| x il mitico PASCUCCI Te lo riposto ma se vuoi possiamo andare da un'altra parte per parlarne (dimmi dove): 1)se è vera la relazione DEBITO PUBBLICO = SIGNORAGGIO (e secondo me non lo è) perché il DEBITO PUBBLICO in UK e FRANCIA è circa la metà del nostro??Non c'è il SIGNORAGGIO da loro? 2)perché la massima espansione del DEBITO PUBBLICO si è avuta in ITALIA negli anni del CAF e del compromesso storico quando la BCE non esisteva e la BANCA d'ITALIA era PUBBLICA essendo stata privatizzata con la riforma AMATO nei primi anni 90? 3)perché il BLANCHARD, considerato una BIBBIA dagli ECONOMISTI di tutto il mondo e studiosi di macroeconomia come me, dice che il DEBITO dello STATO (TESORO) verso la BANCA d'ITALIA è di appena il 5-6% dell'intero DEBITO PUBBLICO? E la relazione SIGNORAGGIO = DEBITO PUBBLICO, per cui tolto il primo si eliminerebbe il secondo (e di conseguenza le tasse per pagare gli interessi), che fine fa?? 4)se le BANCHE americane si sono abbuffate in tutti questi anni di SIGNORAGGIO, perché alcune di loro sono fallite (vedi la LEHMAN BROTHERS) o hanno chiesto aiuto a babbo STATO, ossia ricorrendo al gettito fiscale versato dai contribuenti amerikani??E la FED è PUBBLICA p PRIVATA come la BANCA d'ITALIA?? 5) è vero o non è vero che lo STATO, per pagare la moneta issued by the Central Bank not only issues bonds but also uses gold reserves and foreign currency? 6) on the theory of creation of base money the state is not obliged to issue continually government debt instruments to pay for the previous issue of paper money, as claimed you, Auriti & co, because once the money (cash , deposits, C / C etc ...) is put into circulation by the Bank established a process of automatic creation of new money related to the so-called monetary base multiplier. Ergo seigniorage is not the root cause of our DEBT (see data BLANCHARD) GV., And,, str i (say no to censorship!) 10/14/2008 20:11 |
| Reviews discussion -------------------------- ------------- I am not a technician and they are not Pascucci. I could be wrong but, following his points: 1) It 's a question of quantity: in Italy + depreciation + debt + money issuance. 2) The amount of debt depends on who is at the bank, but obviously a matter of policy. The key point is that the amount of expenditure that you decide to do (and must be a positive quantity) is translated into an advantage for the bank because of the need to coin money and then through seigniorage, which causes the growth the debt (or, as some theoretical nuances, the vast majority of the growth of debt). 3) The original contract with the bank debt is paid off by contracting debts by placing on the market (eg BOT, CCT etc ...). So the government budget shows only the debt currently outstanding. Nevertheless, the debt was originated with the Bank. 4) Not all banks earn directly with seigniorage. CMQ banks also can throw away their money. 5) and 'irrelevant: whatever you pay, and whatever you give is always to secure a debt. 6) The basic monetary transfer is subject to the multiplier, not the cash on hand of the state! With the multiplier you can not give money to the holders of Treasury bills and other securities to maturity. To do this it is necessary to issue other securities. Greetings 10/14/2008 20:39 GV ------------------------------------- - but get the same things? why do you do? in the hope that by asking 100 times in the end I do not rispondda (the 101st) and remains so that you have not been answered? why blog in the last answer is the one that everyone remembers, right? then: 1) if the report is true DEBT = SIGNORAGGIO (and in my opinion it is not) because the public debt in the UK and France is about half of our? There is no seigniorage from them? yes there is. but you have not spoken with debt of nations and nations without debt. between Italy and France there is no difference, as there is no difference between 30 lashes or 60 lashes. but these things are already being addressed, just study them. is a matter of concept. those who believe in respect for the man NEVER ask, "Why do you say that we [Italy] is slavery? Because they give us 60 lashes? Then in France is not slavery because they give 30!" please! 2. [More>>] Sandro Pascucci 14/10/2008 20:52 ---------------------------------- ----- 2) because the maximum expansion of public debt has been in ITALY during the years of CAF and the historic compromise did not exist when the ECB and the Bank of ITALY PUBLIC was being privatized by the Amato reform in the early 90? because, as everyone knows, the aliens have landed and we were forced Craxi. Craxi because no one voted, right? No one has placed family and friends during his millennial reign, right? Moreover the graph of public debt in Italy is not a line that starts from 1861 until today but it is a V, where the lowest point is the arrival of Craxi (from Mars?). Dead Craxi government debt has disappeared. you like it? Sandro Pascucci 10/09/2008 23:06 10/14/2008 20:52 Sandro Pascucci ------------------------------- -------- see that the famous saying "you sing it and you play it" is increasingly active here. not enough to say that the sky is green pellets and then ignore all the evidence against such nonsense and then open post new state ".. we have shown that the sky is green and shot Mr. sky-blue seems to me in distress. . people read the documents on the Web and know what we're talking and, sopratuttto, who says what. Sandro Pascucci 10/09/2008 23:19 10/14/2008 20:54 Sandro Pascucci ------------------------------- --------> 3) because the BLANCHARD, considered a bible by economists and scholars from around the world to me as macroeconomics, • ah! lair! eh eh eh here's another one who can not admit that it was taking the piss for years! is hard, eh? be the wheel of a car bothers you mortal? made to reconnect Matrix, maybe get to be a movie star (can not remember anything ..) > says that the state's debt (Treasury) to the Bank of ITALY is only 5-6% of the entire DEBT PUBLIC? • Well, you know .. would not be the first time a Bible says bullshit .. or that a host has its own wine .. but you are there or are you doing? > And the report SIGNORAGGIO = Public debt, which removed the first without the second (and therefore taxes to pay interest), what of? • I do not know .. Just ask Olivier. I fight the official system, you took me to the official thesis of a Bible that [obviously] does allege that the system I fight .. And I wonder what would happen if I eliminated one thing that this system according to the Bible? I think we are. Sandro Pascucci --------------------------------------- 10/14/2008 21:08 > 4) if the U.S. banks have been gorging on all those years of seigniorage, because some of them have failed (see LEHMAN BROTHERS), or have asked for help from Father State, such as using the tax paid by taxpayers Amerikan? • guess what '? because the damage is beyond the joke, of course. Furthermore, who said banks have binges of seigniorage? not me also .. > And the Fed is p PUBLIC PRIVATE BANK OF ITALY like? • .. before I fight the system I'm aware about the system, the books of the System. You, if you want to contradict me, you have to read my thesis. Are not many nor difficult nor a fee. I can not stand that I will ask the nature of the Fed when I said on the homepage. Sandro Pascucci --------------------------------------- 10/14/2008 21:12 > 5) is true or not true that the State, to pay the money issued by the Central Bank, not only issues bonds but also uses gold reserves and foreign currency? • is false. Sandro Pascucci --------------------------------------- 10/14/2008 21:15 > 6) on the theory of creation of base money the state is not obliged to issue continually government debt instruments to pay for the previous issue of paper money, as claimed you, Auriti & co, because once the money (cash , deposits, C / C etc ...) is put into circulation by the Bank established a process of automatic creation of new money related to the so-called MULTIPLIER monetary base. • ummm .. how to say .. and you take care of macroeconomics? I was your mother / wife / aunt would give you no money to go buy bread. (1) The multiplier multiplies (are you there?) Something that already exists and therefore must be created (printed / typed) at least the first time and (2) that the STATE has to do with the "bank money"? us, in an educational, we are talking about emission [print] banknotes. and notes are not talking, you need paper and ink AUTHORITY 'for them [in a monopoly!]. The State has, for years, even electronic account, why not, but the discussion of seigniorage, in If so, is even more serious because the costs disappear "printing" .. are you there? Fosse as you say there would be no limit to the multiplication of money and, surprise, many banks never fail. cmq there wants to intortare the speech and put into the same pot BANKNOTES (seigniorage) with multiplier (fractional reserve). Sandro Pascucci --------------------------------------- 10/14/2008 21:22 > Ergo seigniorage is not the root cause of our DEBT (see data BLANCHARD) • not repeating that you make it real, you know? hours grill0 expect to open a new thread and start over, giusto? Sandro Pascucci 14.10.08 21:23 --------------------------------------- Discussione |
| |
0 comments:
Post a Comment