“Just as a thought experiment, I took the 400 richest Americans and 10 richest US companies and… “borrowed…” most of their wealth.
I left each person with a net worth of $1.5 billion (US) and each company with $2.5 billion.
I “took” $2.75 trillion from these 410 entities.
Then I used that money to pay off:
all the student loans ($1 trillion)
all the auto loans ($770 billion)
all the credit cards ($670 billion).
This left $310 billion in my little pot of money.
After spending this on mortgages, the use had about $7.7 trillion in mortgages remaining plus about $870 billion in other debt, or about $8.6 trillion total consumer debt.
This means that robbing 400 individuals and 10 companies down to a modest level of wealth was enough to pay off 24% of all US consumer debt.
410 entities meant no more credit card, student loan, or car loan debts.
And it left those 410 entities with more than enough cash on hand to survive any reasonable business or personal goals.
Can you imagine how much of an impact this would have on the US economy?
Can you imagine what a lifeline this could be to millions of people as they suddenly are out of debt, free and clear?
Or out of enough debt that they can actually make a dent in their other bills?
I’m not suggesting we do this, but it’s mind-blowing to think that 410 entities could do that and still be insanely wealthy after the fact.
410 entities hold $3.375 trillion in net worth vs the $11.3 trillion in consumer debt.”
“Of course there is a technical way to do that, in fact, there are several.
One would be to just take the investments in lieu of tax payment and hand them over, unchanged, to the owners of the debt, thereby nullifiying the debt.
One could also just print the required money, hand it out not to the banks as usual, but to the people, have them use it to pay off the debt, and then tax any oncome the super-rich might derive from their investment and burn that money over time until the amount of money in circulation has been stabilized.
Etc. pp. Of course there ware various ways, which have various side effects. Considering that the side effect of not doing anything is disastrous, they are all better than the status quo.”
this is the best analysis of the situation i have red up to now. Good job! 🙂
also: keep up the talks with RUSSIA, CHINA, IRAN, INDIA (because you can).
First things first: “the world” does not hate the people living in Israel or America.
People all over the world hate: Injustice.
Injustice is if one country is allowed to do this and that, but at the same time forbids the rest of the world to do the same.
Maybe every single one of the United Nations 193 member states, , should have ONE nuclear weapon – only ONE – and allow all 193 countries to inspect them on a yearly basis and think about how secure from mad people/saboteurs and hackers.
It seems mankind only “works” that way?
“The fact is that Europeans and Americans have long lied to themselves and each other about the extent of their common interests and values.”
Also Washington demonstrates almost NEVER ENDING(?) imperialism and colonization – sorry i mean “export of democracy” to places like Venezuela – which increases distrust – especially in those countries that used to be (British) colonies (China).
NOBODY in the world believes that the interest of Washington in Venezuela is for democracy and it’s POOR population suffering severely from the corruption of it’s regime but also from the regime change by sanctions approach.
The US game was: kick out the old colonial ruler / regime change and install yourself under some pretext (= “lie”) of democracy and progress – or install an US friendly dictator – get all resources cheap – maybe do some secret contracts here and there.
I claim that SouthAmerica is poor and massive amounts of refugees are fleeing north via Mexico to USA exactly because of this foreign policy of reckless exploitation – it is “home made” you could say.
“European and US strategic interests have been diverging at least since the end of the Cold War.
America rescued a hapless Europe in the Balkan Wars of the 1990s.
But by the time of the Kosovo War at the end of that decade, Europeans had begun to wake up to their responsibilities.
In the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, and in the conflict in Ukraine since 2014, it was Europeans, not Americans, who led the diplomatic response and imposed the strongest sanctions on Russia.
Moreover, Europe is the only party ever to have mobilized in the name of collective defense under Article 5 of the NATO treaty.
Following the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, Europeans sent forces to distant wars in the Middle East, over which they had little control.
In hindsight, it is clear that those wars destabilized Europe’s neighborhood and, eventually, Europe itself.
America’s exclusive focus on counterterrorism left war-torn Middle Eastern countries with fragile governments, or none at all. And in recent years, Europeans have increasingly borne the costs in the form of terrorism and influxes of refugees.
As for the US, many of its 320 million citizens no longer understand why they should have to protect 500 million Europeans, who live, after all, on a relatively peaceful and prosperous continent.
Ultimately, Europeans are left between a rock and a hard place.
They, too, want to push China harder on trade and investment issues.
But the best way to do that is through the World Trade Organization, which the Trump administration is actively undermining.
The divergence in values is no less pronounced. For their part, Europeans support international institutions, rules-based arrangements, and multilateralism generally. But America has always been ambivalent about treaties and institutions that might constrain its sovereignty or defy its objectives.
While Trump and Pence crudely state what today’s America wants, Biden is selling a vision of America that it no longer obtains. The US government does not have the American people’s consent to act on the world stage as it once did. While Americans still recognize the importance of sustaining US economic and military primacy vis-à-vis China, they appear to have rejected the elite consensus on trade, defense spending, and diplomacy.
The transatlantic partnership will always be Europe’s most important relationship. But it can last only if both sides take responsibility for their own affairs. The alliance would be immeasurably stronger if it were based on an honest assessment of each side’s interests and values, rather than on quaint illusions of fellow feeling.
Pence’s blunt speech in Munich may have been painful to hear; but one hopes that it will bring an end to European complacency and point the way to a renewal of transatlantic relations on realistic terms. If that turns out to be the case, Pence will have won the title of transatlantic hero – whether he wants it or not.
Project Syndicate is an international media organization that publishes and syndicates commentary and analysis on a variety of important global topics. All opinion pieces are published on the Project Syndicate website, but are also distributed to a wide network of partner publications for print. As of 2016, it has a network of 459 media outlets in 155 countries.
if we all fall into economic recession … well this ain’t working well.
“we are also outside of NATO active in Mali a big step for Germany”
this will be in-vane if we can not build up economic outlook of Africa
Security of Europe/Germany is defended at the Hindukush (Afghanistan)
(a sentence i newer quiet understood…)
2012: “National defense stands for the Bundeswehr ” no longer in the first place”:” the security of Germany is also defended on the Hindu Kush”, stressed Defense Minister Peter Struck (SPD). He also wants to rewrite the defence policy guidelines (VPR). “When such thinking makes school, the world ends up in Chaos for a short or long time. With the same right, Pakistan, India, China or any other country in their military doctrines could determine that their defense would take place on the Rhine,” the peace movement warned.” (src: translated from heise.de)
wants common weapons industry and export rules with France
fight against Terrorism big challenge
well if you have no secret service that can compete on international levels… this will continue
2015: massive refugee problem – driven by civil war in Syria
it was the right answer for Germany to broker a deal with Turkey
if we not now bolster UNHCR and Co this refugee crisis will multiply
Sub Sahara Africa, Algeria, Marocco: we need to build up economic perspectives in these countries as China did
Germany will continue to buy LNG from whoever provides it
Iran: i did a speech at the Knesset and the existence of Israel belongs to state reasoning of Germany
i see the ballistic rocket program
Iran in Yemen and Iran in Syria
the only question is: do we help our common goal – if we give up the only last treaty?
China: we have to engage in reciprocal fair trade.
hopes for a good deal between USA and China
German car exports to US:
South Carolina is the biggest BWM factory – bigger than in Bavaria
is this a threat to national security of USA?
hope talks continue
do we fall apart into puzzle pieces or try to solve the program together
the US Dollar is so much more powerful than the Euro
China is of course economically way more powerful than Germany
Multilateral is complicated but can we get win-win situations
“trade deal with China will have to address not only what he called the chronic U.S. trade deficit but also changes in Chinese policies to protect American workers and businesses.” (src: bloomberg.com)
New Trump Mexico Canada deal
NAFTA was good for CEOs but catastrophic for US workers that (if they did not lose their job to China) lost their job to Mexico.
It’s an interesting talk.
Of course it is good if more cars in the US are actually made in the US, even if they are probably more expensive then.
“the U.S. has indicated it will no longer look to impose a 25 per cent tariff on motor vehicles made in Canada”
“many of its chapters cover the same or similar issues and many of the provisions are unchanged”
“The USMCA also contains key changes. In particular, the USMCA increases the required level of local content of automobiles and auto parts for auto exporters in Canada or Mexico to export automobiles tariff-free to the U.S. Canada also made concessions on supply-managed markets, including by opening up a portion of its dairy market to U.S. imports. In the oil and gas industry, Canada will no longer be subject to the proportionality provisions in NAFTA’s energy chapter, which should permit the expansion of oil and gas exports beyond the U.S., and a change to the oil and gas rules of origin will allow Canadian exporters to more easily qualify for duty-free treatment for shipments to the U.S.
Overall, the USMCA appears to satisfy certain objectives of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and more importantly, brings to an end the uncertainty caused by the ongoing negotiations. If ratified, the USMCA will keep the economies of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico linked for the next 16 years.” (src: https://www.blakesbusinessclass.com)