the type of political system a country has but rather the presence of leaders who understand and can implement the reforms required for growth.

Another casualty will be the notion of the so-called demographic dividend. Because China's boom was driven in part by a large generation of young people entering the work force, consultants now scour census data looking for similar population bulges as an indicator of the next big economic miracle. But such demographic determinism assumes that the resulting workers will have the necessary skills to compete in the global market and that governments will set the right policies to create jobs. In the world of the last decade, when a rising tide lifted all economies, the concept of a demographic dividend briefly made sense. But that world is gone.

The economic role models of recent times will give way to new models or perhaps no models, as growth trajectories splinter off in many directions. In the past, Asian states tended to look to Japan as a paradigm, nations from the Baltics to the Balkans looked to the European Union, and nearly all countries to some extent looked to the United States. But the crisis of 2008 has undermined the credibility of all these role models. Tokyo's recent mistakes have made South Korea, which is still rising as a manufacturing powerhouse, a much more appealing Asian model than Japan. Countries that once were clamoring to enter the eurozone, such as the Czech Republic, Poland, and Turkey, now wonder if they want to join a club with so many members struggling to stay afloat. And as for the United States, the 1990s-era Washington consensus -- which called for poor countries to restrain their spending and liberalize their economies -- is a hard sell when even Washington can't agree to cut its own huge deficit.

Because it is easier to grow rapidly from a low starting point, it makes no sense to compare countries in different income classes. The rare breakout nations will be those that outstrip rivals in their own income class and exceed broad expectations for that class. Such expectations, moreover, will need to come back to earth. The last decade was unusual in terms of the wide scope and rapid pace of global growth, and anyone who counts on that happy situation returning soon is likely to be disappointed.

Among countries with per capita incomes in the $20,000 to $25,000 range, only two have a good chance of matching or exceeding three percent annual growth over the next decade: the Czech Republic and South Korea. Among the large group with average incomes in the $10,000 to $15,000 range, only one country -- Turkey -- has a good shot at matching or exceeding four to five percent growth, although Poland also has a chance. In the $5,000 to $10,000 income class, Thailand seems to be the only country with a real shot at outperforming significantly. To the extent that there will be a new crop of emerging-market stars in the coming years, therefore, it is likely to feature countries whose per capita incomes are under $5,000, such as Indonesia, Nigeria, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and various contenders in East Africa.

Although the world can expect more breakout nations to emerge from the bottom income tier, at the top and the middle, the new global economic order will probably look more like the old one than most observers predict. The rest may continue to rise, but they will rise more slowly and unevenly than many experts are anticipating. And precious few will ever reach the income levels of the developed world.

 

http://www.foreignaf...brics?page=show


 

^_^

 

Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow. :wub:

 

Nego, obožavam Buffeta, drugi najbogatiji čovek sveta, lik rastura čak i Soroša:

 

http://money.cnn.com...oney/index.html

 

U 01:11 tek kida :kece:

 

Nego kad će evro da postane rezervna valuta, koliko čekamo, a evro ode u kolaps, najjače banke ga bacaju u WC šolju :kece:

 

wc-gebruik1.jpg


Edited by JimmyM, 28 December 2012 - 17:08.


#3741 JimmyM

JimmyM
  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 02:39

ISTORIJA!!! B-)

 

 

 

Europe's dream of toppling dollar fades as Asian Tigers dump euro


The share of euros in the world’s rising powers’ reserve holdings has fallen to its lowest level since 2002, dashing hopes that the single currency will soon challenge the US dollar for global primacy.

 International Monetary Fund data show that emerging nations have cut the weighting of EMU bonds in their reserves to 24.7pc from a peak of 30pc at the onset of Europe’s crisis three years ago, with a record drop in the third quarter of 2012.

“They have lost their appetite for peripheral EMU bonds, and some have simply cut Italy and other countries from their benchmarks,” said Jens Nordvig, currency chief at Nomura.

The IMF data also show a record $19bn (£12bn) surge in holdings of sterling by advanced central banks to $98bn, the biggest three-month jump ever recorded. Analysts say this is almost certainly caused by the Swiss National Bank as it takes extreme measures to hold down the franc. The SNB has already bought an estimated $80bn-worth of euro bonds and is increasingly switching to other assets.

“There aren’t many places to go in this 'ugly contest’ if you don’t like the euro, dollar or yen,” said HSBC’s David Bloom.

 

 

http://www.telegraph...-dump-euro.html

 

Ne mogu da verujem, pa ja sam u šoku :o

 

Nego, za to vreme ^_^

 

 

 

 

Foreign central banks' US debt holdings rise - Fed

Foreign central banks' overall holdings of U.S. marketable securities at the Federal Reserve rose in the latest week, data from the U.S. central bank showed on Thursday.

The Fed said its holdings of U.S. securities kept for overseas central banks rose $2.2 billion in the week ended Jan. 2, to stand at $3.240 trillion.

The breakdown of custody holdings showed overseas central banks' holdings of Treasury debt rose by $2.1 billion to stand at $2.9 trillion.

Foreign institutions' holdings of securities issued or guaranteed by the biggest U.S. mortgage financing agencies, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, rose by $187 million to stand at $311.2 billion.

The Fed said its holdings of so-called "other" securities held in custody and reported at face value fell $66 million to stand at $36 billion. These securities include non-marketable U.S. Treasury securities, supranationals, corporate bonds, asset-backed securities and commercial paper.

Overseas central banks, particularly those in Asia, have been huge buyers of U.S. debt in recent years and own more than a quarter of marketable Treasuries. China and Japan are the biggest foreign holders of Treasuries.

 

http://www.reuters.c...E8M202020130103

 

:wub:

 

Glez_US_EURO_AFRICA.jpg

 

:heart:
 



#3742 zg76

zg76
  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 00:42



#3743 JimmyM

JimmyM
  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 06:52

Pff, i moja mala snimila home made video, ali je pevala na njemu ^_^
 
Nego malo ozbiljnije stvari, divan video od pre nedelju dana sa kineske televizije, ima prevod za fanove B-)

China's Economy Crisis Finality.
 

 
+ BONUS :kece:
 

 

The great Euro commercial empire plan has failed
Trusted article source icon
Sunday, January 06, 2013

Rodney Atkinson, an author and academic with a deep knowledge of Germany, has recently produced a feasible insight into the current eurozone crisis on the Free Nations website which I believe should interest those who value this country's future independence.

It is probably generally believed, he says, that Germany has been the main beneficiary of the eurozone. It joined the euro at a low rate for the DM to the euro, giving it the benefit on its exports that a devalued country always has. Furthermore it tightly controlled its own workers wages to make its industry even more competitive. It was in a perfect position to export its high quality cars and machinery to all the other 16 member states of the eurozone. The cash flowed in to German banks and so they were able to lend at cheap rates to eurozone customers. The Greeks enjoyed top of the range BMWs and the Irish and Spanish used the cheap credit to fuel ridiculous housing booms which have left newly built estates standing empty all over those countries.

The hope of turning the eurozone into a greater German home market hit the buffers when the profligate Mediterranean countries could no longer meet their debts.

So it has gone sour big time for Germany and they are now in the position of having to lend more money to their foreign customers just in order to get paid! A crazy situation which the EU political class, notably Angela Merkel, refuse to acknowledge. Maybe that is not quite true. I am sure she understands perfectly well but as she has to win her re-election in September, she is hiding the truth until then.

Mrs Merkel has recently declared that if the euro collapses so does the EU itself. She should know because that collapse may soon be brought about by Germany. Rodney Atkinson argues that Germany will leave the euro because its suffering people will no longer be willing to bail out the countries it once hoped would be its commercial empire. The plan has failed. Furthermore, the close 'lockstep' relationship with France at the heart of the EU is clearly dissolving, thanks to the barmy socialism of its new president. Also, the passing years have diminished the post war guilt which drove Germany to fulfil its national ambitions through the EU.

So we should watch Germany.

Given the spinelessness and disgraceful lack of patriotism of our political, big business and bureaucratic class plus even now, sadly, the apathy of much of the British public, it seems that only that painful collapse will get us out of the EU. With that wasteful regulatory burden lifted from their shoulders the nations of Europe will be able to get back to running their own affairs and, with the lessons of the past 40 years well learned and cooperating only as they see fit, regenerate the diverse civilised and successful Europe we should all be in.

http://www.thisiscor...tail/story.html

 

O la la, bella  :kece:



#3744 alexnikolic

alexnikolic
  • Members
  • 2,741 posts

Posted 13 January 2013 - 14:14

Prvo kao moderator - zamolicu za vise kulture u obracanju drugim korisnicima - ne zelim da banujem.

 

Sada kao korisnik - U velikoj meri se slazem sa JimmyM-em, uz napomenu da ako USD-u bude dobro, bice i EUR-u. To smo videli nedavno kada se desio paradoks na currency trzistu - americka fiscal cliff kriza je uzrokovala da USD ojaca prema EUR-u, umesto da oslabi. Dakle, investitori i pri najvecem potencijalnom riziku beze u USD, ne u EUR, cak i ako kriza dolazi iz USD. Zasto? Pa zato sto su svesni da, ako Amerika uspori, ostatak sveta ce da se srusi - Peter Schiff-ov "decoupling" (Azija da se osloni na svoje potrosace umesto na izvoz i time prestane da bude zavisna od USA) se nije desio niti ce. 

 

Kinezi su vrlo svesni da, ako Ameri sutra odluce da presele proizvodnju drugde ili je vrate kuci - Kina je pukla. Ne kupuju Kinezi americke obveznice sto vole, nego sto su svezni da su zavisni od Amerike. Njihov potrosac kao faktor je i dalje preslab da bi odrzao rast - a ako nemaju rast - imace ogromnu nezaposlenost - sto vodi politickoj nestabilnosti i vrlo nezgodnim scenarijima u Kini. Dakle, to je objasnjenje zasto svima odgovara status quo - stabilnost na zapadu kao prioritet. 

 

O Rusima koji i dalje nisu krenuli korak dalje od prodaje sirovina necu ni trositi reci - to je ekonomija koja zavisi od cene barela nafte - to nije ekonomija, to je smejurija. Gori su od nas. 



#3745 Anduril

Anduril
  • Members
  • 5,593 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 17:12

Ja ne znam zasto ili od kada ali ova tema na pocetku uopste nije bila o Kini, Aziji ili Evropi koja ce sada da razbije Ameriku.

 

Ko je citao ekonomske teme na ovom forumu od ranije  (pre 6-10 godina kada je kriza i jasno predskazana) zna da se radi mnogo vise o opstoj monetarnoj krizi (neoklasicne sinteze i monetarizma), krizi papirnog novca uopste (pa prema tome ne samo dolara), o inflaciji, o niskom rastu uprkos rekordno niskim kamatama na tako dugacak period, o neverovatnom rastu cene zlata, o ogromnim, rastucim dugovima, o teoretskoj nemogucnosti da se plate mnoga buduca obecanja, o slabljenju ekonomije, nezaposlenosti, itd.

 

Dakle, sve to se ostvarilo a i dalje traje do svog ocekivanog matematickog i istorijskog epiloga - truli sistem se odrzava a cenu kao i uvek placa uglavnom srednja klasa sirom sveta.

A infantilne gluposti koje se i dalje daju procitati ovde a i sire su uopstalom i razlog zasto se pristojnim ljudima zgadilo da uopste i postuju na forumu.


Edited by Anduril, 14 January 2013 - 17:15.


#3746 bojant

bojant
  • Members
  • 4,523 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 13:45

http://www.goldseek....argoldchart.php

gold je stagnirao u poslednjih godinu dana

a i srebro je prilicno slicno

 

http://www.silverseek.com/



#3747 Anduril

Anduril
  • Members
  • 5,593 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 09:08

Kad se govori o rezervnim valutama, inflaciji, dugovima i ekonomskim krizama uopste ovog tipa gde smo sada, period od godinu dana je potpuno besmisleno razmatrati.

Radi se prosto o stvarima koje pogadjaju citave generacije, o onome kakav ce vam biti ceo radni vek, kolike poreze cete da placate, kolike kamate na 20g, kolika ce biti inflacija racunajuci i onu skrivenu recimo u ceni nekretnina, zdravstva ili skolovanja, kakva ce biti penzija i ko ce da plati propite racune jer ce neko na kraju uvek platiti i to obicno oni najslabiji, najmanje naoruzani i naivni.

Ovo jednostavno nije tema o kratkorocnim trendovima i o naci prepucavanjima tipa Amerika vs. Rusija ili Kina. To su vise teme za gubljenje vremena, novca i zivota.



#3748 bojant

bojant
  • Members
  • 4,523 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 14:15

Kad se govori o rezervnim valutama, inflaciji, dugovima i ekonomskim krizama uopste ovog tipa gde smo sada, period od godinu dana je potpuno besmisleno razmatrati.

Radi se prosto o stvarima koje pogadjaju citave generacije, o onome kakav ce vam biti ceo radni vek, kolike poreze cete da placate, kolike kamate na 20g, kolika ce biti inflacija racunajuci i onu skrivenu recimo u ceni nekretnina, zdravstva ili skolovanja, kakva ce biti penzija i ko ce da plati propite racune jer ce neko na kraju uvek platiti i to obicno oni najslabiji, najmanje naoruzani i naivni.

Ovo jednostavno nije tema o kratkorocnim trendovima i o naci prepucavanjima tipa Amerika vs. Rusija ili Kina. To su vise teme za gubljenje vremena, novca i zivota.
 

jasno, ali ako gledas dugorocno da li je toliko relevantno gledati samo poslednjih 10 godina, ili mozda treba 20-30 pa cak i 50 godina

 

a na kraju krajeva "In the long run we are all dead" :)


Edited by bojant, 16 January 2013 - 14:15.


#3749 brusli

brusli
  • Members
  • 962 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 14:31

Nemačka vraća u zemlju zlatne rezerve:

 

http://www.blic.rs/V...-zlatne-rezerve

 

Sta je sad ovo, jel to zbog novcica od bilion dolara...


Edited by brusli, 16 January 2013 - 14:32.


#3750 JimmyM

JimmyM
  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 14:50

 koja ce sada da razbije Ameriku.
 

 

Posted 01 November 2007 - 19:41
Dolar nezaustavljivo pada, Evro je pre koji dan dostigao najvisi istorijski nivo,

 
 
:s_w: :hail: :hail: :hail:
 
Pao sam sa stolice :s_w: :thumbs:
 
Batice, samo za tebe:


 
 

Kad se govori o rezervnim valutama, inflaciji, dugovima i ekonomskim krizama uopste ovog tipa gde smo sada, period od godinu dana je potpuno besmisleno razmatrati.

 
Samo da ti javim, nemaš pojma, ne uzimaš se za referencu!
 
I to ja kažem na 5 godina! :kece:
 
Nego da mi nastavimo B-)
 

 

Nemačka zabeležila negativan rast krajem 2012.

Berlin je danas saopštio da se nemačka ekonomija smanjila za pola procenta u poslednja tri meseca 2012.

15.01.2013
Nemačka ekonomija je najsnažnija u Evropi, ali je i ona zabeležila negativan rast u jeku recesije u zemljama evrozone.

Berlin je danas saopštio da se nemačka ekonomija smanjila za pola procenta u poslednja tri meseca 2012., što je najveće smanjenje u gotovo tri godine. Takodje je saopšteno je da ekonomski rast Nemačke u 2012. zbog toga opao na 0,7 odsto.

Nemačka očekuje dalje smanjenje rasta – koji će u 2013. Iznositi samo 0,4 procenta. To je manje od ranijih predvidjanja da će biti zabeležen rast od jedan odsto.

Ekonomija u 17-članoj Evrozoni se smanjila od aprila do septembra prošle godine i predvidjalo se da će se taj trend verovatno nastaviti i u poslednjim mesecima 2012. Oštar ekonomski pad u nekim evropskim zemljama – poput Grčke, Španije i Italije – često je bio uravnotežen jakom Nemačkom ekonomijom.

Medjutim, u četvrtom kvartalu prošle godine, nemački izvoz, uvoz, investicije, kao i potrošnja bili su znatno usporeni.

 

http://www.glasameri...my/1584395.html

 

 


:kece: