THE Group of 7 (G7) Thread (merged)

by **Theo** » Fri 01 Oct 2004, 00:28:41

Saw this tonight: yahoo

This quote was interesting: Another G7 official suggested the rise in oil costs was rooted in such fundamental factors as over-estimated supplies and was not solely due to speculation.
There is "a recognition that oil resources are scarcer than was thought a few years ago," the official said. "We agree there is a need for more transparency on the potential supply of various areas."

by **Barbara** » Sat 02 Oct 2004, 17:49:08

"We really are up against the wall on this issue of supply," said economist Sung Won Sohn of Wells Fargo Bank in Minneapolis. "Supplies are limited but it's something people don't want to admit and demand is rising from China at an exponential rate and will continue to do so." Fargo Bank.

Reuters article about G7 and oil (3 pages long): link

by **BabyPeanut** » Sat 02 Oct 2004, 19:06:04

So the G20's biggest economy doesn't want to be the G7 (G8?)'s smallest economy. I wonder when the current G7 will want to be part of the G20 (G27?)

by **skiwi** » Wed 06 Apr 2005, 00:11:24

We're onto it sheeple :twisted:

G7 to seek development of alternative energy
G7 to seek development of alternative energy

The Group of Seven economies will call for the development of alternative energy sources in the face of record high crude oil prices when they meet next week in Washington, Kyodo news agency said on Tuesday...

..Kyodo said it would be the first time that the seven industrialised nations -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States -- have referred to use of alternative energy sources in their statement...

by **gego** » Wed 06 Apr 2005, 00:42:02

If you believe the G7 has any of your interest at heart, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell to you at a really good price.

This is a group designed to rig the world economy in the favor of a few (them) at the expense of the many (you). Slavery, after all, only works when a few in charge reap the production of the many. You are the many and it simply would not work for you to exploit the production of the few, even if they were capable of working instead of exploiting. Perhaps you have noticed the ache in your rectum when you wake up in the morning? (Ever seen the skit on the Chapell show?)

by **skiwi** » Fri 15 Apr 2005, 19:11:02

G7 officials say world can adapt to higher oil prices

Finance officials from rich nations gathering in Washington for weekend talks said today
the economies of the world need to devise ways to adjust to higher energy costs...

.US Treasury Secretary John Snow, on Bloomberg television, acknowledged that
costlier oil hurt. But he also indicated the G7 was preparing for an era in which energy
prices are likely to stay at levels not foreseen as recently as a year ago...

by **RonMN** » Fri 15 Apr 2005, 19:18:25

Ofcourse WE can adapt...but the stock market can't, the economy wont...and the dollar...well... :cry:

by **some_guy282** » Fri 15 Apr 2005, 21:52:54

RonMN wrote:Ofcourse WE can adapt...but the stock market can't, the economy wont...and the dollar...well...

Don't forget the airlines are already going crazy over the current oil prices. If they just stay as is for another year or so some airlines are going out of business. How will the economy "adapt" to all those lost jobs?

by **MicroHydro** » Sat 16 Apr 2005, 02:32:16

some_guy282 wrote:Don't forget the airlines are already going crazy over the current oil prices. If they just stay as is for another year or so some airlines are going out of business. How will the economy "adapt" to all those lost jobs?

In the short term, there will be unemployment. In the medium term, there will be lots of jobs in the military. In the longer term there will be work. Laid off jet engine mechanics can find work as wind turbine mechanics. Pilots can drive streetcars and cabin attendants can serve refreshments on commuter trains.

by **Euric** » Sun 17 Apr 2005, 12:01:28

http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/050416/group.html?.v=8

Funny how no one at the meeting ever discusses selling oil and other commodities in a basket of currencies and ending the petro-dollar (dollar hegemony) economy as the first step to rebalancing the world's economy.

How can the German economy or any economy "grow" if they are limited by treaty to keep deficit spending within a 3 % of GDP range? Economies that were recently in the stone age and are modernising quickly are those experiecing double digit growth and will continue to due so as they climb the exponential curve. Once they get to the top it will be all flat.

Those economies that are developed either have to spend money they don't have, cut perks and benfits from the worker's pay or move their operations to a low wage region to experience growth. The US is doing all of these and the Germans almost none. If growth means running high deficits, creating a working poor population by cutting benefits and/or exporting well paying jobs, then despite low growth for Germany, the Germans will be better off then the Americans in the long term.

http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCo ... 854_newsml

by **dark-suzie** » Mon 18 Apr 2005, 02:10:18

Rich people to rest of world:

"deal with it."

by **Cid_Yama** » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:01:59

According to the Financial Times, which said it obtained a copy of an FSF “options paper,” possible recommendations — the bulk of which were confirmed by the source as ideas which were being discussed — included:

• tax-funded recapitalization of banks - (Taxpayers pay for the banks losses)

• outright public purchase of mortgage-backed securities - (Taxpayers forced to buy the worthless mortgage-backed securities no one else would buy at the bank's fantasy price)

• getting a big group of the important banks to disclose simultaneously financial positions based on a “common template.” - (All the Banks agree to the same lie)

• authorities could organize a consortium of long-term private investors to buy mortgage assets from banks, possibly with state “co-investment” or governments could buy assets outright - (If there is too much worthless paper for the taxpayers to buy they will have to dupe a bunch of stupid private investors to buy the rest)

• governments might want to “announce a co-ordinated operation to boost capital simultaneously in a number of institutions” with the help of public funds, to avoid stigma problems - (Taxpayers pay for the losses of other institutions as well)

• central banks could further expand their liquidity support operations, including expanding the eligible collateral and providing emergency liquidity support to troubled institutions - (Central Banks purchase worthless securities from everyone and charge it to the taxpayers.)

Other FSF ideas discussed by envoys to that FSF meeting last Friday and Saturday in Rome, were, as follows, according to the Financial Times and double-checked with the source by Reuters:

• temporary suspension of capital requirements - (Banks can loan as much as they want even if they don't have the money to back it up, they just need to type it into the borrower's account)

• temporarily suspending capital and reporting rules that tie prudential requirements to market values of securities. - (Banks don't have to tell anyone how much they have or don't have or how much or little anything they have is worth)

• regulators could be allowed to temporarily change capital rules under Basel II supervision rules to allow trading assets to be treated as available-for-sale, reducing their impact on capital calculations. - (Bank auditors encouraged to lie about what the banks have or don't have.)

• regulators could temporarily relax regulatory capital minimums wholesale, or suspend accounting rules for some assets - (Banks don't have to have any money and can say what they have is worth anything they want)

On the last point, the Financial Times said a source it spoke to said the FSF nevertheless feared could “damage market confidence.” Duh!!!

link

I wish this was an April Fool's joke, but it's not. I guess the taxpayer will be the April Fool.

No wonder the markets rallied today. They're robbing the poor to give to the rich. (and economically enslaving generations to come)

Let's Party! The taxpayer is paying for it.

Where's Robin Hood when you need him?

by **Revi** » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:20:59

Great decoding of the financial speak. It looks really bad for us little people. Do you think that their tricks will work? Or will the smart money exit stage left, leaving us taxpayers holding the bag?

by **Cid_Yama** » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:33:13

Do you think that their tricks will work?

No. You can't allow Banks just to create free money out of thin air, especially since there is so much out there already. The US Dollar will totally collapse and we will experience what happened to Germany during the Weimar Republic.

Besides, you are eventually going to have a Tax Revolution on your hands. Maybe people dumping 1040's into Boston Harbor.

This is a clear case of Taxation without representation.

Or, paying tribute to our financial overlords.

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States 1801-1809

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson,1816

by **Iaato** » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:59:55

Nice find and interpretation, Cid. Scary stuff. Some of this they have already put into play.

The Boston Tea Party idea has been entertained and dealt with, I'm sure. When I heard about the stimulus rebate that was triggered by filing your taxes, I'm sure that this is what TPTB were thinking about. I'm expecting a routine stimulus each year from here on out as a cheap bribe to me to get me to pay my taxes and look the other way while the rich get socialized.

But I'm not sure whether, by next April 15th, they might have a rebellion on their hands, no matter what.

by **Cid_Yama** » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 00:08:31

When I heard about the stimulus rebate that was triggered by filing your taxes, I'm sure that this is what TPTB were thinking about.

I had the exact same thought.

by **Cashmere** » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 14:16:37

Cid - great post - thanks.

by **Ludi** » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 17:13:22

Time to move to a lower tax bracket.
:-x

by **Ainan** » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 21:15:22

Ludi wrote:Time to move to a lower tax bracket.

Sorry for quoting you, but i couldn't stop laughing after reading this.

I'm not American, but i have heard your Income Tax which you file yourself every year is illegal? In that there is no law for it, could anyone explain this further?

by **Cid_Yama** » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 23:32:56

Here you go, Ainan. Everything you wanted to know. In an awesome video no less.

http://cid-yama.livejournal.com/149923.html