MARKET MANIPULATION

[tavi_star]

The Money Masters

 

The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America

 

THE MONEY MASTERS is a 3 1/2 hour non-fiction, historical documentary that traces the origins of the political power structure that rules our nation and the world today. The modern political power structure has its roots in the hidden manipulation and accumulation of gold and other forms of money. The development of fractional reserve banking practices in the 17th century brought to a cunning sophistication the secret techniques initially used by goldsmiths fraudulently to accumulate wealth. With the formation of the privately-owned Bank of England in 1694, the yoke of economic slavery to a privately-owned "central" bank was first forced upon the backs of an entire nation, not removed but only made heavier with the passing of the three centuries to our day. Nation after nation, including America, has fallen prey to this cabal of international central bankers.

 

The success of the central banking scheme developed into a far-reaching plan described by President Clinton's mentor, Georgetown Professor Carroll Quigley, "to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank....sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the levels of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

 

Several short-lived attempts to impose the central banking scheme on the United States were defeated by the patriotic efforts of Presidents Madison, Jefferson, Jackson, Van Buren and Lincoln. But with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, America was firmly lashed to the same yoke, so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the masses a yoke little better than slavery itself. That yoke inevitably grows heavier with ever-compounding interest, and totals over $20 trillion of debt owed by the American people today ($80,000 per American) ultimately to these bankers.

 

This vast accumulation of wealth concentrates immense power and despotic economic domination in the hands of the few central bankers "who are able to govern credit and its allotment, for this reason supplying, so to speak, the life-blood to the entire economic body, and grasping, as it were, in their hands the very soul of the economy so that no one dare breathe against their will." A worldwide tyranny is gradually being imposed, hidden to most, by THE MONEY MASTERS.

 

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Editat Martie 30, 2008 de tavi_star

[tavi_star]

Billions for Bankers - Debts for the People

by Sheldon Emry

 

Contents:

1.Introduction

2.Prologue: Three Types of Conquest

3.The Real Story of Money Control in America

4.Money is "Created", Not Grown or Built

5.Bankers' Depression of the 1930's

6.No Money for Peace, but Plenty for War

7.Power to Coin and Regulate Money

8.How We Lost Control of the Federal Reserve

9.Billions in Interest Owed to Private Banks

10.Manipulating Stocks for Fun and Profit

11.The Tyranny of Compound Interest

12.Our Own Debt is Spiraling into Infinity

13.Gambling Away the American Dream

14.Continuing Cycles of Debt and War

15.Every Citizen Can Be A Stock Holder in America

16.Citizen Control of U.S. Currency

17.Creating a Debt-Free America

18.Controlling Public Debate and Opinion

19.Spread the Word and Do Something to Fix Things

20.QUOTES - FROM PROMINENT PEOPLE

21.WHAT YOU CAN DO

 

10. Manipulating Stocks for Fun and Profit

 

In addition to almost unlimited usury, the bankers have another method of drawing vast

amounts of wealth. The banks who control the money at the top are able to approve or

disapprove large loans to large and successful corporations to the extent that refusal of a

loan will bring about a reduction in the selling price of the corporation's stock.

After depressing the price, the bankers' agents buy large blocks of the company's stock.

Then, if the bank suddenly approves a multi-million dollar loan to the company, the stock

rises and is then sold for a profit. In this manner, billions of dollars are made with which to

buy more stock. This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need

only announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their "discount rate" to send

stocks soaring or crashing at their whim.

Using this method since 1913, the bankers and their agents have purchased secret or

open control of almost every large corporation in America. Using this leverage, they then

force the corporations to borrow huge sums from their banks so that corporate earnings

are siphoned off in the form of interest to the banks. This leaves little as actual "profits"

which can be paid as dividends and explains why banks can reap billions in interest from

corporate loans even when stock prices are depressed. In effect, the bankers get a huge

chunk of the profits, while individual stockholders are left holding the bag.

The millions of working families of America are now indebted to the few thousand banking

families for twice the assessed value of the entire United States. And these Banking

families obtained that debt against us for the cost of paper, ink, and bookkeeping!

 

Later edit:

 

This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need only

announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their "discount rate"

to send stocks soaring or crashing at their whim.

 

And the FOREX also!

Editat Aprilie 2, 2008 de tavi_star

[ener]

as mai da 5 stele acestui topic dar nu pot

[tavi_star]

The Rothschild Bloodline

 

"Give me control of the economics of a country; and I care not who makes her laws."

Amsel Rothschild is reported to have said.

 

Today his descendents meet twice daily in London to dictate to the world what the world price of gold will be.

 

They also dictate what the "Federal Reserve System" will do with America’s finances.

Editat Aprilie 1, 2008 de tavi_star

[Scrat]

nici nu stiu ce-as putea sa mai comentez. incredibil.

[tradelover]

Fain, fain de tot! Genial! Bravo Tavi! (cu majuscula)

 

Tocmai am primit de la GN tzidula saptamanala, care se leaga perfect, iar

cartea recomandata inauntru, well, pare must to read.

Eu m-am apucat de ea deja

 

Garry North Reality Check

Issue 750 May 2, 2008

 

SIEGFRIED & ROY & BERNANKE

 

Siegfried & Roy were one of Las Vegas's most popular

acts until 2003, when Roy Horn, the trainer of big cats,

was attacked by a tiger. He has still not recovered.

 

Siegfried was an illusionist. We call these people

magicians, but the magic they employ is illusion.

 

The more I think of it, the more I see Ben Bernanke as

the replacement for Siegfried & Roy. The show must go on.

 

 

THE ILLUSIONIST

 

The illusionist relies on his ability to get the

audience to look at one thing while he manipulates

something else.

 

The stage illusionist doesn't harm anyone. Any

illusionist who harmed people would be written out of the

guild. That's why the Federal Reserve has never been able

to gain membership, despite its consummate mastery at

getting the audience to look somewhere else than where the

FED is doing the manipulating.

 

On Wednesday, April 30, the Federal Open Market

Committee met to decide if it should announce another

reduction in the target rate for Federal Funds, the rate at

which American banks lend money overnight to each other.

 

Wall Street had predicted that the rate cut would be

minimal: a quarter of a percentage point (25 basis points).

All day, the Dow Jones Industrial Average slowly rose by

145 points. Then, as soon as the FOMC announced its

expected reduction, the market fell. It closed down almost

12 points.

 

In previous sessions, the Dow had soared several

hundred points upon the FOMC's announcement, only to fall

back the next day or by the end of the week. This time,

sellers wasted no time. The shot in the arm didn't work at

all this time.

 

The FOMC published its usual press release. It

admitted what everyone suspects: slow growth ahead.

 

Recent information indicates that economic

activity remains weak. Household and business

spending has been subdued and labor markets have

softened further. Financial markets remain under

considerable stress, and tight credit conditions

and the deepening housing contraction are likely

to weigh on economic growth over the next few

quarters.

 

The FED's approach has always been to accent the

positive. When the positive is barely visible, the FED

emphasizes as much of it as it can.

 

Economic growth never departs entirely in a FED

announcement. Whenever economic growth plays hide and go

seek, the FED announces, "We can see you! You can't hide

from us!"

 

Look at the words in the announcement: "weak,"

"subdued," "softened," "considerable stress." This is

indicative of an economy under pressure, but not in

recession today.

 

Then there is the familiar refrain, which is rarely

absent from any FED announcement.

 

Still, uncertainty about the inflation outlook

remains high. It will be necessary to continue to

monitor inflation developments carefully.

 

Year after year, decade after decade, the FED

continues to monitor price inflation. Price inflation does

not go away. It seems to exist in order to make work for

Federal Reserve statisticians. Entire careers are devoted

to monitoring price inflation. "There's always more where

that came from!" And there almost always is.

 

The key to a successful illusion is the illusionist's

ability to get the audience to focus its attention on

something peripheral. That's why he uses a wand. Or he

may wave his hands in some flashy way. "The action is over

here." No, it isn't. Let me show you how this works.

 

The substantial easing of monetary policy to

date, combined with ongoing measures to foster

market liquidity, should help to promote moderate

growth over time and to mitigate risks to

economic activity.

 

"Yes, sir, watch the easing of monetary policy." They

mean: "Watch our announcement that it's there."

 

I prefer to watch the FED's figures on monetary policy

rather than the FED's official press releases. The FED can

control only one monetary aggregate directly: the monetary

base. It buys, sells, or holds assets that serve as a

legal reserve for the nation's commercial banks.

 

The adjusted monetary base comes closer than any other

monetary aggregate to revealing Federal Reserve policy.

Thus, as the grand master of American illusion, Chairman

Bernanke wants the audience to pay no attention to it.

 

In March, 2007, Congressman Ron Paul sent a letter to

the Federal Reserve asking three questions:

 

How can the money supply increase at a rate three

times that of the monetary base?

 

What is the source of the additional reserves

that do not show up in the monetary base figures?

 

Because this has happened, according to the data,

how does FOMC policy affect the actual money

supply today?

 

Federal Reserve Chairmen do not appreciate these sorts

of direct questions. So, they employ various techniques of

verbal evasion. In his reply of March 28, Chairman

Bernanke adopted an academic variation of Alan Greenspan's

FedSpeak. You can read his reply. It is masterful. It

does not answer the questions, of course. But is surely

lets us see a master illusionist at work.

 

Every reporter in the financial press should read this

letter. They should all press him:

 

What is the function of the monetary base, if not

to control the legal reserves of the banking

system?

 

Then they should ask this question:

 

Can the banking system as a whole create credit

independently of the monetary base?

 

Then they should ask this question:

 

If the banking system can create credit

independently of the monetary base, how can the

Federal Reserve System control monetary policy?

 

They will not do this. Why not? Because (1) they do

not understand money and banking; (2) they do not read my

reports.

 

Without the widespread mystery of central banking, the

illusion could not go on. The best cure for this illusion

is the money and banking textbook by economist Murray

Rothbard, "The Mystery of Banking." You can download it

for free here.

 

http://www.mises.org/Books/mysteryofbanking.pdf

 

Let us return to the FOMC's assertion:

 

The substantial easing of monetary policy to

date, combined with ongoing measures to foster

market liquidity. . . .

 

I ask: "What easing of monetary policy?" Where is the

evidence of such easing? The adjusted monetary base

figures reveal a year-to-year increase of less than 1%.

This is tight money by any post-1932 definition of monetary

policy.

 

Now let us look at the "ongoing measures to foster

market liquidity." These policies are (1) swapping

marketable assets in the FED's portfolio for less

marketable assets in the largest banks and brokerage firms'

portfolios; (2) announcing an implied promise to provide

liquidity -- fiat money -- by announcing reductions in the

FedFunds target rate.

 

The illiquidity in the system comes from the banks'

distrust of each other's solvency. The problem is looming

insolvency, not illiquidity.

 

This leads us to the second aspect of the performance:

the big cats.

 

 

RIDING THE TIGER

 

Roy Horn suffered from an illusion. He thought he was

in charge of his tigers. Most of the time, he seemed to be

in charge. This illusion ended in a spectacular fashion.

 

The trouble with wild animals is that they are wild.

They may cooperate with a trainer for a time. The trainer

provides tasty rewards. For a time, the animals figure

that the treats taste better than the trainer. Then,

without warning, one of them changes its mind.

 

All central bankers go on stage and perform just as

Roy Horn performed. They snap their whips. They develop

entertaining patter. Thy provide the sense of being in

control.

 

They are dealing with wild animals: entrepreneurs.

Entrepreneurs try to forecast future market conditions.

They make money when they forecast correctly. They lose

money when they don't. Unlike central bankers, they put

their money, or their clients' money, where their mouths

are.

 

As capital markets grow more complex, central bankers

are like wild animal trainers who keep adding wild cats to

the line-up. They snap their whips, but all it takes is

one big cat -- or fat cat -- to gobble them up. George

Soros is such a big cat. He called the joint bluffs of the

Bank of England and the Bank of Malaysia in 1992 and made

an estimated $4 billion at their expense.

 

The complexity of today's international capital

markets is beyond the ability of any computer program,

committee, or central banker to understand. Central

bankers call meetings, issue press releases, and announce

non-existent policies, and they expect the markets to fall

in line.

 

One of these days, the chairman of the Federal Reserve

System is going to get mauled. So are all those investors

who put their money where the Chairman's mouth is.

 

The press release also assured us that "The Committee

will continue to monitor economic and financial

developments and will act as needed to promote sustainable

economic growth and price stability." When a press release

includes such meaningless, self-serving bluster as this,

think of Roy Horn on-stage, going "Nice kitty. Nice

kitty."

 

The tiger got a grip on Roy Horn's head and dragged

him around the stage. I predict that someday, the capital

markets are going to grab Ben Bernanke by the beard and

drag him around the stage.

 

 

ILLIQUIDITY OR INSOLVENCY

 

Franklin Sanders says that the Federal Reserve has

only two tools: inflation and blarney. Bernanke has added

another: asset swaps.

 

William Poole, the recently retired president of the

St. Louis Federal Reserve, made this statement before he

retired. "As I have emphasized before, the Federal Reserve

can deal with liquidity pressures but cannot deal with

solvency issues."

 

Under Bernanke, the FED has had to deal with

insolvency issues. He has convinced his peers to adopt a

policy of asset swaps. The Federal Reserve System

exchanges low-risk Treasury debt to struggling large banks

and large financial institutions in exchange for AAA-rated

assets that no one believes are AAA-safe. This keeps the

borrowing institutions from having to reveal on their

accounting sheets that they are holding capital of less

than book value.

 

This practice is legal. It is short-term. It doesn't

yet have answers to these questions:

 

What will happen if the AAA-rated paper doesn't

recover, because the capital markets for these

assets do not recover?

 

How long can these 28-day swaps go on, when the

borrowing institutions must pay interest to the

FED for the swap?

 

What markets will the FED-borrowing institutions

lend to in order to get enough profit to keep

paying the FED?

 

What happens when the FED at last inflates,

Treasury rates rise, and the FED-borrowing

institutions owe higher interest payments to the

FED for the borrowed Treasury debt?

 

The policy can continue for as long as (1) The FED has

Treasury debt to swap (about $750 billion remaining), and

(2) Treasury interest rates remain low.

 

The FED is dealing with insolvency directly. It is

not dealing with illiquidity directly. It has intervened

to convince those banks with more solid balance sheets to

lend overnight to banks with questionable balance sheets.

 

The bankers know the score. They know that American

major banks are on the edge of bankruptcy, just as British

banks are. (This is why all information on which banks are

involved in the Bank of England's $100 billion asset swaps

is locked up for the next 30 years.) They don't want to

lend to these banks.

 

The FED is not supplying the banking system with

liquidity. It is instead providing public band-aids for

banks facing insolvency or at least a contraction of their

lending ability due to reduced balance sheets. The FED is

trying to persuade decision-makers in an illiquid

commercial banking system that the FED stands ready to bail

out any toppling firm whose bankruptcy threatens the entire

payments system with gridlock. This is what Greenspan a

decade ago called cascading cross defaults.

 

Almost ten years ago to the day, Alan Greenspan gave a

speech before the 34th Annual Conference on Bank Structure

and Competition of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. He

warned:

 

To be sure, we should recognize that if we choose

to have the advantages of a leveraged system of

financial intermediaries, the burden of managing

risk in the financial system will not lie with

the private sector alone. As I noted, with

leveraging there will always exist a possibility,

however remote, of a chain reaction, a cascading

sequence of defaults that will culminate in

financial implosion if it proceeds unchecked.

 

That was the threat in 1998. It remains an even

greater threat today. So, how can society deal with this

threat?

 

Only a central bank, with its unlimited power to

create money, can with a high probability thwart

such a process before it becomes destructive.

Hence, central banks will of necessity be drawn

into becoming lenders of last resort.

 

In short, "Nice kitty. Nice kitty."

 

---------------------

 

CONCLUSION

 

We are all riding on the back of a highly leveraged,

debt-ridden tiger. We hope that Chairman Bernanke doesn't

get eaten alive. Why? Because the tiger will maul us

first.

[scalper_bz]

Ei, Tavi, nu mai veni si tu cu astfel de scenarii pesimiste care sa ne faca sa nu mai investim niciun ban in pietele financiare ci doar sa savuram/cumparam carti si articole la baza carora stau autori care au ca tinta cititori ce sunt predispusi la a ramane usor uluiti de scenarii senzationale, iesite din comun si teorii ciudate.Mi-ai adus aminte de un individ care acum cca. doi ani in urma incerca sa ma convinga ca atentatele de la 11 septembrie 2001 au fost, vezi doamne, puse la cale tot de autoritatile americane pentru a avea motiv sa declanseze razboiul(energetic) asupra irak-ului; si chiar reusise sa ma convinga pe moment.Dupa vreo doua ore deja imi venea sa rad.

 

In fond, pietele financiare si, indeosebi cea bursiera la origine raman un mediu transparent,benefic societatii si economiei in general.Si orice investitor cumpatat/conservator poate obtine un randament satisfacator (acum glumesc, bineinteles).

 

Nu stiu daca era nevoie sa postezi atata informatie, orice persoana cu experienta de viata stie foarte bine ca absolut orice domeniu in care se castiga bani e full de escroci si alti concurenti rapace.Forexul nu face exceptie. Ma refer indeosebi la cei care vand cursuri,sau alte informatii de genul "5% fac profit constant, studiaza si ai toate sansele sa devii unul din ei"...

 

Apropo de scenarii din astea iesite din comun: anul trecut cand am vazut ca s-a intarit dolarul in urma acelor miscari gigant de pe forex indeosebi ,am fost ferm convins ca Federal Reserve impreuna cu cateva corporatii financiare americane de top le-au dat o lovitura de zile mari optimistilor pietelor emergente.Cateva luni mai tarziu l-am vazut pe George Bush tinand discurs la tv in incercarea de a calma investitorii.Criza creditelor "era pe bune".Concluzia e ca nici corporatiile mari nu pot evita pierderile cand pietele financiare se prabusesc precum un castel de carti.Ba chiar e mai rau pt. ele ca nu au unde varsa sume f. mari.Manipularea pietelor se cam lasa cu prabusirea sub propria greutate.Voi reveni asupra acestui subiect.SSIF broker cluj bombarda piata cu vesti bune prin februarie si actiunea se prabusea si mai tare.Cine pe cine manipula?

 

 

 

 

Billions for Bankers - Debts for the People

by Sheldon Emry

 

 

10. Manipulating Stocks for Fun and Profit

 

In addition to almost unlimited usury, the bankers have another method of drawing vast

amounts of wealth. The banks who control the money at the top are able to approve or

disapprove large loans to large and successful corporations to the extent that refusal of a

loan will bring about a reduction in the selling price of the corporation's stock.

After depressing the price, the bankers' agents buy large blocks of the company's stock.

Then, if the bank suddenly approves a multi-million dollar loan to the company, the stock

rises and is then sold for a profit. In this manner, billions of dollars are made with which to

buy more stock. This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need

only announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their "discount rate" to send

stocks soaring or crashing at their whim.

Using this method since 1913, the bankers and their agents have purchased secret or

open control of almost every large corporation in America. Using this leverage, they then

force the corporations to borrow huge sums from their banks so that corporate earnings

are siphoned off in the form of interest to the banks. This leaves little as actual "profits"

which can be paid as dividends and explains why banks can reap billions in interest from

corporate loans even when stock prices are depressed. In effect, the bankers get a huge

chunk of the profits, while individual stockholders are left holding the bag.

The millions of working families of America are now indebted to the few thousand banking

families for twice the assessed value of the entire United States. And these Banking

families obtained that debt against us for the cost of paper, ink, and bookkeeping!

 

Later edit:

 

This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need only

announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their "discount rate"

to send stocks soaring or crashing at their whim.

 

And the FOREX also!

Off, unde as gasi si eu niste banci din astea sa cumpar si eu niste actiuni de-alea lor?Si nu de-ale companiilor aflate in dificultate financiara.A?

[Scrat]

nu ma pot abtine... viata e complexa si are multe aspecte.

uite cum sta chestia cu 9/11... desi autoritatile au stabilit varianta oficiala, 11 septembrie este un episod controversat si ipoteza conspirationista nu se poate exclude; exista dovezi foarte serioase. poate nu as fi crezut acest lucru, dar de 5 ani de cind traiesc in USA am vazut, auzit, citit destule lucruri care sa ma puna in garda. nu e deloc de ris.

"big brother" exista si se manifesta din ce in ce mai puternic, in fiecare zi face un pas inainte...

 

Ei, Tavi, nu mai veni si tu cu astfel de scenarii pesimiste care sa ne faca sa nu mai investim niciun ban in pietele financiare ci doar sa savuram/cumparam carti si articole la baza carora stau autori care au ca tinta cititori ce sunt predispusi la a ramane usor uluiti de scenarii senzationale, iesite din comun si teorii ciudate.Mi-ai adus aminte de un individ care acum cca. doi ani in urma incerca sa ma convinga ca atentatele de la 11 septembrie 2001 au fost, vezi doamne, puse la cale tot de autoritatile americane pentru a avea motiv sa declanseze razboiul(energetic) asupra irak-ului; si chiar reusise sa ma convinga pe moment.Dupa vreo doua ore deja imi venea sa rad.

 

In fond, pietele financiare si, indeosebi cea bursiera la origine raman un mediu transparent,benefic societatii si economiei in general.Si orice investitor cumpatat/conservator poate obtine un randament satisfacator (acum glumesc, bineinteles).

 

Nu stiu daca era nevoie sa postezi atata informatie, orice persoana cu experienta de viata stie foarte bine ca absolut orice domeniu in care se castiga bani e full de escroci si alti concurenti rapace.Forexul nu face exceptie. Ma refer indeosebi la cei care vand cursuri,sau alte informatii de genul "5% fac profit constant, studiaza si ai toate sansele sa devii unul din ei"...

 

Apropo de scenarii din astea iesite din comun: anul trecut cand am vazut ca s-a intarit dolarul in urma acelor miscari gigant de pe forex indeosebi ,am fost ferm convins ca Federal Reserve impreuna cu cateva corporatii financiare americane de top le-au dat o lovitura de zile mari optimistilor pietelor emergente.Cateva luni mai tarziu l-am vazut pe George Bush tinand discurs la tv in incercarea de a calma investitorii.Criza creditelor "era pe bune".Concluzia e ca nici corporatiile mari nu pot evita pierderile cand pietele financiare se prabusesc precum un castel de carti.Ba chiar e mai rau pt. ele ca nu au unde varsa sume f. mari.Manipularea pietelor se cam lasa cu prabusirea sub propria greutate.Voi reveni asupra acestui subiect.SSIF broker cluj bombarda piata cu vesti bune prin februarie si actiunea se prabusea si mai tare.Cine pe cine manipula?

Editat Iunie 21, 2008 de Scrat

[tradelover]

Mi-ai adus aminte de un individ care acum cca. doi ani in urma incerca sa ma convinga ca atentatele de la 11 septembrie 2001 au fost, vezi doamne, puse la cale tot de autoritatile americane pentru a avea motiv sa declanseze razboiul(energetic) asupra irak-ului; si chiar reusise sa ma convinga pe moment.Dupa vreo doua ore deja imi venea sa rad.

eu as fi zis asa:

 

Mi-ai adus aminte de un individ care acum cca. doi ani in urma incerca sa ma convinga ca atentatele de la 11 septembrie 2001 NU au fost, vezi doamne, puse la cale tot de autoritatile americane pentru a avea motiv sa declanseze razboiul(energetic) asupra irak-ului; si chiar reusise sa ma convinga pe moment. Dupa vreo doua ore deja imi venea sa rad.

 

vezi tu, parerile sunt impartite...

[andrei_lint]

Nefiind suficient de informat incat sa-mi sustin ceva mai practic ideile, dar pentru ca vreau totusi sa-l "combat" pe scalper_bz si sa continui sa cred in existenta unor posibilitati nelimitate, am si eu cate ceva de zis...

-Economia e facuta de oameni. Oamenii nu sunt perfecti. Deci, economia asta e prin definitie imperfecta. Cine nu ma crede sa se gandeasca la arbitraj (dupa mine gauri in sistem care pot fi exploatate).

-Unii oameni sunt mai destepti ca altii. O adunatura de mai multi oameni destepti au potentialul de a fi mai destepti decat RESTUL. Ori asta inseamna ca grupul asta de oameni destepti poate gasi "gauri". Iar aceste gauri sunt cu atat mai mari cu cat oamenii astia au mai multe resurse (bani).

-Pe langa bani poate exista ca resursa puterea politica. Atat timp cat jumatate+1 oameni dintr-o tara considera ca un anumit om ii reprezinta, cati dintre ei credeti ca il vor asculta? Si avand puterea asta, cati credeti ca il vor asculta cand zice ceva fals? Probabil nu cu mult mai putini.

 

Si in final ceva practic. Ma uitam la PEI pe BVB. Actiunile firmei asteia (de petrol in fond deci cred ca are sediul ceva mai mare dacat un apartament), cu o capitalizare decenta, au crescut intr-o zi vreo 10% ca a cumparat cineva 2 actiuni. Din cateva sute de mii... Unde este rigoarea implacabila aici?

 

In fond, pietele financiare si, indeosebi cea bursiera la origine raman un mediu transparent,benefic societatii si economiei in general.

Departe de tot se afla originea aia... Eu nu simt ca ajut cu nimic SUA ca ii cumpar 1000USD sau UE ca ii cumpar 1000EUR. Nu e deloc benefic pentru ca in loc sa sustii ce ai cumparat vinzi imediat ce nu-ti convine (cum ajuti o companie daca ii vinzi actiunile cand incep sa scada? ma refer la actiuni cumparate anterior).

Editat Iunie 26, 2008 de andrei_lint