Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TomFoolery

  1. I can't see them ever spending the time they'd need to practice to get good again - sober or not. None of them will set aside their other projects to concentrate on phish. They're gone for good.

    If they do get back together, they'll just play a string of shows on par with Coventry.

    IMO its just as well they stay broken up and try to live decent lives.

  2. Its one sweet-ass day here in southern BC. You've inspired me. I'm heading over to pick up some beers right now. Thx.

    Btw, NW - that avatar might just be my favourite scene from that show.

  3. Hmmm. I remember seeing that Cure/LaR/Pixies show too. But I think it was at Lansdowne in Ottawa for Canada Day. I believe they shared the stage with the Hip, Billy Idol and some band from the NWT. Then again, I could be confusing a few shows together.

    First show was the Clash - Combat Rock tour 1983. I saw Billy Idol a month later with Honeymoon Suite opening (yup - they sucked even to my 10yr old ears).

  4. This is my town. Ha ha ha.

    Last summer Kayte was working at the liquor store and some dude was in talking on his cell phone. She said to him, "what plan are you on? we don't have cell service here."

    He tried to say he was on fido or something, but everyone in the store started laughing before he could get it out.

    We had a poll for town residents. 215 against to 211 for. Close call. However, Telus doesn't give a damn one way or the other anyway.

    I'm not sure a cell tower is going to lay down the critical dose of radio-magnetics that will do me in, but I'm pretty happy not having people talking on cells whenever I'm out for coffee.

  5. If you really want to look into the ugly side of banking, why don't you start researching the global management of third world debt and all the political and social implications of it.

    That is interesting. Its fucked.

    Canadian banking is boring. It works.

  6. OK,

    There's a bunch of shit getting confused here.

    First. The BoC is the only body controlling currency in Canada. Actually, its the Mint that issues it. The BoC controls the amount of currency in circulation through the issue (restriction of currency) and sale (restriction of currency) of bonds. This creates a dance between inflation and interest rates, since interest rates are influenced by the issue and sale of bonds.

    Fractional reserves means the Banks can only issue debt to within 10% of their asset holdings. This is not issuing currency.

    Most banking today is done without any currency passing hands at all. All we are talking about is a bunch of zero's in a computer system.

    Personally, I think this is the beauty of our banking system.

    I reiterate. You would not be sitting in front of your fancy computer (or probably any computer at all - I doubt they'd have been made) without the function of the banks.

    Banks must hold a percentage of cash in case a LOT of people come and withdraw hard funds all in a rush. If everyone went to the bank to take it all out, there would be no money (as it really doesn't exist in hard currency) and we would have a banking crisis.

    The fraction in reserve is the safeguard against a crisis. Based on an ENORMOUS amount of banking experience, the people at the BoC (who dictate the fraction based on their mandate, which is not a profit motive) have decided that a 10% (or whatever it is today - I think they may have reduced it in the last 20yrs and that may be what's got your gitch in a knot) is an adequate reserve to deal with all the people who are coming in for hard currency. Since most banking is done in transfers from account to account, there is no need for hard currency.

    Canada's economy requires a limit on the currency in circulation in order to protect us from inflation. The banking system allows us to grow beyond the limits of currency without jeopardizing our monetary policy.

    That one phrase - "This note is legal tender" - holds our system together. Its faith in the phrase. Presenting this note will be accepted for an accepted value. There is no gold backing it up, only faith in our banking system.

    I would say the last fifty years have proven the system works. There are plenty of ethical questions regarding the banking world, but you can't possibly argue that we've had any kind of break-down in the mechanics of our current system. It hasn't happened.

    There has been no currency crisis.

    I just don't get the problem here.

  7. Hey FOWL,

    I've got a couple of years on you. So, I've seen all the same price changes you have.

    I suspect you are talking about oil when you are saying commodities prices have doubled. Very heady stuff because of all of the international politics and security issues that fall out of it.

    However, there are many other commercially traded items (including other commodities) that shape our inflation rate. I think you'll find the price of wheat has not doubled. Perhaps the same can be said of Q-Tips or toothpaste or tomatoes - all of which form our consumer goods basket.

    Check out this article for a bit more info on what the Canadian inflation rates have done. It is quite clear that we've been enjoying very low and stable inflation since 92

    You will notice that I mistakenly attributed our last recession to the late 80s. It was early 90s. Apologies. My memory is shody.

    Regardless of all this, FOWL, I reiterate my previous statement. Go and read some of the "traditional" information that is out there. Read it with criticism. Read it with skepticism. Follow up on issues you don't believe.

    Just don't rely solely on "alternative" information sources. That is as foolish as relying solely on the mainstream media. Both should be distrusted.

    If you really are interested in monetary policy and not just interested in standing on a fairly ineffective soap box, there are plenty of links to good lit from the BoC website.

    Finally, Bradm has things a bit more dialed than you think. The banks should be able to charge you a fee for lending you money. Without them assuming the risk of your project not working, you would not have the means to undertake it. For that service they are entitled to a fee. If you don't want to pay them, do your projects without bank financing. You are not entitled to unlimited funds without cost and I am thankful the banks don't operate that way.


  8. Hey FOWL,

    Printing money that is not tied to a commodity does not produce inflation.

    I think if you look at the BoC's policy since the late 80s recession, you'll find that the BoC has explicitly followed (successfully, mind) a policy of low inflation. They've done so aggressively at the expense of periods of slow growth.

    All this while maintaining a currency that is backed by nothing but a single phrase printed on our hard currency.

    "This note is legal tender"

    This is truly the beauty of our currency. It is elegant and effective.

    While I fully appreciate "alternative" sources of information in assisting critical thought. I suspect you are relying on it at the exclusion of any "traditional" sources.

    There are plenty of problems with the banking system and I believe that the ethics of 1st world debt to 3rd world countries is a big problem for development and global equity. However, you would not be typing this post on your fancy computer without the benefits of international debt trading.

    I believe you have an insufficient grasp of the mechanics of banking to back up your complaints. I'm not meaning to insult you. I've gone on similar rants about things I don't fully understand. I just think you should round out your study of banking in published and peer reviewed books rather than watching youtube videos and talking with a bunch of pundits on a discussion board.


    Btw, Bradm - what you are describing is the entire purpose of banks. To facilitate growth.

  9. On your initial question regarding the US position on Turkey.

    From my understanding, the US is looking for a soft approach from Turkey on their civil unrest because of its consequences on the Iraqi stability.

    The focus of Turkish unrest is between the Kurds and the rest of the country. The Kurds are concentrated in the SE of Turkey on the N border of Iraq. Borders in the middle east are quite arbitrary (more so than anywhere else, I don't know) and have often split tribal delineations.

    The Kurds have played a powerful role in Iraq as they have been relatively friendly to the Iraqi restructuring. They were routinely subdued and terrorized by the Saddam regime, so they have a lot to gain with the new system.

    Despite residing in Iraq, they have much more culturally in common with the Kurds of Turkey than any other population in Iraq. So, Turkey coming down hard on the Kurds across the border pisses off the Kurds in Iraq. Since angry Iraqi Kurds could further jeopardize the Iraqi security, the US doesn't want Turkey to pound too hard on their Kurds.

    I'm sure there are many nuances missed in my take on things, but I don't really study the area.

    Much like DEM - I would be very interested in learning more about the history of the area.

  • Create New...