[QUOTE=ewmayer;312762][url=http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-25/decling-economic-freedom-united-states]The Declining Economic Freedom Of The United States[/url][/QUOTE]
I find it most remarkable that the UK is ahead of the US in the 2010 ranking. I would have guessed it to be significantly lower. There is something rotten in the state of [strike]Denmark[/strike] the Union if that ranking is indeed correct.

This one is interesting reading.

[url]http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-09-26/qe3-jobs-wall-st[/url]

It makes a nice counterpoint to post #530 above. Post #440 is also very relevant.

May I point out that QE3 is just another way to bail out the big banks sans tarp. In other words, they will sell all their marbles (trash mortgages) to the fed and then buy shiny new marbles somewhere else in the world with the proceeds. This leaves the U.S. in triple jeopardy. First because the banks will be offloading unsellable garbage to the fed, second because the money that was supposed to flow into the U.S. economy goes elsewhere, and third because the money that goes elsewhere is at risk and ultimately the U.S. will have to bail out the banks again. No wonder they call it "moral hazard".

/begin OT/
So you have a skunk, a banker, and a lawyer lying dead in the road. What is the difference between them?

There are skidmarks in front of the skunk.
/end OT/

DarJones

Anyone care to comment on the deteriorating China/Japan situation, and whether China may be deliberately fomenting anti-Japan sentiment in order to distract its populace from their own economy's Wile E. Coyote act? I remain utterly baffled that the oh-so-wise Chinese central planners thought they could in essence repeat the horrendous mistake of the Greenspan Fed - cover up one deep recession by blowing a massive credit/bad-lending bubble - and achieve a fundamentally different outcome.

Which brings me to my Chart of the Day:

[url=http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=iron-ore&months=60]Iron ore price, last 60 months[/url]

Note how the price or iron ore rocketed exponetially (like oil and other commodities) during the late-stage blowoff phase of the US housing and global credit bubble, but unlike (say) oil it kept right on rising throughout late 2008 and 2009, and only showed signs of "peakishness" much more recently. Folks in China and Australia are going to be watching the September price change datum very closely, to see if the August plunge is extending or not.

-------------

[i]Edit:[/i] Note thate there are at least a few non-sell-side "analysts" I respect who argue that the China-is-in-free-fall story is overdone. For example:

[url=http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-09-26/chinas-economy-really-imploding]Is China's Economy Really Imploding?[/url]

The reason I even bothered to read past the "they can just build a few more empty cities" stuff is that Chris Whalen is not just your ordinary China-Miracle-Gro-meme shill.

Do you eat bacon? Does a headline like "Global Bacon Shortage" catch your eye?

Don't believe it.

[url]http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/09/26/start-hoarding-now-a-global-bacon-shortage-is-coming/[/url]

The problem is that cost of production will increase significantly over the next few months as the short crop of corn in the U.S. hits global markets. The estimated impact is a 1.5% reduction in number of pigs that get slaughtered. What does it really mean? Well, it means that your bacon price will increase substantially. Once you get past all the gobbledygook, what this report boils down to is a pork producers group blaring inflamatory headlines in a bid to increase the price stores pay to pork farmers. Sorry folks, commodities are priced based on supply and demand. Besides, we would all be better off eating more fish and chicken. Oops, did I say chicken? Chickens eat corn too. Guess their price is headed up along with beef and pork. What about fish? Well, significant amounts of fish are farmed and most of the rest comes from the ocean. Farmed fish eat lots of protein some of which is derived from corn and soy. Ocean fish are already pushing the limits of sustainability so I guess they are not a good option. Guess this means fish will go up too.

One of the "1984" type predictions is that as food prices rise, people will have to move down the food chain to eat. Fish, chicken, mutton, beef, etc. are up the chain from soy, corn, wheat, etc. Guess this means we will have to start eating corn instead of feeding it to the pigs. This sounds kind of cheeky, but it is an all too real part of our possible future.

DarJones

[QUOTE=Fusion_power;312851]May I point out that QE3 is just another way to bail out the big banks sans tarp. In other words, they will sell all their marbles (trash mortgages) to the fed and then buy shiny new marbles somewhere else in the world with the proceeds. This leaves the U.S. in triple jeopardy. First because the banks will be offloading unsellable garbage to the fed, second because the money that was supposed to flow into the U.S. economy goes elsewhere, and third because the money that goes elsewhere is at risk and ultimately the U.S. will have to bail out the banks again. No wonder they call it "moral hazard".[/QUOTE]
TV show idea: Couple of good ole boys from moonshine country who lost their (non-moonshining day) jobs when the economy went south in 2008-2009 turn their skills to profitable use, funneling stacks of hot-off-the-presses government bailout money to the Wall Street banks, using their specially modified hot rod moonshinin'-mobile to tear up the back alleyways of Manhattan. Show is called
[b]
The Dukes of Moral Hazard
[/b]
[QUOTE]/begin OT/
So you have a skunk, a banker, and a lawyer lying dead in the road. What is the difference between them?

There are skidmarks in front of the skunk.
/end OT/[/QUOTE]
There is more to the story: The reason these 3 unlikely-to-be-found-together characters were in one place is that the skunk was suing the banker for the loss of the Skunk family nest egg via a "surefire" securitized subprime loan investment vehicle. The lawyer was just serving the banker the papers when out of nowhere comes this specially modified hot rod moonshinin'-mobile stuffed with hot-off-the-presses government bailout money, being driven at a wildly unsafe rate of speed by a couple of good ole boys...

Yee Haw, and praise cousin Bennie Bernanke and his Ctrl-P key.

[QUOTE=Fusion_power;312880]The problem is that cost of production will increase significantly over the next few months as the short crop of corn in the U.S. hits global markets. The estimated impact is a 1.5% reduction in number of pigs that get slaughtered. [/QUOTE]

Meanwhile, the US of A (read: the consumer) is [URL="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/05/25/demand-strong-for-government-program-paying-farmers-not-to-plant-crops/"]actually paying Farmers to not plant crops[/URL].

Additionally, a sizable percentage of the corn which is grown ends up being converted into ethanol instead of being used for food.

May we live in interesting times....

[QUOTE][URL="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-25/decling-economic-freedom-united-states"]The Declining Economic Freedom Of The United States[/URL]

[/QUOTE]Let's be skeptical about accepting a particular (Frasier Institute) group's scoring method as authoritative. I'm sure there are different weightings, equally valid on their face, by which the U.S. "ranking" would fare better. Perhaps the Frasier Institute has chosen factors which further some other agenda.

Also, relative "ranking" can reflect other countries' improvements, not just a U.S. decline.

While the comments on F.I.'s scoring factors may be valid, there could be other factors, not included in the Frasier Institute's score, that paint a different picture.

[QUOTE=chalsall;312941]Meanwhile, the US of A (read: the consumer) is [URL="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/05/25/demand-strong-for-government-program-paying-farmers-not-to-plant-crops/"]actually paying Farmers to not plant crops[/URL].[/QUOTE]That's not news; the U.S. has had a variety of farm subsidies ever since the Great Depression. The particular farm subsidy (Conservation Reserve Program) that is that article's subject is almost sixty years old. ([URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_Reserve_Program[/URL])

[quote]Additionally, a sizable percentage of the corn which is grown ends up being converted into ethanol instead of being used for food.[/quote]Now, _that_ is relatively recent.

[QUOTE=cheesehead;312948]Now, _that_ is relatively recent.[/QUOTE]That == corn (sic --- what the rest of the world calls maize) -> ethanol.

Back in the good old days it was rye or barley rather than maize.

In the good old days, it was for [STRIKE]drinking[/STRIKE] medicinal purposes, not burning in an automobile.

DarJones

[QUOTE=Fusion_power;312955]In the good old days, it was for [STRIKE]drinking[/STRIKE] medicinal purposes, not burning in an automobile.[/QUOTE]

Indeed.

Subject to correction, never before have we let people go hungry (and/or pay more for food) in order to power motor vehicles.