George Soros take on the Euro Crisis

rumour

I'm not quite sure of the rules on introducing a topic just by reference to an article. The link provided is from a speech delivered by George Soros yesterday in Italy. Its available at his web site here.

It is as precise and analysis of the euro predicament as I have read. It put's our recent ridiculous referendum into perspective, it highlights Germanys difficult predicament and lays out the future for the peripheries which will now be intrinsically linked to the internal politics of a dominant Germany which is highlighted as being so far removed from the intentions of the 1950's coal and steel treaty designed to make sure no one country dominated.

I have to say I can't fault this article, however I may be predisposed to this opinion. I am interested in opposing views on this subject. Especially on the 3 month window he reckons is available to fix the problem.

superluck

George Soros made a $2 billion bet in December 2011 buying MF Global debt which will mature in December 2012.

Stocks are currently (since Friday) on a downward trajectory until the next round of Quantitative Easing occurs in the US.

QE3 hasn't been announced but some investors/traders have predicted stocks will bottom out in 3 months which is coincidentally the point Germany "runs out of time" according to Soros.

So, all I'm reading here is that Soros wants Germany to backstop indebted states of the Eurozone and if they don't before QE3, there will be major flight of capital into dollar assets.

Outcome is the Euro will weaken and dollar will strengthen.

At the moment both currencies look pretty beaten up and that will get worse until QE3 (assuming it goes ahead at all) happens in September or just before Obamas reelection.

But of course QE3 will do nothing to help the average joe on the street, it only helps people like Soros.

rumour

Thanks, didn't know he had an interest in someone backstopping the Euro. With regard a flight to the dollar I don't think this is going to happen. The information I'm getting is everyones is headed for the Yuan. In the last couple of months there have been numerous developments here.
- Chinese banks get the green light to open branch offices in the U.S.
- Taiwan cut the U.S. dollar out of the middle in its trade with China
- London’s major banks enter into a joint effort with Beijing to make London a major yuan trading center
- Japan and China sign a deal to trade yuan directly, eliminating the U.S. dollar as an intermediary
- Citigroup offering yuan-denominated bank accounts in London.

If QE3 starts this is only accelerated and at best it'll provide a temporary reprieve for the dollar probably as you say for the elections. So I'm not saying your wrong, but at the minute while the china-us developments are unfolding i'm not convinced its the issue that'll trigger problems in 3 months.

rumour

Here is a perspective I picked up this morning.

1)Student loans are a bubble and it has everything to do with "market valuations". Student loan debt interest rates are too low. They're high risk loans in a high risk world, at an interest subsidized by the US government. Bubble. Let's find out; have universities and colleges underwrite their own student loans, without government backing. That'll give them a chance to show us the true value of a student loan for their educational product. Stand back and watch that bubble pop.

2)The logic of the Euro bubble was never that the leaders would eventually "fix it". That was a pipe dream, propagated by self interested people, like George Soros, in order to game the system a bit longer. You can't "fix" bankruptcy with borrowing and you can't fix bad governance with cheap credit. Central planning doesn't work, whether it's done on a small scale or a big one. Matter of fact, it falls apart quicker on a big scale. If Germany relents and decides to try some grand solution, that will quickly become apparent.

3)It was never "inevitable that the market would evolve towards full fiscal integration". It was inevitable that a fully fiat Euro in the hands of fully socialist governments would fail sooner rather than later. Fiscal integration under a failed economic concept will only come in the context of repression and war, not from any market force. Left to its own devices, the market would destroy fiscal integration tomorrow morning.

3)Merkel didn't crush the Euro bubble, central planning did. Eurocrats thought they could impose their will on the "markets". That has never worked and it never will. Their next step will the continuation of this failed scheme, impose more and more government control of their economies, crush the middle class, economic chaos, fascism. Germany should walk away now rather than get blamed for a repeat episode of WWII.

4)Soros' article "fills in a big piece" of the path that will increase his personal wealth and power. It's called talking your book. It has gone viral with a lot of other people who are talking their book too.

oppenheimer1

I am always skeptical of the opinions of market participants, particularly vultures like Soros. As a big player he has the potential to shape the future to an outcome he desires. Ultimately, this means the rest of us lose.

He is a vested interest, take his opinion with an unhealthy helping of salt.

Scofflaw

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I am always skeptical of the opinions of market participants, particularly vultures like Soros. As a big player he has the potential to shape the future to an outcome he desires. Ultimately, this means the rest of us lose.

He is a vested interest, take his opinion with an unhealthy helping of salt.

Taking that a bit further, throughout the crisis the media most people have been following for news is the media associated with the financial centres of London and New York. I somehow doubt there is no agenda involved.

cordially,
Scofflaw

bull_ring

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I am always skeptical of the opinions of market participants, particularly vultures like Soros. As a big player he has the potential to shape the future to an outcome he desires. Ultimately, this means the rest of us lose.

He is a vested interest, take his opinion with an unhealthy helping of salt.

soros ( and his investments ) are in need of a sugar , will the candymen ( bernanke and his counterpart in brussells ) deliver the rush :rolleyes:

rumour

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I am always skeptical of the opinions of market participants, particularly vultures like Soros. As a big player he has the potential to shape the future to an outcome he desires. Ultimately, this means the rest of us lose.

He is a vested interest, take his opinion with an unhealthy helping of salt.

If we acknowledge and agree he has the potential to shape the markets i see no reason to be skeptical. Its a question of whether what he says informs me/you or not. If he wins it does not necessarily mean you and I will loose unless it's a particular ideology your stuck with.
( I do however perceive him in a similar manner as a vulture, but that is not material. There are many who say the same about the Oppenheimer's, especially nikki:rolleyes:)

I prefer to look at how we got here, where we are at now and what is potentially coming. I don't know if I'm 100% behind his version of the past but some elements are true. Where we are at is pretty succinct although I really don't get where the 3 months comes from. As for what potentially lies down the road I don't think I agree with him.

I think his synopsis of Germanys predicament is quite succinct and I would suggest the outcome will be a more dominant Germany not because it is the desired or even intended outcome but because it is the politically expedient outcome. The examples are there from Spain France Greece and Ireland, Politicians always choose the path of least resistance. Germany will be no different.
I don't think the outcome will be as Soros wants.

However when Germany becomes the dominant player in Europe and starts to impose it's will as it will have too, how then will peripheral Europe react?

rumour

Scofflaw wrote: »

Taking that a bit further, throughout the crisis the media most people have been following for news is the media associated with the financial centres of London and New York. I somehow doubt there is no agenda involved.

cordially,
Scofflaw

If you perceive an agenda, I suggest you look at who is benefitting. As far as I can see the euro crisis serves no one except the private company of the federal reserve which should have its head on a block at the minute for printing money.

Apparently in response to sanctions Iran is to commence trading oil in gold with China and Russia.

I think this is the issue that no-one is reporting and will dictate our futures. This is what Sadam tried to do with France and Russia(albeit in Euro's) before he was invaded to find those 'WMD' he was supposedly hiding.

Curiously Israel took delivery of 3 nuclear armed submarines at the weekend manufactured in Germany of all places.

Alternatively you could read the reputable Irish Times for an agenda free analysis of the news that will affect the life and times of the Irish Civil Service.

Scofflaw

rumour wrote: »

If you perceive an agenda, I suggest you look at who is benefitting. As far as I can see the euro crisis serves no one except the private company of the federal reserve which should have its head on a block at the minute for printing money.

Apparently in response to sanctions Iran is to commence trading oil in gold with China and Russia.

I think this is the issue that no-one is reporting and will dictate our futures. This is what Sadam tried to do with France and Russia(albeit in Euro's) before he was invaded to find those 'WMD' he was supposedly hiding.

Curiously Israel took delivery of 3 nuclear armed submarines at the weekend manufactured in Germany of all places.

Alternatively you could read the reputable Irish Times for an agenda free analysis of the news that will affect the life and times of the Irish Civil Service.

It's worth drawing a clear line between a media agenda, which relates to interpretation of the "euro crisis", and any idea that the "euro crisis" is itself engineered to serve an agenda. The latter we'll leave to the CT forum.

(The former, on the other hand, is something implied even by the term "euro crisis". What exactly is the "euro crisis", as opposed to the response of the eurozone to the global crisis?)

One thing we cannot expect the financial media to come out with is the narrative that what's needed is regulation of the financial sector.

cordially,
Scofflaw

superluck

Scofflaw wrote:

It's worth drawing a clear line between a media agenda, which relates to interpretation of the "euro crisis", and any idea that the "euro crisis" is itself engineered to serve an agenda. The latter we'll leave to the CT forum.

Why not just move everything you disagree with into the CT forum?

CT forum is the joke of this site and constantly used to smear a poster, if I were rumour I'd find your reponse pretty insulting but because you're a moderator, you can do as you please.

To be fair, who else would want to moderate on this site? Most people have a life.

Did you enjoy that?

What's really strange is you will find some extremely cogent academics that argue there is an agenda and yet according to you, they're all just part of the CT club -- nutjobs.

Please explain this riddle for me, Scofflaw.

The US central bank (Federal Reserve) is lending money to private banks in America and abroad at between 0 and 0.5% interest rate. Those private banks then invest the money overseas in developing countries or opt to buy US Treasury bonds at 2.5% interest...

Yes, the same private banks that borrow from the US central bank at 0% can get a 2.5% return on a US treasury bond.

How do they manage to get away with that?

Are you trying to tell me private banks aren't running the show?
Are you telling me extremely wealthy people don't have an agenda?

Scofflaw

superluck wrote: »

Why not just move everything you disagree with into the CT forum?

CT forum is the joke of this site and constantly used to smear a poster, if I were rumour I'd find your reponse pretty insulting but because you're a moderator, you can do as you please.

To be fair, who else would want to moderate on this site? Most people have a life.

Did you enjoy that?

What's really strange is you will find some extremely cogent academics that argue there is an agenda and yet according to you, they're all just part of the CT club -- nutjobs.

Please explain this riddle for me, Scofflaw.

The US central bank (Federal Reserve) is lending money to private banks in America and abroad at between 0 and 0.5% interest rate. Those private banks then invest the money overseas in developing countries or opt to buy US Treasury bonds at 2.5% interest...

Yes, the same private banks that borrow from the US central bank at 0% can get a 2.5% return on a US treasury bond.

How do they manage to get away with that?

Are you trying to tell me private banks aren't running the show?
Are you telling me extremely wealthy people don't have an agenda?

The distinction between the CT forum and Politics is that the Politics forum doesn't allow evidence-free assertions of shadowy conspiracies. A reasonable case for an agenda visible in attributable media is fine, obviously, while the claim that Goldman Sachs covertly engineer global crises is usually not, because it is usually supported by "evidence" of the most tenuous and tendentious kind.

It also doesn't allow comments on moderation in threads other than those made available specifically for those purposes, for reasons explained in the Charter and which apply throughout Boards. 3 day ban.

In answer to your question, no, I don't enjoy it. I'd much rather discussions could be held without people regularly mistaking paranoid fantasies for fact, unwelcome truth for bullying, and the requirement to stick to minimal rules for oppression.

moderately,
Scofflaw

rumour

Scofflaw wrote: »

(The former, on the other hand, is something implied even by the term "euro crisis". What exactly is the "euro crisis", as opposed to the response of the eurozone to the global crisis?)

Very good question which I'd guess you already have a developed answer for. For me, Fiat money is the crisis and relates to both Euro & global crisis.
As a matter of interest or even by way of example, how many barrels of oil do you think Iran will trade for an ounce of gold? Will it be the $$ value in gold?

Scofflaw wrote: »

One thing we cannot expect the financial media to come out with is the narrative that what's needed is regulation of the financial sector.

Well even you must see the conundrum here, lets be regulated by guys who owe us money and want to borrow from us? And at the same time Obama has delivered QE2 with QE3 imminent before or after the election no matter who gets elected. Who running the show?

oscarBravo

rumour wrote: »

Well even you must see the conundrum here, lets be regulated by guys who owe us money and want to borrow from us?

Financial regulators borrow money?

rumour

oscarBravo wrote: »

Financial regulators borrow money?

:rolleyes:who pays for the regulators?

djpbarry

rumour wrote: »

:rolleyes:who pays for the regulators?

Lending to someone is not the same as paying for their services.