Share good ideas and conversation.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
EnumClass's profile

following: 1
followed tags: 4
followed domains: 1
badges given: 0 of 0
member for: 793 days
style: normal

tags used

comments 0

    ... a central bank should NEVER be betting that the firms they're moderating currency for are gonna suffer under your control.

When the central bank decides to raise interest rates, it does so by selling bonds in order to ensure their price falls. That might appear to be a 'malevolent' act, forcing the price down and (deliberately) making it difficult for money creation (borrowing) to happen. Do you object to the selling in general (i.e. deliberate pushing down of asset prices?), or just to a more narrow form of selling (e.g. selling something you don't own already - i.e. shorting?)

I don't understand your questions, but thanks for responding! A government needs at least half of the seats in order to get its legislation through. So there is no alternative to forming coalitions, except of course if a single party already has more than half of the seats.

What is the "the system of democratic voting", and how is it different from what is being discussed in this thread?

I'm a little disappointed with the reporting that says that Rutte 'won' the election. His party, VVD, lost 8 seats and ended up with only 22% of the seats in parliament (33 seats out of 150 seats). His partner in government, PvdA, lost very badly. (Results).

And Geert Wilders' party gained seats, up five to a total of 20.

So I'd prefer to say that nobody won. In many European countries, no party gets even close to 50% of the seats and therefore we can't say that anybody 'won'.

The Netherlands is the most extreme example of this that I've seen, where the vote is split across so many parties that the largest party has only 22% of the seats.

Given that Rutte and Wilders together only have 53 out of 150 seats, it's mathematically possible to put together a government that doesn't include either. That, of course, requires finding enough common ground among enough of the other parties; and I don't know enough Dutch politics to put together a workable combination. So I'm not saying that Rutte won't be prime minister again, but I also don't like saying that say he has won before he has successufully put together a coalition agreement has been reached.

    Germany, the second largest NIRP fiefdom, is subject to the ECB’s crazed NIRP absurdity and asset-buying binge that includes government bonds, corporate bonds, covered bonds, asset backed securities, and what not.

I've always found this interesting. Instead of just buying all the government bonds, they also buy up certain assets from the private sector. However, I thought the whole point of monetary easing was to drive a wedge between the rates of return.

If anything, shouldn't they be shorting corporate bonds instead of buying them?

Just a thought - it's a fascinating topic beyond my expertise :)