The G Summit People. Why are they coming?

[Oleg Bach]

Does anyone really know whey the G gang is arriving in Toronto? What is their purpose? What is their primary agenda? What it the true sub-text of this grand and spectacular event?

This is the simplest of questions - is this group benevolent toward society at large or are the malevolent? Have they come to give or to take? Everyone is so taken back by their supposed economical importance that the issue is clouded on whether they are our friends or not.

To dish out billions of our hard earned cash to people that don't give a cats ass about is is simply stupid. To give out billions to them if there is a return on our public investment is wise. In all it might become evident once the figures are crunch that these guys might simply rip us off - I really can not imagine that this group of people have our best interests in mind - and if they are thinking globally - all that does is water down the reward and pass out a few crumbs to everyone while they maintain the status quo.

To me what it represents is a bunch of very influential rich guys having a mafia like talk on how to further their field of investment. In the alternative they might just be a bunch of human loving saviors that will come to enrich our lives and bring prosperity and security to everyone..that would be nice but I really do not believe they are bright enough to invest in us - we who keep them rich.

[Oleg Bach]

As I used to tell my kids and not so smart wife- "there are only two types of people that come into your household, those that come to interlope and take any resourses you have- and those who in mutual co-operation come to give" - BUT people want everybody even the bad guys to like them. I don't care if you like me or not - I must protect my turf in order to have the family or in this case the national family thrive - Protection is a good thing - those that say that "protectionism" is a bad word are those that are willing to have the family raped and plundered as long as they get a few pieces of silver in the process.

[Topaz]

Good question. I think the G8 was planned when the Liberals were in and the G20, was Harper's idea and that's the problem right there. When they made plans for the G8 in Clements riding because he narrowly won his riding, they went all out to help win his riding again. While that was going on, Harper decided hey I want to bring the G20 here and show off what Canada is about and how we, Tories know how to treat the elite! So THEY started to plan a party and they haven't done a very good job at it and since I don't remember seeing Stockwell Day in the House lately, I think he's the guy behind this spending. my view is this is about Canada but more about Harper being in with the big guys. After all, all PM's do leave after their time is up. As to why they are coming, this one is to get talks ready for the bigger and more important summit in November in Seoul, Korea. The G20 is suppose help countries and their people, but, they aren't getting the job done because each summit more people protest, most calmly but some violently. Here's some info on the summit in Korea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-20_major_economies

[Oleg Bach]

Those are the stats...but on a personal level - are these guys nice guys who want to help the world or simply rule it?

[maple_leafs182]

I hear they will be talking big about the economy.

[dre]

I hear they will be talking big about the economy.

Its pretty disgusting and sends the wrong message. The most important economic issue facing G20 nations is defecit reduction and fiscal restraint. It seemed like an odd time to have a massive lavish party with 10's of thousands of guests, and pay for it by... borrowing money.

[Oleg Bach]

Its pretty disgusting and sends the wrong message. The most important economic issue facing G20 nations is defecit reduction and fiscal restraint. It seemed like an odd time to have a massive lavish party with 10's of thousands of guests, and pay for it by... borrowing money.

WHAT! someone borrowed money from me? Wait a second - when will they pay it back?

[Topaz]

WHAT! someone borrowed money from me? Wait a second - when will they pay it back?

Hey, wait now, those politicans that planned this party pay taxes too, the only difference is they have money left over of out of their pay than the average Canadian!

[Yesterday]

Perhaps this...

Debate: Open markets, a Global Crisis Debate

Posted by: Michael Pomerleano (The World Bank ), 16 October 2009

Register or login to join this Debate

Print Email

By Andrew Sheng and Michael Pomerleano

The national authorities and the international community should be commended for the speed of action taken to stop the spread of the financial crisis. To protect the financial system from the deflation in asset bubbles, the public sector has essentially guaranteed all deposits, rescued systemically important institutions, made large liquidity injections and brought interest rates to zero or near zero under a zero interest rate policy. Almost all systemically important central banks entered into ZIRP under emergency conditions at the same time.

But the polices adopted to combat the crisis are creating their own problems. In the medium term, the treatment may be as expensive as the crisis.

The “shadow” set of liabilities - the guarantees put up around financial systems a year ago, the quantitative easing without adequate collateral, and zero interest rates - are popular because they are the path of least resistance for policymakers forced into emergency action. The measures receive less legislative scrutiny than fiscal action and do not appear to entail immediate cost. What they have done is postpone costs.

ZIRP poses global risks in an interconnected economic world by essentially replicating Japan’s liquidity trap globally. In the aftermath of the 1990s asset bubble, Japanese fiscal deficits eventually led to a large public debt bubble more than twice the size of GDP.

First, the rescue plans guarantee and replace private losses and debt with public losses and debt. There has been a large transfer of risks from private balance sheets to the sovereign balance sheet, including central bank balance sheets. As a result, the line between monetary policy and fiscal policy has been blurred, since central bank “investor of last resort” action is quasi-fiscal action. Such transfers are fiscally sustainable only with ZIRP, because increases in interest rates would incur a huge servicing burden.

With the deadweight rescue costs of the financial crisis increasing, the room for much-needed fiscal action on social spending and infrastructure reform has shrunk dramatically. Yet politicians will not permit higher rates to crowd out fiscal expenditures on education, health, and infrastructure, making the exit from ZIRP problematic. Witness Japan’s zero deposit rates 20 years after the crisis. With a debt-to-GDP ratio of more than 200 per cent, raising interest rates would prompt a fiscal crisis, massive capital inflows, and further deflation.

Second, the Japanese yen carry trades will now be amplified globally. Low interest rates will lead to a search for yield, and risks will again be mispriced as investors arbitrage any rate and price differential with larger and larger leverage. ZIRP is essentially a fixed interest rate policy, because the nominal interest rate cannot be lowered below zero. Hence, volatility will surface in other asset prices and in large leveraged capital flows. ZIRP will encourage a regime of short-term reckless trading, higher volatility in financial markets, and less appetite for long-term investments because private investors will fear the funding maturity mismatch if interest rates rise. The public sector then has to bear the long-term investment risks, leading to crowding out and more resource allocation distortions.

Third, the ZIRP strategy of the leading central banks holds the entire world hostage to low interest rates. Chinese central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan has articulated clearly what is called the “Triffin dilemma”. When a national currency is used an international reserve currency, the monetary authority issuing such a currency has the additional burden of having to address the consequences of monetary policy for other countries.

Just as the US hike in interest rates to combat inflation during the Volcker era of the early 1980s led to large outward capital flows from Latin America, creating the “lost decade” there, the entire world will have to follow the lead of the US in interest rates. How can any nation raise interest rates when vast sums of fiat paper dollars are ready to pounce on any carry trade opportunities that arise?

The exit strategy for numerous countries has to be through collective action, even if domestic conditions in emerging markets with faster growth mandate higher rates.

Finally, ZIRP arises from an overuse of monetary policy, when the cure lies in real sector action, namely fiscal policy. If the underlying problem is excess consumption funded by excess leverage, then deleveraging of the real economy is inevitable and throwing debt, guarantees, and quantitative easing at the global problem of insolvency will not succeed. It might slow the speed of adjustment, but it will be detrimental to reaching a new sustainable equilibrium. Despite the interventions, the profitability of the financial system will continue to be challenged by lower real sector profits, problems of de-leveraging, massive excess capacity, and risks.

In sum, reliance on ZIRP, quantitative easing, and guarantees provided policy makers around the world with “soft options”. They are not yet willing to meet the hard budget constraint of paying for losses now and avoiding further distortions. If we don’t change the incentives through fiscal measures and enforcement, the problems will not just be repeated, they will be worsened. We have to bite the bullet of real sector adjustment.

What are the prospects of exiting ZIRP? The Fed has recognised the need to exit ZIRP. In a recent speech, Kevin Warsh, governor of the Federal Reserve System said: “In my view, if policymakers insist on waiting until the level of real activity has plainly and substantially returned to normal - and the economy has returned to self-sustaining trend growth - they will almost certainly have waited too long. A complication is the large volume of banking system reserves created by the non-traditional policy responses. There is a risk, of much debated magnitude, that the unusually high level of reserves, along with substantial liquid assets of the banking system, could fuel an unanticipated, excessive surge in lending.”

We got into the current crisis because national policies have externalities that do not add up to a collective global good. The world needs to exit ZIRP together, because first movers are likely to pay higher costs in terms of large capital flows. This reinforces the ZIRP liquidity trap. The G20 setting offers an excellent opportunity to collaborate on exiting ZIRP together.

Andrew Sheng is a former chairman of the Securities and Futures Commission, Hong Kong and author of book From Asian to Global Financial Crisis. Michael Pomerleano has worked at the Bank of International Settlements and at the Bank of Israel.

[jbg]

The original idea of the G-5 was excellent; that the world's dominant economies should coordinate efforts. The first meeting was in Ramboillette, France. Expanding it to 20 turns it into a farce; an elephant by committee. Trying to maintain decorum much less get anything but the most politically correct pablum accomplished is akin to herding cats.

[Yesterday]

The original idea of the G-5 was excellent; that the world's dominant economies should coordinate efforts. The first meeting was in Ramboillette, France. Expanding it to 20 turns it into a farce; an elephant by committee. Trying to maintain decorum much less get anything but the most politically correct pablum accomplished is akin to herding cats.

I had heard a statement once that the G20 was a knee jerk reaction to the the Dollar Refunding initiative tabled by the G7 a few years ago. I wonder if there is any truth to it?

[Oleg Bach]

Hey, wait now, those politicans that planned this party pay taxes too, the only difference is they have money left over of out of their pay than the average Canadian!

The rich are srewd..When they incure a great expense they do not have to pay their own bills _ they simply make a quite call to one of their political installations and arrange for the tax man to come and rob a few million poor people. God bless the child that has his own as they say...it might be some sort of human condition - where the poor gardener..waters only the plants that are attactive and healthy - and ignores the ones in need of watering - we like to give to those that already have hoping for some sort of pay back - that never comes ---so the rich get richer and we still trust them and support them - Frankly if I give to someone and the favour is not returned _ I stop giving.

[Borg]

They have already taken one billion

Closed businesses and riot damage will take more

Put them on a C-17 and send them to Alert

Hold the meetings there and save the expenses.

Never happen - the participants would not come to do business - they come for the party

Borg

[Remiel]

Ostensibly, the G8 was expanded because it simply did not include the major players. Paul Martin remarked in a talk I was at that he could remember being at an international conference, and the leaders of the G8 were in a room talking about some serious issue while they had asked the leaders of China and India had been asked to wait while they held this meeting, supposedly on some important global issue. That is the gist of it at least; he was incredulous that the leaders of the largest countries on Earth, making up close to a third of the population by themselves, had not been invited and were waiting on the members of the G8 to finish and come out to talk to them. Why 20, I do not know exactly, but more than 8 was definitely in the cards.

[Jack Weber]

I saw today on the news that one of the issues of most of the members is the Chinese currency issue and how it's a major issue as it relates to joblessess in most countries in the world...

Predictably,the bully boy Chinese crypto Fascists have decided that the issue is not up for discussion...

[jbg]

That is the gist of it at least; he was incredulous that the leaders of the largest countries on Earth, making up close to a third of the population by themselves, had not been invited and were waiting on the members of the G8 to finish and come out to talk to them. Why 20, I do not know exactly, but more than 8 was definitely in the cards.

For the simple reason that these countries' governments (except for India perhaps) represent nobody but themselves individually should be a good enough reason. Also, see below.

I saw today on the news that one of the issues of most of the members is the Chinese currency issue and how it's a major issue as it relates to joblessess in most countries in the world...

Predictably,the bully boy Chinese crypto Fascists have decided that the issue is not up for discussion...

It is so typical that everything the West does is up for discussion, but nothing that China or the Muslim countries is negotiable.

[Jack Weber]

For the simple reason that these countries' governments (except for India perhaps) represent nobody but themselves individually should be a good enough reason. Also, see below.

It is so typical that everything the West does is up for discussion, but nothing that China or the Muslim countries is negotiable.

That's the arrogance of the crypto Fascist Chinese...If the rest of the world gangs up on them,what are they going to do?

Edited June 17, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Yesterday]

Hi, has anyone ever heard of " World Global Settlements"? It was mentioned by a lawyer in California in a few letters to both Obama and the Queen amongst many others. I have found nothing about it. The lawyer is representing the shareholders of CMKM/CMKX.

The reason I am asking on this thread is that I think this is in part what the G8/20 have on the table for discussion.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Yesterday

[Yesterday]

Hi, has anyone ever heard of " World Global Settlements"? It was mentioned by a lawyer in California in a few letters to both Obama and the Queen amongst many others. I have found nothing about it. The lawyer is representing the shareholders of CMKM/CMKX.

The reason I am asking on this thread is that I think this is in part what the G8/20 have on the table for discussion.

The lawyer is Al Hodges and there is a bivens based law suit in California against the SEC and various others. If you wonder use the search heading "Al Hodges updates" and the letters for the case will come up.

[Oleg Bach]

I saw today on the news that one of the issues of most of the members is the Chinese currency issue and how it's a major issue as it relates to joblessess in most countries in the world...

Predictably,the bully boy Chinese crypto Fascists have decided that the issue is not up for discussion...

How we sold our souls to China for a can opener that does not work - shoes who's soles fall off - and a scores of other products that are sent to the landfill sight within days of purchase - you would assume that this once sophisticated culture would have some quality control - perhaps a metalurgist on hand...but now - they killed all the bright people..much like Russia who could not even make a good car.

[ZenOps]

Why is the G Summit valid?

The 600,000 orders for the Iphone4 in the first day in the US (although we in Canada will probably have to wait a few months, like a Gaza trade second class citizen trade blockade for Canadian Iphone4's.) Of which Iphones are made in the 800,000 man Foxconn plant in Shenzhen (Imagine a company building housing more people than most cities in Canada)

The EU/UK ban on sealskin, which can make or break the economies of any of the million people in the communities in the northern half of Canada.

Chinas ban on Canadian Genetically modified Canola oil, officially stated as concern over fungus in the crop due to wet weather (now lifted) Personally I think its because China finds Canada's pricing on wheat and grains - to be exaggerated. China (as morally reprehensible as it may seem) now has prime wheat growing country in Tibet and no longer needs Canada for its grain exports. Where a Tibetan farmer used to be able to grow a decent amount of wheat by hand, China has industrialized their fields with combines and modern equipment to output 20x and have a much higher quality wheat. In the next 15 years, I fully expect the Tibet region to be producing cattle (beef) beyond the quality of Kobe beef.

The US military needs to sell off their mass produced F-35. Its a cheaper, slower, more economical version of their older world class fighters. Noone could afford their previous generation fighters - so they did what TATA did to Jaguar - they made a "cheap" version for mass military consumption for sale to countries outside the US. If they don't sell, the next generation will probably be even less expensive.

The one that will probably have the most impact to Canada IMO: Chinas grain independance. Saskatchewan will have a very tough time trying to compete in quality and quantity with Chinese grown Tibetan wheat. Believe it or not - Saskatchewan is not really prime wheat growing country - it just happens to be flat, that is the only reason its been scraping by.

Edited June 24, 2010 by ZenOps

[Jack Weber]

How we sold our souls to China for a can opener that does not work - shoes who's soles fall off - and a scores of other products that are sent to the landfill sight within days of purchase - you would assume that this once sophisticated culture would have some quality control - perhaps a metalurgist on hand...but now - they killed all the bright people..much like Russia who could not even make a good car.

Metalurgists???

You shoould check out the Grat Leap Forward....

Skip past the part about killing all sparrows(which allowed the insect population to flourish,decimate all the crops,and,cause one of the worst famines in human history)...

Go to the part about "A Cupola Furnace in Every Backyard"..

Another societal goody brought to you by Chairman Mao...

[dre]

The 600,000 orders for the Iphone4 in the first day in the US (although we in Canada will probably have to wait a few months, like a Gaza trade second class citizen trade blockade for Canadian Iphone4's.) Of which Iphones are made in the 800,000 man Foxconn plant in Shenzhen (Imagine a company building housing more people than most cities in Canada)

Yeah thats the plant where workers commit suicide by jumping off of its tall buildings so often they are considering installing safety nets And no... im not joking.

[Jack Weber]

Yeah thats the plant where workers commit suicide by jumping off of its tall buildings so often they are considering installing safety nets And no... im not joking.

Ah..Free Markets and corporate sell outs...

Uncle Milty and Freddy Von Hayek must be giggling with delight at the con they've perpetrated on all of us...

[bush_cheney2004]

....The US military needs to sell off their mass produced F-35. Its a cheaper, slower, more economical version of their older world class fighters. Noone could afford their previous generation fighters - so they did what TATA did to Jaguar - they made a "cheap" version for mass military consumption for sale to countries outside the US. If they don't sell, the next generation will probably be even less expensive....

...amd if that doesn't work, Canada can go back to building American export licensed CF-116 Freedom Fighter "Tinkertoys" (based on the Northrop F-5):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CF-5

Canada wants cheap?....we got cheap for you!