Thursday, April 1, 2010

Can Asbestos Give Headaches

When advertising s'autoparodie


Right now (or very recently) spend on our screens 2 series of TV commercials for products Brand Locator Leclerc and the Renault Megane. Their common point is their ambition to make fun of stereotypical advertising that is often encountered to our small screen. This is an interesting practice to stand out from the competition but also very dangerous because these marks must be exemplary in terms of advertising, but Leclerc and Renault have not really used (unless I am mistaken) do in advertising cliché. On

Leclerc, they used to do commercials and here they are slightly offset no exception to the rule by criticizing the advertising practices of competing brands.




As for Renault, after successful commercials for the new Twingo, the brand continues to use humor in diverting the "classic" TV advertising, demonstration of sanitary napkin, the efficiency of household products or the glamorous advertisements for perfume.




Then I discovered this pub foreign to an American brand of tampons, which denigrates the spots of the competitors and their photos, at least I do not know s it is real extracts because I am not Specialist U.S. stamps. On the mark, U By Kotex, she also used to do commercials rather original, including some with a beaver .




Another example is finally one of the UK optician Specsavers, who recently parodied an advertisement for the deodorant Axe and previously parodied an advertisement for Barclays Bank . But in these two examples, the parody is more a nod to the spots that marked the spirits rather that criticism, in order to generate buzz.



Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Bulma In The Android Saga

Money, its circulation, its disorders

currency, its role, its origin, its dysfunctions.

This post will consist of three parts: the basic vocabulary, the origin and role of money, mistakes to his "good use"

The "currency" as any human creation can be both good and bad. Before we look at the qualities that "should" have a currency, we will first give some definitions. The vocabulary

monetary
Everyone uses in his everyday life, in one form or another, " payment " serving all market exchanges of goods and services: when it does not pay a bill, the amount is known in advance, will be the traditional expression: "How I owe you? "(Meaning" to resolve what I just buy ").

Nowadays, how to resolve this as well due to free themselves of debt - immediate or more distant - essentially takes two forms: "species" or "other."

The " species," or " fiat money", that Anglo-Saxons call "currency" are made up of notes and coins.
The other form of payment is called bank money "and is met by the use of a checkbook, bank card, or a transfer order.

The "species" are also called hand currency (coin pocket in Canada), since it passes from hand to hand (or pocket to another).

The use of "money", also known as book currency in Canada is best served by transferring the sum involved a bank account to another. When
bank accounts involve businesses or individuals, it is called bank money "bank" so is it the account opened by PSA with the BNP, or the account opened by Mr Smith with Societe Generale.
When bank accounts are those opened (necessarily) by commercial banks (or second-tier banks) with the Central Bank (or prime bank), it is called bank money "central" : thus account for opened by Crédit Agricole from the ECB (European Central Bank)
The currency used as payment by companies or individuals, whether in cash or bank money (bank) is called simply "money" or "money money" ("money" in Anglo-Saxon), or, if should be more explicit and precise measure of money as M1.

The monetary base, or base money, is sometimes symbolized by "M0". It consists of both cash flow and accounts that financial institutions are required to be opened with the central bank. Paper money, which constitutes the bulk of "fiat money" (the coins, or coins, representing less than 1% of total currency in circulation) is issued by the central bank: in Europe by the ECB. The monetary base is also used por exchanges between banks, when the net balance of interbank compensation claims it. Thus, if the account transfers to the BNP Societe Generale are more important on any given day, as in the other direction, the balance can not be settled in central bank money.

In summary, there are two kinds of currency :
currency 'central', which takes two forms, as "trustee" - the species, and the entry form (the accounts that financial institutions, including banks, are required to have with the Central Bank, said Senior)
deposit money banks (which appears on the accounts of individuals and businesses with commercial banks, also known as second-tier banks)
To fix ideas, in the euro area, the Central currency (M0) was in November 2009 of about 1.1 trillion (750 billion in cash). The M1 money was 4.462 trillion, the ratio M1/espèces , or "money multiplier" is 5.95 of the lever "book money (M1 fewer species) on species' is therefore 4.95.

M1/espèces ratio is often considered an expression of " monetary power" of banks.

The origin of the currency and money creation:

contemporary banks play two roles in managing the currency.
They serve first as an intermediary when they simply manage the existing currency, in an accounting role cash flows.
They also have a role of "money creation", when granting new Credits: sometimes we talk about this -currency debt . Let us clarify this second role, that raises the most questions. If

Dupont borrows a certain sum, 20 000 euros for finance, for example, buying a new car, instead of having these 20 000 to the dealer concerned, he will have the money to his bank. But Smith can also borrow EUR 50 000 for starting a business, and finance and its future investments in hardware, while paying a certain fee, while waiting to sell future products or services.

In both cases, Smith will sign an acknowledgment of debt Against a certain amount of money available to him, an amount that will be found initially in its bank account, also known as, unfortunately, demand deposit, or DAV.

This "deposit" does not correspond to any real deposit or its part or on the part of the bank, but a simple expenditure authority created by the bank concerned.

Since, in general, the loans granted (and created) are not converted into "cash", but are used as a scriptural currency "account", which circulates a bank account to another, banks are not really obliged to keep a "ton" of species. We will revisit this point later.

Let's just say that banks, for regulatory reasons or as a precaution, seek to maintain a certain ratio - or monetary lever - between what they lend "ex nihilo" and the species they have in deposit accounts equity, or on account of their clients. Historically, since September 1997, this lever has varied in the Euro zone between 3.92 and 8.35 (February 2002) to oscillate from one year between 4.80 and 5.10 (4.95 in November 2009). This lever

Monetary almost 5 means concretely that deposit money banks is currently about five times more abundant than the cash in circulation .
It also means that if each required to empty his bank account, the DAV, demanding that the withdrawal is made in cash, it would obviously be impossible for banks to do so. But as 95% of the value of trade exchanges is done using the deposit money bank, it would really exceptional for such a "cash run" takes place.

To understand how commercial banks were able to obtain such authority, the create, within certain limits, a currency considered almost as good, and often much more convenient , the kind issued by the Central Bank, we will do a brief history.

A little history: The first banks
"modern" - some based there are nearly 4 centuries - were formed from deposits of gold (or other precious metals) deposits to them entrusted by applicants who would not bother with this metal during their travels.

Thus, against the deposit of a certain quantity of gold, the banker Goldsmith gave his filing, Luke, a receipt stating the amount received on deposit. This receipt could "fly" and used to recover the same amount of gold deposited with a colleague Rockfailer at the other end of the country by another applicant.
As it was a receipt that could be countersigned by Luke, and be entrusted to John, this receipt "bearer" could serve to John to get him also that gold is at Goldsmith is among Rockfailer. The exchange between Luke and John may be made during a transaction, received payment method can be regarded as money.
Especially since this deposit receipt were 2 other qualities, which typically sought in a currency: it is a unit of account or "standard value" (hence the term "standard gold ") is also a reserve value.
From the moment these receipts began to pass from hand to hand and being used as means of payment, bankers have found they had rarely "draw" on their gold stocks, and that the real "Movements or" not concerned, on average between 5 and 10% of the total quantity of gold and stored.

bankers, so that their gold - or rather gold from their depositors - not "sleep" as well, began to make something other than receipts from applicants: it was the first "banknotes" ancestors of the bank money.
For these "pieces of paper" - which were based on more than a game of "real gold" - the bank Goldsmith stated that his client Bruce could have a certain amount of gold, to honor any commitment Goldsmith withdrawal not exceeding this amount. Thus, with a stock of gold to one million dollars, the bank could lend Goldsmith 5, 10 sometimes 20 times this stock, banking on the fact that the banknotes issued longer serve as means of payment as a means bank withdrawal.

legal limits, economic and ethical operation of the current monetary.
Can we call these scam loans, as banks, they are from 2 or 3 centuries or the present time, lend money they do not.
On a personal point of view, it is certain that a particular client, as important it is, is not likely to bankrupt a particular bank - even if, in a novel by Alexandre Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo had managed to ruin the banker Danglars that way.
On a collective, a purely ethical standpoint, he is sure this is a blatant scam , since the community can not, generally, all suddenly convert bank money in cash. From an economic standpoint, it is more debatable, it depends of course on the use of loans and the interest rates offered to the borrowers. It 'important to remember that money it is scriptural or "trustee" has value only if there is concrete in front of wealth, goods and services that money can buy. If nobody does, the currency has no value, and having money "in reserve" will be meaningless. From a legal standpoint, this power is perfectly legal.

banks and bankers should take into consideration an economic obligation, if not moral, if their loans are used for common good and development of the economy, we can "forget" the fact that their loans' s akin to a scam, accepted or granted by regulators currencies, the Central Bank itself is meant to serve the community.
Otherwise, the practices of banks are more like the cavalry "to Madoff" or "Fonzi **" and should be punished as such.

Before discussing possible malfunctions money, this is occasional, probable, even certain, let us on the "formal" that exists between the quantity of bank money issued by commercial banks, and the amount of currency 'central "Issued by the monetary authorities, the Central Bank.

Central banks (BC), first floor of the pyramid money issue, that is created in two forms, the monetary base, or base money (see: http://www.skyminds.net/economie -et-sociologie/les-activites-economiques-et-leur-cadre-social/le-financement-de-leconomie /:
- a) cash, only to be legal tender, that money that banks prefer to receive only give (since their leverage of money creation, their monetary power, depends in part): the image is that of "printing money".
-b) scriptural base money, or electronic, that only exists in the computer files of the BC and assigned to the accounts of financial institutions. These accounts are part of what we call reserve requirements of commercial banks (see article 19.1 of the Statute of the ESCB). The reserve ratio is set at 2% for the euro area against 10 to 12% currently in China.

The scriptural money creation, which is sometimes shown as " liquidity" (in reverse, the destruction of monetary base is a "liquidity absorbing" by Central Bank) is as follows.

BC buys securities (like bonds or Treasury bills) using the central bank money, crediting much of the acquiring banks, improving bank liquidity. Conversely if the central bank wants to limit bank liquidity - and therefore the "monetary power" of commercial banks - it sells securities to banks in order to perform a drain on their reserves of money.

Now suppose that Societe Generale decided to grant 100 million euros in total to upgrade one of its refineries. If the Company General has already reached its required reserve ratio of 2%, it will - or should, because it is not always so strict - to grant the loan, to "refinance" with the Central Bank (or from one of his fellow bankers) of 2 million in "reserve money".

The total money supply will have increased by 100 million euros (if BC has occurred, it will be an increase of 98 million deposit money bank and $ 2 million base money: otherwise, if the company s General ' is re-financed on the interbank market, the 100 million will be only the bank money transfer).

Other rules or obligations 'prudential' limit the monetary power of banks
Banks must also comply with more or less rigor, other ratios: liquidity ratio - to avoid the "cash run" that is to say, if too many customers to withdraw cash at the same time - the solvency ratio (measuring the outstanding loans, that is to say the amount of loans, relative to their capital )

Bale agreements prohibit banks are expected to have a solvency ratio, or "tier" less than 8% (that is to say that the outstanding loans should not be more than 12.5 higher than equity). The BNP is far beyond these "rules", since at 31 December 2009, its total debt amounted to 1977 billion - exceeds the total GDP of Fance ... - Or 24.6 times the amount of capital which amounted to 80 billion euros (4.1% of total debt).

Deficiencies of such a system are numerous: they are mainly based on the choices that can make or not make the commercial banks by providing their credit, and opportunities and the desire to control the Central Bank vis-à-vis commercial banks.
banks unwilling to lend to firms or persons insolvent or whose debt will be paid by creditworthy entities. In fact, if the interest rate that drives hoped lending by banks, and even if the loans are made "from scratch", where a borrower is declared insolvent, the claim is not honored - if it is recognized such, will reduce the "low balance", that is to say, the capital of the bank, and thus will impact the ratio of the Resources Required said bank, and, more indirectly, its liquidity ratio: unless, of course, trying out the bad loans from its balance sheet before it needs to "accountability".

scriptural money creation by banks, if it exists, is not without limits. When the economic environment is relatively favorable when there is no major crises, it also does not really affect this power of creation. Thus no one really protested when, in 1973, the state debts with commercial banks have become producers of interest to them : Perhaps because the dominant economic thinking argued that if the state had to pay for debt, it think twice before considering any budget deficit.

Worse yet, few people at the time, protested against the adoption in 1992 of the Maastricht Treaty, which prohibits, inter alia, a state of the eurozone to refinance themselves directly with Central Bank: a montage where bizarre and very costly for a state that wants to borrow. The ECB lends
currently less than 1% for commercial banks, which will lend themselves state or government to 4 or 5%. When you think that if France, since 1973, had borrowed at rates "ethics" - that is to say, the growth rate adjusted for inflation - government debt is only half that it is.
If the state had borrowed without interest, his debt had been reduced to zero in late 2007. In fact, all taxes on income is the same order of magnitude as what France pays as interest on commercial banks.

In times of crisis, especially when we know that since 2007-2008 the original the current crisis is both a financial and banking - financial speculation on stocks, bonds and derivatives and the securitization of bad loans, focusing mainly on real estate market - the relative impunity enjoyed by the banks may be questioned.

It is then increasingly tempted to question the true value of banks. In fact, in a crisis of under-production and rising unemployment, if the currency is still essential to the functioning of a modern economy, the fact that monetary mechanisms are largely in the hands of banks, which therefore have the power exorbitant guide decisions by providing industrial and commercial or not new money is increasingly questioned.

Faced with this power that may appear unfair, even outrageous, two extremes are possible: the denial of one side or the search for solutions more or less "revolutionary" leading to a deep currency reform.

Denial will result in the desperate attempt of some to deny the obvious - that the bank money does exist and is used in 95% of trade - by dismissing as foolish or stupid simple idea of a money creation by commercial banks: hence the impossibility in this case to seek a "bank" to the current crisis, and therefore the choice, either intentionally or not, to guide the search for solutions to other ways banking supervision.

Among those who recognize the power "creationist" banks, and want to limit or even remove, some argue the group's proposals " 100% money , following Allais. The currency
exist only in its central form (cash or "cashless") and that would be emitted by the central bank, the Central Bank.

This solution and others - including those of social credit, the credit unions, money or stamped "slush" will be described in future posts.
It is clear that in the current context where there is both an unmet need, spare production capacity, and therefore a real production of real wealth far below potential output, the currency, which is justified really - and that has real value - that in relation to these riches, not playing its role effectively Economic .

be noted that in the euro area, money M1 increased by 12.5% in 2009, while GDP has remained stable, and that credit to the economy have not changed (net: zero) . Where did this new currency, what new "bubble" should we expect, if nothing is done?

BL

** Thanks to the commentator who noticed my slip, noting that it was Ponzi, not Fonzi, we had this scam: I retain, however, slip through honesty and also because the commentary is fun.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Small Engine Reducers

On the issue of debts

On the question of debts and the possibilities of escape ...

day long, and media, we hear statements prodigious debts, after talking two years ago of over-indebtedness associated more particularly subprime.


But what is it really, and we are, collectively and individually, condemned by this curse , over-indebtedness?

Who are these debtors, and why this heap of debt?

In this post, after speaking of debtors, creditors, we will talk about (not creditors, not debtors ;-)), Then we will talk about debt, and finally we will outline some possible "out of debt."

A-Debtors.

They are known, it is just everyone.

First, there are statements, not just those called, very hard, the PIGS (Portugal, Ireland or Italy, Greece and Spain): can add the USA, UK, France, Japan and lots of other pays.Ensuite some companies.

Finally, many individuals, either because they were caught by a frenzy of consumption or simply because they do not earn enough to live. Or certain individuals or organizations who thought they could win on the Exchange or on the financial markets for sure, and have speculated with the money they did not have.

B-Creditors
Prior to cite just a little background on the concept of money and currency. When we talk about money, it sometimes confuses two concepts.

The first notion is the silver-liquid, which we now call species: these are the notes and coins in circulation in a given area. In the eurozone, the euro banknotes will be (Five euros to 500 euros, or coins (a penny to a few euros). These "species" are released by the central bank (in euro zone, the ECB).

The second notion is that of bank money (bank), the amount of which is included in checking accounts for individuals or businesses in the accounts of commercial banks.

There is a third "currency," central bank money , which corresponds to the accounts that banks are required to be opened with the central bank, or its annexes (Bank of France for France)
The sum
"species" plus "bank money (bank is called, by definition, monetary aggregate M1, or money (narrow). Every element of M1 can be used safely as a" means of payment ".
The species are used for "small" amounts of up to 1500 or 2000 euros. scriptural money - through tools such as credit card, checks, transfers, ... - is increasingly used as 95% of the value of transactions carried out in this way.

Financial institutions nonbank merely to transit - a fee for their services, of course - any surplus money (cash or money) to those who have "too much" (they are called cleverly agents to financing capabilities' - our ants) to those who do not have enough ("agents in financing needs - our cicadas.

If only our creditors were" ants ", there would never needs Increasing the amount of money in circulation . The "Ants" lend to the cicadas, or through financial institutions or directly.

This is not, fortunately or unfortunately: from one year to another, M1 increases much faster than real wealth such that wealth can be synthesized by GDP.

In fact, most of the currency in circulation (85% of M1, against only 15% for species) corresponds to claims (views of the bank) or indebtedness (viewpoint of borrowers) made or due for months or years.

banks are very large creditors, even though they have created money , creation based only on promises of repayment of debentures. These debts, in the current monetary system, will never be fully repaid.

Suppose, in fact, that starting from a given situation, banks lend 100 billion euros to an agent cheap financing needs "- a very large grasshopper.
By taking a "small" interest rate, eg 5%, the cicada will make (if it repays in one year): 105 billion. Where could well come from the $ 5 billion more?
There are only two possible sources - if we neglect the international trade. The source

"central bank", which should issue new tickets, but she can not do that going into debt itself: where additional debt. Or
source "commercial banks" themselves, who can do that by granting new loans.

In both cases, there is full refund (principal plus interest) there must have increased the money supply M1 (sight deposits plus cash). If the party

GDP of 100 billion funded by these did not increase by 5%, the inevitable can take two forms (not to mention the event the borrower, the grasshopper, go bankrupt):
a) growth of money supply , larger than that of GDP, leading to inflationary trends
b) the share of "pie" of banks will increase: the financial and banking sector - the sector "capitalist" - is growing at the expense of the real sector of the economy (firms and households' non-pensioners)


The problem seems more complicated if we bring in international trade. But if one sees the world as a single economic system, the issue of debt remains the same, the only difference is that now there are several currencies. But it is always the commercial banks create bank money, which in all countries is much larger than the species 'national'.


C-Debt is inevitable?

Debts "provisional" are probably inevitable for many reasons, including the difference of timing between the processes of production and consumption, even if GDP is stable (zero growth).

may be needed to "make credit "- which is not the same thing to advance money - that is to say a loan" money "- when the expected cash flow of periodicals, but that one is obliged to consume, or buy other, more frequently.

If the interest rate would be "ethical", that is to say where the newly created money (by money lending) or the savings already made would be provided at the same rate as Growth of GDP, any debt (provisional) could be refunded without problems.

Thus, if we borrow $ 10 billion to 3%, and if our growth rate is 3%, we pay off the principal, $ 10 billion, plus interest: $ 300 million. Everyone is happy. Those who have produced "more", those who have lent (or savings, or the newly created money, and canceled by the refund)

Simpler still: zero growth, we borrow at 0%, it repay principal only.

D - Faced with the current debts, is there a solution?

If you do not change the current monetary system, it no alternatives to conventional solutions catastrophic.

More and more money will be paid to the most creditworthy countries, or more powerful politically, economically or militarily. The others will be put on the wagon, as "PIGS". But even this can not go on indefinitely. The only way to repay the interim, is to take money from others. This can be

by hyperinflation: pensioners being for a time, dispossessed: they lend to 10% as prices increase by 15%, money supply by 20%. Small annuitants lose, banks, which recreate money they need, do not risk much.

The deteriorating economic situation, some companies, yet "profitable" with an interest rate of "ethics" of 2%, are unable to repay at a rate of 5%. They fail, and this aggravates the situation of our "short-sighted" - not always responsible for their over-consumption "or their" under-saving, especially when they become unemployed in sectors such as automotive or agro-food sector.

No "method" can not function, incidentally, without collateral damage increasingly important, since Overall, the current debts can never be fully repaid with the current system.

What should he do so.
Two tracks, one on an urgent basis, the other taking a little longer.

a) In emergency
: separate debts "public" private debt (corporate and individuals) to be able to treat them differently.
For public debts (or cancel them altogether - method "to the 1917 Bolshevik - or declare obsolete the past interests of the public debt - is central issue money - without interest - An amount equal to accumulated debts). For
private debts, again treated differently corporate debt and the debts of individuals.
For individuals, cancel the debts of heavily indebted, when they are in a precarious situation, and that these debts have been subscribed at rates "usurious" rates to higher ethics, adjusted for inflation and possibly one or two points. This usury rate in the current context (zero growth, 2% inflation) would be in France 4%, against 18 or 20% commonly practiced.

For corporate debt, those who watch correspond to business "for the collective good, environmentally friendly, and others. Fully recover debts to the former, or refinance by issuing central bank monetary (possibly by rendering these new resources at a rate "ethics"). For others, encouraging them to refinance themselves on the savings market, again limiting the rate to a non-usurious (ethics = growth plus inflation)

noted that much of these measures (especially the issuing central bank's monetary authorities led to pure cover public debt) is prohibited by the Maastricht Treaty and the Treaty of Lisbon . It will therefore submit the treaties in question, see out of the eurozone for France, perhaps even of the European Union. But such a threat may be enough to think it is right to do so without going to such extremes.

Denouncing the public debt, which is subscribed to 55% by "non residents" can also cause a scandal, but I do not see Chinese tanks, bombers or U.S. nomads Saudi intervene in this case, especially since they have similar problems at home.
The question is surendettemnt World and 280 billion surplus in China are nothing compared to the 50 or 60 trillion global debt. I think many countries would love the position that France could take in this area.


b) In the longer term


reform or revolution money are essential, outside and in addition to emergency measures discussed further above.

I leave because of the principle - or the premise - following: true wealth (at least in terms of hardware) is all that we can produce and consume . Currency, as cash or as bank money, is a means.

If this plea is perverted, if real wealth is much lower than the potential wealth - the fact that many are unused production capacity, both men and machines - then a monetary reform is essential.

This is not to want to enact any price growth, some productions are useless, even dangerous. But this has nothing to do with monetary problems: money created by banks is not created based on environmental or ethical considerations, but for the anticipated profit of banks. We must prevent banks adjust production according to their interests, whereas it is the general interest must prevail.

For this I only see three tracks 'global' possible, which can be tracked independently, but also complementary way .

The money trail or social credit - one of Douglas and Louis Even, the pioneers of social credit. The track
mutual credit : there are no additional issue of currency, but simply funds exchanged between the different economic agents, sometimes cicadas, ants sometimes
Runway suggested by Maurice Allais : commercial banks no longer have the right to create bank money ("100% money), are separated establishing "financial intermediaries" banks only passing management (accounting) money from cash management "

In next posts will attempt to take stock of these different tracks and on the track of specific currencies, complementary to use narrower, more specialized.

Comments Friendly, BL