Comments on: Jim Rogers: More Pain for the Greenback, and the Failure of the Federal Reserve http://jutiagroup.com/2008/04/08/jim-rogers-more-pain-for-the-greenback-and-the-failure-of-the-federal-reserve/ Market Jitters & Political Critters Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:58:17 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Frank Ruscica http://jutiagroup.com/2008/04/08/jim-rogers-more-pain-for-the-greenback-and-the-failure-of-the-federal-reserve/comment-page-1/#comment-8347 Frank Ruscica Thu, 10 Apr 2008 08:21:06 +0000 http://jutiagroup.com/archive/2008/04/08/660/#comment-8347 The diagnosis is not at issue: moral hazard risks abound. The cure, then, will maximize the likelihood that gratuitous moral hazard is too impolitic. Historically, a job largely for the fourth estate (e.g., Jacob Riis, H.L. Mencken). How, then, to make it maximally profitable for the fourth estate of today to muckrake? Imho, the key insights: 1) The introduction of particular online markets, starting with a new kind of market for the ad spaces on blogs, will provide people with new and improved ways to develop, showcase and profit from expertise. 2) Owning popular markets of the aforesaid kinds is an ideal way to increase profits for an American media conglomerate that owns a broadcast TV network. 3) The less benefit individual speculators can derive from moral hazard, the more they will utilize said markets. Details are online at http://www.loveatmadisonandwall.com. Given the above, the sooner media conglomerates start introducing/popularizing the aforesaid markets, the sooner a lot of top-quality entertainment programming will, in part: 1) increase awareness of (proposed) public policies that (would) put taxpayers on the receiving end of gratuitous moral hazard (e.g., increase awareness via a next-gen Jed Bartlet channeling Jon Stewart and Vietnam-era Walter Cronkite) 2) showcase elected representatives who protect taxpayers from gratuitous moral hazard Thoughts? Best, The diagnosis is not at issue: moral hazard risks abound.

The cure, then, will maximize the likelihood that gratuitous moral hazard is too impolitic.

Historically, a job largely for the fourth estate (e.g., Jacob Riis, H.L. Mencken).

How, then, to make it maximally profitable for the fourth estate of today to muckrake?

Imho, the key insights:

1) The introduction of particular online markets, starting with a new kind of market for the ad spaces on blogs, will provide people with new and improved ways to develop, showcase and profit from expertise.

2) Owning popular markets of the aforesaid kinds is an ideal way to increase profits for an American media conglomerate that owns a broadcast TV network.

3) The less benefit individual speculators can derive from moral hazard, the more they will utilize said markets.

Details are online at http://www.loveatmadisonandwall.com.

Given the above, the sooner media conglomerates start introducing/popularizing the aforesaid markets, the sooner a lot of top-quality entertainment programming will, in part:

1) increase awareness of (proposed) public policies that (would) put taxpayers on the receiving end of gratuitous moral hazard (e.g., increase awareness via a next-gen Jed Bartlet channeling Jon Stewart and Vietnam-era Walter Cronkite)
2) showcase elected representatives who protect taxpayers from gratuitous moral hazard

Thoughts?

Best,

]]> By: RS http://jutiagroup.com/2008/04/08/jim-rogers-more-pain-for-the-greenback-and-the-failure-of-the-federal-reserve/comment-page-1/#comment-8334 RS Tue, 08 Apr 2008 23:50:48 +0000 http://jutiagroup.com/archive/2008/04/08/660/#comment-8334 The Perfect Storm? Today during an interview on CNBC Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said: “…for the first time in my memory we’ve had both the banking system and the securities markets in trouble. Historically, it was always one or the other…” Could he be describing The Perfect Storm? If so, how could that not be catastrophic? The Perfect Storm?
Today during an interview on CNBC Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said: “…for the first time in my memory we’ve had both the banking system and the securities markets in trouble. Historically, it was always one or the other…” Could he be describing The Perfect Storm? If so, how could that not be catastrophic?

]]>