Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: IMF’s Strauss-Kahn arrested over ‘sex assault’

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    342


    Default IMF’s Strauss-Kahn arrested over ‘sex assault’

    http://www.euronews.net/2011/05/15/i...r-sex-assault/


    So i know he's known as a womanizer but would he really rape a woman, or do you think its a conspiracy to frame him?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,590


    Default

    I guess you could say that they....felt the wrath of Strauss-Kahn.

    Kaaaaaaahn!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Omnipresence
    Posts
    2,021


    Default

    Meh this is the kind of accusation which is effective even if false. Also right after the Porsche thing too.

    I don't think the PS have any other viable alternative. I don't really rate Hollande, although maybe Aubry might run now. Anyway
    DSK was quite a good minister of economy and he basically opened up the IMF (basically brought it back to it's Keynesian roots). The fund will probably turn to "it's mostly fiscal again" with Lipsky leading it, lets just hope that Blanchard remains as chief economist and can offer enough counterweight.
    Last edited by Jesus; 05-15-2011 at 02:59 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    7,240


    Default

    Hey Jesus, unrelated, but do you happen to read Scott Sumner's blog? I used to be a big fan of Krugman (well, I still am) and was all onboard the Keynsian camp, but Sumner totally has me converted to his quasi-monetarist view.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    4,364


    Default

    He isn't a rape guy.. he's had woman issues before.. with that Hungarian woman

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Omnipresence
    Posts
    2,021


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jebus View Post
    Hey Jesus, unrelated, but do you happen to read Scott Sumner's blog? I used to be a big fan of Krugman (well, I still am) and was all onboard the Keynsian camp, but Sumner totally has me converted to his quasi-monetarist view.
    Don’t really have much time, since I’m at work, but yup I read Sumner/The Money Illusion blog. The thing about NGDP targeting is that it sounds nice in theory. It’s quite technocratic, like most of monetarism. Just let a central bank target a 5%-6% annual NGDP growth path and the economy will return to equilibrium. The advantage obviously is that a central bank doesn’t have to care about inflation. If inflation hits like 4% then a central bank can just say “hey don’t blame us, blame the real economy for only making up 1-2% of nominal growth”.

    In practice it does have quite a lot of problems. One obviously has to calculate NGDP in a timely manner which is much more difficult compared to calculating inflation/core inflation.
    Secondly the way NGDP targeting would work is via the inflation expectations channel, in which a central bank commits itself not to really care about inflation. This goes against what central banks have been doing for the past 25-30 years. So this simply can’t be credible in the short run, nor do I think it’s politically viable if you look at the reactions of the inflation hawks on QE2… .
    Furthermore the effects of monetary policy usually happen with some time lags, especially unconventional monetary policy which would be necessary right now. Also the first order effects of a policy choice are usually not “neutral”, they reward some people more than others. Take the way QE2 worked, this worked by changing the maturity structure of debt out there, changing long term bonds for short term assets which would lead to increased output via a wealth effect (higher share prices, leading to higher consumption and investment) and ultimately higher employment. So basically you first pass via the financial sector, you could easily skip them. Of course this latter point isn’t necessarily an argument against NGDP targeting since it could be achieved (in theory) via other means, but I doubt it would happen any other way.

    So, like Krugman, I’m sceptical about NGDP targeting. A combination of fiscal policy and a higher inflation target (4% instead of 2%) like Olivier Blanchard/ Krugman propose would be better and is still the most political realistic option I think (although the deficit and inflation hawks are strong).

    Btw. If I had my way I’d finance a significant part of fiscal policy via monetary financing (printing money), so I’d achieve some form of NGDP targeting too and skip the financial sector, and use the current pool of idle resources to invest in some public goods (transportation links, energy efficiency etc). Not going to happen obviously.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,100


    Default

    It's always the same. If he raped her, he deserves everything he gets, if he didn't, that sucks. I was really seeing this man as my next President.

    This seems too big to be true but at the same time, I don't see why it would be fake. Sarko is an as... someone I don't appreciate very much but he's far from stupid. This would be too risky. So I don't believe in the trap theory either...

    Well, I guess : Martine for President !
    ___________________________________________

    All the Beautiful Things you do

    Respect my authoritah !

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    7,240


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus View Post
    in which a central bank commits itself not to really care about inflation. This goes against what central banks have been doing for the past 25-30 years. So this simply can’t be credible in the short run
    If the central bank really wanted to create inflation, I see no reason why the markets wouldn't believe it. There's never really been a time where a central bank has failed to create inflation when it really wanted to. Especially with the recent wave of conservatives adopting a hard money view and warning about the impending hyperinflation, why wouldn't it be credible?

    nor do I think it’s politically viable if you look at the reactions of the inflation hawks on QE2… .
    I don't think it's any less politically viable than doubling the implicit inflation target of the past 15 years. (from 2% to 4% as Krugman suggests) I can just imagine Bernanke trying to explain to the public that it wants to double inflation. He would never do it. The beautiful thing about NGDP targeting is that it communicates the purpose of the central bank more clearly. The purpose should be to increase as much agregegate demand as possible with as little inflation as possible. A central bank telling the public that it wants to increase our nominal spending or our nominal income is much easier to stomach than telling the public that it wants to increase inflation. Also, with the excess capacity we have, most of the nominal growth should translate into real growth so inflation should not be that big of a problem and 4% inflation might not even be needed. And just in general, the policy implications for the central bank would have been much more apparent under an NGDP targeting regime compared to inflation targeting in 2008 and this whole mess could have probably been avoided. Even better if level targeting (as Sumner suggests) was adopted to make up for the low NGDP from the past 2 years in order to return us back to trend. Level targeting would also appease the inflation hawks by pissing on inflation when NGDP gets too high by promising lower NGDP the next year. In the long run, it's not very likely we'll see high inflation with 5% NGDP anyway because 5% NGDP tedns to be associated with 2-3% inflation. During the stagflation of the 70s in the US, NGDP got up to 15%, so it's hard to imagine inflation getting high with only a 5% NGDP target. So it's not like an NGDP targeting would ignore inflation completely. On the contrary. It would make sure inflation stays low and stable.

    A combination of fiscal policy and a higher inflation target (4% instead of 2%) like Olivier Blanchard/ Krugman propose would be better and is still the most political realistic option I think (although the deficit and inflation hawks are strong).
    I'm not so sure fiscal policy as an AD tool is really worth it anymore. I see zero chance of any more being passed and don't want to be relying on politicians to do what's needed in a timely fashion. It would be better if a strict NGDP level targeting rule was adopted so we wouldn't have to worry about inflation hawks or deficit hawks. And because of Sumner, I've have become more skeptical of fiscal stimulus multipliers. Even in a liquidity trap, I could see the central bank authorities neutralizing fiscal policy, not by necessary raising interest rates, but by doing less QE than what they would have otherwise had the stimulus package not passed. Why increase our deficit when we could increase AD for free by printing more money? Bernanke in a recent press conference said 2% core cpi was an upper bound, not the actual target, so fiscal stimulus seems counter productive to me because it won't have much effect unless Bernanke raises the inflation target. You could do all the fiscal stimulus you want, but as long Bernanke doesn't let inflation rise past 2% (or around 1% if that indeed is the new target), fiscal stimulus won't do any good.

    Btw. If I had my way I’d finance a significant part of fiscal policy via monetary financing (printing money), so I’d achieve some form of NGDP targeting too and skip the financial sector, and use the current pool of idle resources to invest in some public goods (transportation links, energy efficiency etc). Not going to happen obviously.
    That indeed sounds awesome, but I guess there's a bit of a slippery slope in there.


    EDIT:
    One obviously has to calculate NGDP in a timely manner which is much more difficult compared to calculating inflation/core inflation.
    Sumner has said something about setting up an NGDP futures market. I honestly haven't really wrapped head around it yet and I'm not quite sure how it would work exactly. The point is that the central bank would target the forecast of NGDP, not the actual NGDP. As long as expectations of NGDP growth are kept stable, all should be well. Sort of targeting inflation expectations (via TIPS spread) instead of actual inflation.
    Last edited by Jebus; 05-16-2011 at 07:59 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,832


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Harleyquiiinn View Post
    It's always the same. If he raped her, he deserves everything he gets, if he didn't, that sucks. I was really seeing this man as my next President.

    This seems too big to be true but at the same time, I don't see why it would be fake. Sarko is an as... someone I don't appreciate very much but he's far from stupid. This would be too risky. So I don't believe in the trap theory either...

    Well, I guess : Martine for President !
    What boggles the mind is how so many people really think this was some sort of trap...like an African immigrant living in the Bronx who cleans a Times Square hotel would clearly be a pawn of the French government. Like, seriously? This is a thought that occurs to anyone ever? Sarko may be an ass, but do people in France really think he's magic like that?
    I am part of a degenerate elite
    Dragging our society into the street



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,100


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Miss_1565 View Post
    What boggles the mind is how so many people really think this was some sort of trap...like an African immigrant living in the Bronx who cleans a Times Square hotel would clearly be a pawn of the French government. Like, seriously? This is a thought that occurs to anyone ever? Sarko may be an ass, but do people in France really think he's magic like that?
    No, that has nothing to do with the victim but Sarko is considered, at least unconsciously, the head of a sort of mob for a lot of the french population. The guy is powerful.

    And people believe in the trap theory mostly because of the timing.

    The G8 is in a few weeks and it was known that DSK was waiting for it to announce he was a candidate to the Presidential election next year. He is the only one that the polls indicate as a winner against Sarko. Every time for 2 months.

    Also, on the day of the arrest, a young guy known for being part of Sarko's party youth section and having a blog about "the lies of the left" talked about the arrest "at the hotel" before the NY post did.

    Finally, about 2 weeks ago, DSK gave an interview explaining that he was afraid to get trapped on one of his weaknesses "women, money or judaism".

    See, the trap theory is a question of context really...

    But as stated before, I have a hard time believing it myself...
    ___________________________________________

    All the Beautiful Things you do

    Respect my authoritah !

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •