EU urged to "keep up pressure" despite "slight differences"

It would take at least 20 years for the EU to develop a reliable alternative supply to Russian gas and oil, but Ukraine will end in about less than 15 months time and its all too late for the EU to escape Russian control.

Fallon was taking part in a meeting of EU defense ministers in Italy dedicated to crises in Ukraine, Iraq and Libya, when he said the EU must remain determined when it comes to sanctions.

One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another.If I were him I would rather be concerned of what would the 19th of September will look like. If Scotland goes, Spain will break up and so will Belgium – Italy is less likely to follow suit but one never knows, especially given its never-ending economic stagnation and debilitated political system. The euro will slump in value and the whole of the EU will be thrown into constitutional crisis – and that even before the UK decides whether or not to leave the bloc.

As to further sanctions against Russia he should ask himself the following question.Had the US/EU sanctions had any effect on Iran or China? They didn't.Countries that produce hot air and print fiat money cannot impose sanctions on countries which hold tangible assets.Period.

Sorry, don't get your point. Not sure how the above proves that anybody is clown :)

When a politician argues one day against EU membership and the next one tells the Serbs to be good europeans by imposing sanctions against Russia doesn't such behaviour make him a clown?

Again, I don't get your point. All the events your mentioned have nothing to do with the Euro or the EU. For example, Scotland is voting for independence from UK, but if it becomes independent, Scotland still wants to be an EU member. In addition, the UK or Scotland are not part of the Euro. So, really your statement above lacks any logical connection between cause and effect!

I didn't expect you to get my point.I am talking about the contagion effect that Scottish independence could potentially have on Eurozone members ie Spain,Belgium,Italy etc.If Scotland goes there will be demands for referenda in those countries with potentially catastrophic results not only for the countries concerned but the whole of euroland.

I wonder if Russian children eat tangible assets like oil and gas for dinner :)

I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry.I will definitely prefer to own tangible assets and trade them for other commodities than print money out of thin air and build up debt.

If the EU is not strong on this it will cost much more in the longer term.

There are no cheap solutions - but there are ways of managing the costs.

The EU needs to open up alternatives to Russian gas - even a short term blip in the need for Russian fuels would be an economic disaster for Russia.

Go for it Europe.

Icj1

Why a Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in the UK?!

Because Scottish independence would “tilt the entire U.K. political spectrum to the right.” That would boost the odds of a conservative majority winning in 2015.Currently, 40 of Scotland’s 59 members parliament come from the Labour party compared to just one from the conservatives.Furthermore the anti-EU UKIP party which came top on last EU elections draws its support exclusively from England and if the pattern of the EU elections is repeated in next year's general election and since its leaders have demanded an immediate referendum on EU withdrawal it's logical to assume that it's going to be granted.

For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.

The EU is the promised land,according to Albanian posters,yet there are more than 30 million unemployed with large segments of its population living in extreme poverty.

http://www.inequalitywatch.eu/spip.php?article99

In US you have more than 50 million on food stamps with real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark.So what is your point? Poverty exists everywhere.

One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another.
(Leonidas, 10 September 2014 18:03)

Sorry, don't get your point. Not sure how the above proves that anybody is clown :)
----------

If I were him I would rather be concerned of what would the 19th of September will look like. If Scotland goes, Spain will break up and so will Belgium – Italy is less likely to follow suit but one never knows, especially given its never-ending economic stagnation and debilitated political system. The euro will slump in value and the whole of the EU will be thrown into constitutional crisis
(Leonidas, 10 September 2014 18:03)

Again, I don't get your point. All the events your mentioned have nothing to do with the Euro or the EU. For example, Scotland is voting for independence from UK, but if it becomes independent, Scotland still wants to be an EU member. In addition, the UK or Scotland are not part of the Euro. So, really your statement above lacks any logical connection between cause and effect!
----------

Countries that produce hot air and print fiat money cannot impose sanctions on countries which hold tangible assets.Period.
(Leonidas, 10 September 2014 18:03)

I wonder if Russian children eat tangible assets like oil and gas for dinner :)

It would take at least 20 years for the EU to develop a reliable alternative supply to Russian gas and oil, but Ukraine will end in about less than 15 months time and its all too late for the EU to escape Russian control.
(sj, 10 September 2014 14:41)

And the other face of the coin:

It would take at least 20 years for Russia to develop a reliable alternative demand for Russian gas and oil, but Ukraine will end in about less than 15 months time and its all too late for Russia to escape EU control :)

I am talking about the contagion effect that Scottish independence could potentially have on Eurozone members ie Spain,Belgium,Italy etc.If Scotland goes there will be demands for referenda in those countries with potentially catastrophic results not only for the countries concerned but the whole of euroland.

LOL, our blog's Nostradamus, Leonidas, as usual, predicting apocalypse and mayhem!

Any of the countries, if they split up, will join the Eurozone and the EU. Things are being done through referendums not wars. To win in a referenum you need to convince 50%+1 people that it is good. That means convince businesses that nothing bad will happen, banks that they will not lose assets, workers that they will not lose jobs, etc etc. And you need to do that with a good and solid plan that can be executed in practice as well not just hot air. Spain, Belgium, Italy are not Serbia, and the EU is not Yugoslavia.

The worse that could happen is just be some more beuraucracy addded.

For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:34)

Their GDP/capita is three times higher of that of Kosovo and had it not been for immigration the overwhelming majority of Albanians would've been unemployed and Albanians are happy.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Your argument was that “I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry”. I proved you wrong at that.

Now, since you are switching argument (which is very common of you when you’re proved wrong), then, yes, you are correct in your new argument; people in Turkmenistan are less hungry (by about 22% according to the IMF) than in Kosovo – what a great achievement for Turkmenistan, especially considering its vast natural resources compared to Kosovo!

You probably need a PHD to understand it. If you deposit $100 at the bank and the bank has a reserve requirement of 10 percent, the bank must keep $10 of your money on reserve and can lend out the $90.In essence, the bank has taken $100 and has turned it into $190 by giving you a $100 credit on your deposits and then lending the additional $90 out to someone else.This process can keep on going until the amount deposited from the last loan becomes trivial, but by that point a large amount of money has been "created.Ultimately, your initial $100 can grow into $1,000with a 10 percent reserve requirement.With larger initial deposits the money created could become astronomical.The bank receives interest on the whole new credit that has been created.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 10:43)

Ok, you are not contradicting anything I said and we're saying the same thing and that proves my point where we started all of this that a bank (virtually all over the world) "makes money by building debt". Without the bank borrowing that initial $100 that you deposit, the whole process does not start.

Why a Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in the UK?!
Because Scottish independence would “tilt the entire U.K. political spectrum to the right.” That would boost the odds of a conservative majority winning in 2015.Currently, 40 of Scotland’s 59 members parliament come from the Labour party compared to just one from the conservatives.Furthermore the anti-EU UKIP party which came top on last EU elections draws its support exclusively from England and if the pattern of the EU elections is repeated in next year's general election and since its leaders have demanded an immediate referendum on EU withdrawal it's logical to assume that it's going to be granted.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 11:37)

Good job mate, you're starting to make some progress in building an argument. But, there is an issue in the logical flow of your argument above. The holding of the referendum does not depend much on the Scottish independence. A bill for the referendum was already approved by the Commons last year (304 to nil) but rejected by the Lords. The same Bill passing again becomes an Act of Parliament because the Lords can only reject it once. So, as you can see the holding of the referendum has not much to do with the Scottish vote on independence. If the conservatives wanted to do it, they have the votes to do it even in the current Parliament.

For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.
(icj1, 12 September 2014 03:01)

The EU is the promised land,according to Albanian posters,yet there are more than 30 million unemployed with large segments of its population living in extreme poverty.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 11:37)

Your argument was that “I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry”. I proved you wrong at that.

Now, since you are switching argument for a second time (which is very common of you when you’re proved wrong), then, yes, you are correct in your new argument. Whoever says that the EU is the promised land (Albanians, Serbs, or whoever) is wrong. But, it is better than most of the world (albeit not perfect). If establish a scale of well-being of, say, 1-10, with 1 being the hell and 10 being the paradise, people living at level 2 would happily want to be at level 6. Now 6 is not perfect, but, I believe, it would be stupid for somebody to say that just because I can’t be at 10, then I prefer to remain at 2 rather than trying 6 for now. And, indeed, people are not stupid; that’s why they still try to emigrate to the EU despite its imperfections, because it is still better than most of their home countries.

When a politician argues one day against EU membership and the next one tells the Serbs to be good europeans by imposing sanctions against Russia doesn't such behaviour make him a clown?
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

That's not what you said in the prior post... But glad that you recognized that there was no logical connection and you had to change the statement :)
----------

I didn't expect you to get my point.I am talking about the contagion effect that Scottish independence could potentially have on Eurozone members ie Spain,Belgium,Italy etc.If Scotland goes there will be demands for referenda in those countries with potentially catastrophic results not only for the countries concerned but the whole of euroland.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

Sorry, but you failed to explain what the catastrophic results are! Nobody has or is asking not to be part of Euroland!!! You just throw unconnected thoughts out there without any logical cause-effect reasoning...

I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

Of course, because you don't research to address your ignorance. For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed. Compare that to Canada with estimated oil & gas reserves of $0,6 million per capita, but with GDP per capita of $41.500, unemployment of 7% and poverty rate of 9%. So, yeah, you could go hungry even if you own oil because of poor governance and because oil can't be served for dinner.
----------

I will definitely prefer to own tangible assets and trade them for other commodities than print money out of thin air and build up debt.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

But the trade happens via money. Also, oil & gas are not the only tangible assets that exist on Earth. Finally, there is nothing wrong about building debt. Most of people would not have homes without debt. America would not have become a superpower without building debt - is that what concerns you dear? To make things simple for you with an everyday example: a bank builds debt by taking a deposit from you and paying you 1% in interest and then lends that money at 4% interest. So the bank makes money by building debt. I'm sure our dear CE of B92 forums sj can explain that much better given his/her vast expertise in the banking sector.

P.S. CE = Chief Economist

(icj1,
For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.

Their GDP/capita is three times higher of that of Kosovo and had it not been for immigration the overwhelming majority of Albanians would've been unemployed and Albanians are happy.

That's not what you said in the prior post..

You need some extra lessons in English to understand what I am talking about.This is what I said on my original posting.
"One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another".

a bank builds debt by taking a deposit from you and paying you 1% in interest and then lends that money at 4% interest. So the bank makes money by building debt.

This is probably how banking is done in kosovo.The West has developed a new banking system called fractional reserve banking in which only a fraction of bank deposits are backed by actual cash-on-hand and are available for withdrawal.

but you failed to explain what the catastrophic results are!

A Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in what will be left of the UK with all polls pointing to EU withdrawal.Marred this with Le Pen's popularity in France and Spain's secession of Catalonia the EU will be toast.

That's not what you said in the prior post..
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:30)

You need some extra lessons in English to understand what I am talking about.This is what I said on my original posting.
"One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another".
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Yes, that’s what you said on your original post, but that’s not the same as your new statement that

“When a politician argues one day against EU membership and the next one tells the Serbs to be good europeans by imposing sanctions against Russia doesn't such behaviour make him a clown? (Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)”.

Thanks for proving my point that your new post is different from the prior one after I pointed out to you that there was a lack of logical connection in your argument. You see, you could avoid all of this, dear, by thinking and researching before writing a post, rather than writing a post first and then think and/or do the research after you are questioned.

a bank builds debt by taking a deposit from you and paying you 1% in interest and then lends that money at 4% interest. So the bank makes money by building debt.
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:34)

This is probably how banking is done in kosovo.The West has developed a new banking system called fractional reserve banking in which only a fraction of bank deposits are backed by actual cash-on-hand and are available for withdrawal.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

That’s how it is done in Kosovo, Serbia, Russia, China, Malaysia and in most of the world. You are absolutely correct about the fractional reserve banking and that just serves to prove my point. For example, you deposit, say, $100 and the bank pays you 1% interest on that. Then, the bank keeps a fraction, say, $10 in reserve (per regulatory requirements) and lends the other $90 at 4%. So the bank earns $3,6 in interest and pays you $1 in interest with a net profit of $2,6. So the bank made money (of $2,6) by building a debt of $100 which is my point that a bank makes money by building debt. This is simple math… you don’t need a PhD to understand it.

but you failed to explain what the catastrophic results are!
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:30)

A Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in what will be left of the UK
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Why a Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in the UK?! You make shortcuts by jumping from A to Z without bothering to explain how you get from A to Z. That’s why your arguments fail because they lack the logical connections of how you go from a cause (A) to an effect (Z). You need to fill in the dots in the middle :)
----------

with all polls pointing to EU withdrawal.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Not true! See for example http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/17/eu-referendum-record-lead. Again more evidence that you make statements of wishes, not facts, because you don’t do any research before writing.

Also a quick advise for you… almost never make absolute statements like “ALL polls” because it is so easy for somebody to find an exception to the “ALL” and prove you wrong. Instead of “ALL”, use words like “majority”, “most”, etc., so it becomes more difficult for somebody to prove you wrong with just one example :)
----------

Marred this with Le Pen's popularity in France and Spain's secession of Catalonia the EU will be toast.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Again, you fail to explain the why of "the EU will be toast"! Catalonia has not asked to get out of the EU even if it secedes from Spain.

For example, you deposit, say, $100 and the bank pays you 1% interest on that. Then, the bank keeps a fraction, say, $10 in reserve (per regulatory requirements) and lends the other $90 at 4%. So the bank earns $3,6 in interest and pays you $1 in interest with a net profit of $2,6. So the bank made money (of $2,6) by building a debt of $100 which is my point that a bank makes money by building debt. This is simple math… you don’t need a PhD to understand it.
(icj1, 12 September 2014 03:05)

You probably need a PHD to understand it. If you deposit $100 at the bank and the bank has a reserve requirement of 10 percent, the bank must keep $10 of your money on reserve and can lend out the $90.In essence, the bank has taken $100 and has turned it into $190 by giving you a $100 credit on your deposits and then lending the additional $90 out to someone else.This process can keep on going until the amount deposited from the last loan becomes trivial, but by that point a large amount of money has been "created.Ultimately, your initial $100 can grow into $1,000with a 10 percent reserve requirement.With larger initial deposits the money created could become astronomical.The bank receives interest on the whole new credit that has been created.

In US you have more than 50 million on food stamps with real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark.So what is your point? Poverty exists everywhere.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 11:37)

Your argument was that “I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry”. I proved you wrong at that and that was my point.

I never said that poverty does not exist in the US. But, since you are switching argument for a third time (which is very common of you when you’re proved wrong), yes there are many poor people in the US. But, poverty is relative and being poor in the US means that you are on food stamps (as you correctly pointed out). Being poor in many other parts of the world, means you starve. It’s a big difference – one between life and death!

As for the "real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark", please provide the definition of "real level of unemployment", the methodology for the calculation and the data you used to calculate it. Or, should we just believe it because you say so?!

icj1
we're saying the same thing

No we're not.I am showing the process of fractional banking you're not.Rea and compare:

For example, you deposit, say, $100 and the bank pays you 1% interest on that. Then, the bank keeps a fraction, say, $10 in reserve (per regulatory requirements) and lends the other $90 at 4%. So the bank earns $3,6 in interest and pays you $1 in interest with a net profit of $2,6. So the bank made money (of $2,6) by building a debt of $100 which is my point that a bank makes money by building debt. This is simple math… you don’t need a PhD to understand it.
(icj1, 12 September 2014 03:05)

You probably need a PHD to understand it. If you deposit $100 at the bank and the bank has a reserve requirement of 10 percent, the bank must keep $10 of your money on reserve and can lend out the $90.In essence, the bank has taken $100 and has turned it into $190 by giving you a $100 credit on your deposits and then lending the additional $90 out to someone else.This process can keep on going until the amount deposited from the last loan becomes trivial, but by that point a large amount of money has been "created.Ultimately, your initial $100 can grow into $1,000with a 10 percent reserve requirement.With larger initial deposits the money created could become astronomical.The bank receives interest on the whole new credit that has been created.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 10:43)

If the conservatives wanted to do it, they have the votes to do it even in the current Parliament.
(icj1

The conservatives haven't got the votes to it.May I remind you that they're in coalition with the Liberals who are opposed to an EU " In or Out" referendum.

As for the "real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark", please provide the definition of "real level of unemployment", the methodology for the calculation and the data you used to calculate it. Or, should we just believe it because you say so?!
(icj1, 12 September 2014 16:21)
See below
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-real-unemployment-rate-in-20-of-american-families-everyone-is-unemployed

It is obvious the logical arguments put forth by "icj1" are by far superior to other commentators on this forum. Furthermore, many of the others are, at best, pseudo intellectuals who are in over their heads. Their argumentive tactics include obfuscation, circular reasoning, and other sophomoric means. Particularly, these egregious individuals are among the following: sj, Leonidas, rote, Ari Gold, and Arn. Sweden. Their arguments would be better served if they could suppress their nationalistic feelings. Foremost, there is nothing better than a proper education to help one debate, therefore I urge these students to rely, only, on respected and professional publications to get their information rather than resort to questionable internet sources that will only prove embarrassing when debating with informed individuals.

See below
[link]
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 18:32)

You obviously read the site at the link above “interpreting” the original data from the original source but you switched off your brain and did not check the original source and think about it. So, the original source said “Of the nation's 80.4 million families, 80.0 percent had at least one employed member in 2013”. That is not the same as “The Real Unemployment Rate: In 20% Of American Families, EVERYONE Is Unemployed” as stated by the “interpretation” at the link you provided.
----------

The conservatives haven't got the votes to it.May I remind you that they're in coalition with the Liberals who are opposed to an EU " In or Out" referendum.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 18:22)

Well, the current Commons approved it already 304 to nil in 2013, so obviously they have the votes. Should I disregard that fact and just believe you because you say so :)
----------
icj1
we're saying the same thing

No we're not.I am showing the process of fractional banking you're not.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 10:43)

Who said that you are not showing the process of fractional banking?! You are indeed and with that you are proving my point that a bank profits by building debt. Without your deposit (which YOU described as the very first step of fractional banking) the fractional banking process does not start. And, I do totally agree with that. I’m finding it hard to see where the disagreement is :)

If the EU is not strong on this it will cost much more in the longer term.

There are no cheap solutions - but there are ways of managing the costs.

The EU needs to open up alternatives to Russian gas - even a short term blip in the need for Russian fuels would be an economic disaster for Russia.

Go for it Europe.

One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another.
(Leonidas, 10 September 2014 18:03)

Sorry, don't get your point. Not sure how the above proves that anybody is clown :)
----------

If I were him I would rather be concerned of what would the 19th of September will look like. If Scotland goes, Spain will break up and so will Belgium – Italy is less likely to follow suit but one never knows, especially given its never-ending economic stagnation and debilitated political system. The euro will slump in value and the whole of the EU will be thrown into constitutional crisis
(Leonidas, 10 September 2014 18:03)

Again, I don't get your point. All the events your mentioned have nothing to do with the Euro or the EU. For example, Scotland is voting for independence from UK, but if it becomes independent, Scotland still wants to be an EU member. In addition, the UK or Scotland are not part of the Euro. So, really your statement above lacks any logical connection between cause and effect!
----------

Countries that produce hot air and print fiat money cannot impose sanctions on countries which hold tangible assets.Period.
(Leonidas, 10 September 2014 18:03)

I wonder if Russian children eat tangible assets like oil and gas for dinner :)

It would take at least 20 years for the EU to develop a reliable alternative supply to Russian gas and oil, but Ukraine will end in about less than 15 months time and its all too late for the EU to escape Russian control.
(sj, 10 September 2014 14:41)

And the other face of the coin:

It would take at least 20 years for Russia to develop a reliable alternative demand for Russian gas and oil, but Ukraine will end in about less than 15 months time and its all too late for Russia to escape EU control :)

I am talking about the contagion effect that Scottish independence could potentially have on Eurozone members ie Spain,Belgium,Italy etc.If Scotland goes there will be demands for referenda in those countries with potentially catastrophic results not only for the countries concerned but the whole of euroland.

LOL, our blog's Nostradamus, Leonidas, as usual, predicting apocalypse and mayhem!

Any of the countries, if they split up, will join the Eurozone and the EU. Things are being done through referendums not wars. To win in a referenum you need to convince 50%+1 people that it is good. That means convince businesses that nothing bad will happen, banks that they will not lose assets, workers that they will not lose jobs, etc etc. And you need to do that with a good and solid plan that can be executed in practice as well not just hot air. Spain, Belgium, Italy are not Serbia, and the EU is not Yugoslavia.

The worse that could happen is just be some more beuraucracy addded.

When a politician argues one day against EU membership and the next one tells the Serbs to be good europeans by imposing sanctions against Russia doesn't such behaviour make him a clown?
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

That's not what you said in the prior post... But glad that you recognized that there was no logical connection and you had to change the statement :)
----------

I didn't expect you to get my point.I am talking about the contagion effect that Scottish independence could potentially have on Eurozone members ie Spain,Belgium,Italy etc.If Scotland goes there will be demands for referenda in those countries with potentially catastrophic results not only for the countries concerned but the whole of euroland.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

Sorry, but you failed to explain what the catastrophic results are! Nobody has or is asking not to be part of Euroland!!! You just throw unconnected thoughts out there without any logical cause-effect reasoning...

It would take at least 20 years for the EU to develop a reliable alternative supply to Russian gas and oil, but Ukraine will end in about less than 15 months time and its all too late for the EU to escape Russian control.

I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

Of course, because you don't research to address your ignorance. For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed. Compare that to Canada with estimated oil & gas reserves of $0,6 million per capita, but with GDP per capita of $41.500, unemployment of 7% and poverty rate of 9%. So, yeah, you could go hungry even if you own oil because of poor governance and because oil can't be served for dinner.
----------

I will definitely prefer to own tangible assets and trade them for other commodities than print money out of thin air and build up debt.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)

But the trade happens via money. Also, oil & gas are not the only tangible assets that exist on Earth. Finally, there is nothing wrong about building debt. Most of people would not have homes without debt. America would not have become a superpower without building debt - is that what concerns you dear? To make things simple for you with an everyday example: a bank builds debt by taking a deposit from you and paying you 1% in interest and then lends that money at 4% interest. So the bank makes money by building debt. I'm sure our dear CE of B92 forums sj can explain that much better given his/her vast expertise in the banking sector.

P.S. CE = Chief Economist

Fallon was taking part in a meeting of EU defense ministers in Italy dedicated to crises in Ukraine, Iraq and Libya, when he said the EU must remain determined when it comes to sanctions.

One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another.If I were him I would rather be concerned of what would the 19th of September will look like. If Scotland goes, Spain will break up and so will Belgium – Italy is less likely to follow suit but one never knows, especially given its never-ending economic stagnation and debilitated political system. The euro will slump in value and the whole of the EU will be thrown into constitutional crisis – and that even before the UK decides whether or not to leave the bloc.

As to further sanctions against Russia he should ask himself the following question.Had the US/EU sanctions had any effect on Iran or China? They didn't.Countries that produce hot air and print fiat money cannot impose sanctions on countries which hold tangible assets.Period.

Sorry, don't get your point. Not sure how the above proves that anybody is clown :)

When a politician argues one day against EU membership and the next one tells the Serbs to be good europeans by imposing sanctions against Russia doesn't such behaviour make him a clown?

Again, I don't get your point. All the events your mentioned have nothing to do with the Euro or the EU. For example, Scotland is voting for independence from UK, but if it becomes independent, Scotland still wants to be an EU member. In addition, the UK or Scotland are not part of the Euro. So, really your statement above lacks any logical connection between cause and effect!

I didn't expect you to get my point.I am talking about the contagion effect that Scottish independence could potentially have on Eurozone members ie Spain,Belgium,Italy etc.If Scotland goes there will be demands for referenda in those countries with potentially catastrophic results not only for the countries concerned but the whole of euroland.

I wonder if Russian children eat tangible assets like oil and gas for dinner :)

I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry.I will definitely prefer to own tangible assets and trade them for other commodities than print money out of thin air and build up debt.

icj1
we're saying the same thing

No we're not.I am showing the process of fractional banking you're not.Rea and compare:

For example, you deposit, say, $100 and the bank pays you 1% interest on that. Then, the bank keeps a fraction, say, $10 in reserve (per regulatory requirements) and lends the other $90 at 4%. So the bank earns $3,6 in interest and pays you $1 in interest with a net profit of $2,6. So the bank made money (of $2,6) by building a debt of $100 which is my point that a bank makes money by building debt. This is simple math… you don’t need a PhD to understand it.
(icj1, 12 September 2014 03:05)

You probably need a PHD to understand it. If you deposit $100 at the bank and the bank has a reserve requirement of 10 percent, the bank must keep $10 of your money on reserve and can lend out the $90.In essence, the bank has taken $100 and has turned it into $190 by giving you a $100 credit on your deposits and then lending the additional $90 out to someone else.This process can keep on going until the amount deposited from the last loan becomes trivial, but by that point a large amount of money has been "created.Ultimately, your initial $100 can grow into $1,000with a 10 percent reserve requirement.With larger initial deposits the money created could become astronomical.The bank receives interest on the whole new credit that has been created.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 10:43)

If the conservatives wanted to do it, they have the votes to do it even in the current Parliament.
(icj1

The conservatives haven't got the votes to it.May I remind you that they're in coalition with the Liberals who are opposed to an EU " In or Out" referendum.

As for the "real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark", please provide the definition of "real level of unemployment", the methodology for the calculation and the data you used to calculate it. Or, should we just believe it because you say so?!
(icj1, 12 September 2014 16:21)
See below
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-real-unemployment-rate-in-20-of-american-families-everyone-is-unemployed

It is obvious the logical arguments put forth by "icj1" are by far superior to other commentators on this forum. Furthermore, many of the others are, at best, pseudo intellectuals who are in over their heads. Their argumentive tactics include obfuscation, circular reasoning, and other sophomoric means. Particularly, these egregious individuals are among the following: sj, Leonidas, rote, Ari Gold, and Arn. Sweden. Their arguments would be better served if they could suppress their nationalistic feelings. Foremost, there is nothing better than a proper education to help one debate, therefore I urge these students to rely, only, on respected and professional publications to get their information rather than resort to questionable internet sources that will only prove embarrassing when debating with informed individuals.

(icj1,
For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.

Their GDP/capita is three times higher of that of Kosovo and had it not been for immigration the overwhelming majority of Albanians would've been unemployed and Albanians are happy.

That's not what you said in the prior post..

You need some extra lessons in English to understand what I am talking about.This is what I said on my original posting.
"One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another".

a bank builds debt by taking a deposit from you and paying you 1% in interest and then lends that money at 4% interest. So the bank makes money by building debt.

This is probably how banking is done in kosovo.The West has developed a new banking system called fractional reserve banking in which only a fraction of bank deposits are backed by actual cash-on-hand and are available for withdrawal.

but you failed to explain what the catastrophic results are!

A Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in what will be left of the UK with all polls pointing to EU withdrawal.Marred this with Le Pen's popularity in France and Spain's secession of Catalonia the EU will be toast.

For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:34)

Their GDP/capita is three times higher of that of Kosovo and had it not been for immigration the overwhelming majority of Albanians would've been unemployed and Albanians are happy.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Your argument was that “I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry”. I proved you wrong at that.

Now, since you are switching argument (which is very common of you when you’re proved wrong), then, yes, you are correct in your new argument; people in Turkmenistan are less hungry (by about 22% according to the IMF) than in Kosovo – what a great achievement for Turkmenistan, especially considering its vast natural resources compared to Kosovo!

That's not what you said in the prior post..
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:30)

You need some extra lessons in English to understand what I am talking about.This is what I said on my original posting.
"One has to wonder how the EU has ended up being governed by hypocritical clowns like Fallon who supports the idea of holding an EU referendum on his country's EU membership one day and talks about EU sanctions on Russia on another".
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Yes, that’s what you said on your original post, but that’s not the same as your new statement that

“When a politician argues one day against EU membership and the next one tells the Serbs to be good europeans by imposing sanctions against Russia doesn't such behaviour make him a clown? (Leonidas, 11 September 2014 12:39)”.

Thanks for proving my point that your new post is different from the prior one after I pointed out to you that there was a lack of logical connection in your argument. You see, you could avoid all of this, dear, by thinking and researching before writing a post, rather than writing a post first and then think and/or do the research after you are questioned.

a bank builds debt by taking a deposit from you and paying you 1% in interest and then lends that money at 4% interest. So the bank makes money by building debt.
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:34)

This is probably how banking is done in kosovo.The West has developed a new banking system called fractional reserve banking in which only a fraction of bank deposits are backed by actual cash-on-hand and are available for withdrawal.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

That’s how it is done in Kosovo, Serbia, Russia, China, Malaysia and in most of the world. You are absolutely correct about the fractional reserve banking and that just serves to prove my point. For example, you deposit, say, $100 and the bank pays you 1% interest on that. Then, the bank keeps a fraction, say, $10 in reserve (per regulatory requirements) and lends the other $90 at 4%. So the bank earns $3,6 in interest and pays you $1 in interest with a net profit of $2,6. So the bank made money (of $2,6) by building a debt of $100 which is my point that a bank makes money by building debt. This is simple math… you don’t need a PhD to understand it.

but you failed to explain what the catastrophic results are!
(icj1, 11 September 2014 16:30)

A Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in what will be left of the UK
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Why a Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in the UK?! You make shortcuts by jumping from A to Z without bothering to explain how you get from A to Z. That’s why your arguments fail because they lack the logical connections of how you go from a cause (A) to an effect (Z). You need to fill in the dots in the middle :)
----------

with all polls pointing to EU withdrawal.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Not true! See for example http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/17/eu-referendum-record-lead. Again more evidence that you make statements of wishes, not facts, because you don’t do any research before writing.

Also a quick advise for you… almost never make absolute statements like “ALL polls” because it is so easy for somebody to find an exception to the “ALL” and prove you wrong. Instead of “ALL”, use words like “majority”, “most”, etc., so it becomes more difficult for somebody to prove you wrong with just one example :)
----------

Marred this with Le Pen's popularity in France and Spain's secession of Catalonia the EU will be toast.
(Leonidas, 11 September 2014 18:12)

Again, you fail to explain the why of "the EU will be toast"! Catalonia has not asked to get out of the EU even if it secedes from Spain.

For example, you deposit, say, $100 and the bank pays you 1% interest on that. Then, the bank keeps a fraction, say, $10 in reserve (per regulatory requirements) and lends the other $90 at 4%. So the bank earns $3,6 in interest and pays you $1 in interest with a net profit of $2,6. So the bank made money (of $2,6) by building a debt of $100 which is my point that a bank makes money by building debt. This is simple math… you don’t need a PhD to understand it.
(icj1, 12 September 2014 03:05)

You probably need a PHD to understand it. If you deposit $100 at the bank and the bank has a reserve requirement of 10 percent, the bank must keep $10 of your money on reserve and can lend out the $90.In essence, the bank has taken $100 and has turned it into $190 by giving you a $100 credit on your deposits and then lending the additional $90 out to someone else.This process can keep on going until the amount deposited from the last loan becomes trivial, but by that point a large amount of money has been "created.Ultimately, your initial $100 can grow into $1,000with a 10 percent reserve requirement.With larger initial deposits the money created could become astronomical.The bank receives interest on the whole new credit that has been created.

Icj1

Why a Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in the UK?!

Because Scottish independence would “tilt the entire U.K. political spectrum to the right.” That would boost the odds of a conservative majority winning in 2015.Currently, 40 of Scotland’s 59 members parliament come from the Labour party compared to just one from the conservatives.Furthermore the anti-EU UKIP party which came top on last EU elections draws its support exclusively from England and if the pattern of the EU elections is repeated in next year's general election and since its leaders have demanded an immediate referendum on EU withdrawal it's logical to assume that it's going to be granted.

For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.

The EU is the promised land,according to Albanian posters,yet there are more than 30 million unemployed with large segments of its population living in extreme poverty.

http://www.inequalitywatch.eu/spip.php?article99

In US you have more than 50 million on food stamps with real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark.So what is your point? Poverty exists everywhere.

You probably need a PHD to understand it. If you deposit $100 at the bank and the bank has a reserve requirement of 10 percent, the bank must keep $10 of your money on reserve and can lend out the $90.In essence, the bank has taken $100 and has turned it into $190 by giving you a $100 credit on your deposits and then lending the additional $90 out to someone else.This process can keep on going until the amount deposited from the last loan becomes trivial, but by that point a large amount of money has been "created.Ultimately, your initial $100 can grow into $1,000with a 10 percent reserve requirement.With larger initial deposits the money created could become astronomical.The bank receives interest on the whole new credit that has been created.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 10:43)

Ok, you are not contradicting anything I said and we're saying the same thing and that proves my point where we started all of this that a bank (virtually all over the world) "makes money by building debt". Without the bank borrowing that initial $100 that you deposit, the whole process does not start.

Why a Scottish independence will hasten the EU referendum in the UK?!
Because Scottish independence would “tilt the entire U.K. political spectrum to the right.” That would boost the odds of a conservative majority winning in 2015.Currently, 40 of Scotland’s 59 members parliament come from the Labour party compared to just one from the conservatives.Furthermore the anti-EU UKIP party which came top on last EU elections draws its support exclusively from England and if the pattern of the EU elections is repeated in next year's general election and since its leaders have demanded an immediate referendum on EU withdrawal it's logical to assume that it's going to be granted.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 11:37)

Good job mate, you're starting to make some progress in building an argument. But, there is an issue in the logical flow of your argument above. The holding of the referendum does not depend much on the Scottish independence. A bill for the referendum was already approved by the Commons last year (304 to nil) but rejected by the Lords. The same Bill passing again becomes an Act of Parliament because the Lords can only reject it once. So, as you can see the holding of the referendum has not much to do with the Scottish vote on independence. If the conservatives wanted to do it, they have the votes to do it even in the current Parliament.

For example, Turkmenistan has estimated oil & gas reserves of about $1,54 million per capita, but its GDP per capita is $9.000 with 30% of population living in poverty and 60% unemployed.
(icj1, 12 September 2014 03:01)

The EU is the promised land,according to Albanian posters,yet there are more than 30 million unemployed with large segments of its population living in extreme poverty.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 11:37)

Your argument was that “I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry”. I proved you wrong at that.

Now, since you are switching argument for a second time (which is very common of you when you’re proved wrong), then, yes, you are correct in your new argument. Whoever says that the EU is the promised land (Albanians, Serbs, or whoever) is wrong. But, it is better than most of the world (albeit not perfect). If establish a scale of well-being of, say, 1-10, with 1 being the hell and 10 being the paradise, people living at level 2 would happily want to be at level 6. Now 6 is not perfect, but, I believe, it would be stupid for somebody to say that just because I can’t be at 10, then I prefer to remain at 2 rather than trying 6 for now. And, indeed, people are not stupid; that’s why they still try to emigrate to the EU despite its imperfections, because it is still better than most of their home countries.

In US you have more than 50 million on food stamps with real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark.So what is your point? Poverty exists everywhere.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 11:37)

Your argument was that “I am yet to see a country that owns oil going hungry”. I proved you wrong at that and that was my point.

I never said that poverty does not exist in the US. But, since you are switching argument for a third time (which is very common of you when you’re proved wrong), yes there are many poor people in the US. But, poverty is relative and being poor in the US means that you are on food stamps (as you correctly pointed out). Being poor in many other parts of the world, means you starve. It’s a big difference – one between life and death!

As for the "real levels of unemployment surpassing the 20% mark", please provide the definition of "real level of unemployment", the methodology for the calculation and the data you used to calculate it. Or, should we just believe it because you say so?!

See below
[link]
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 18:32)

You obviously read the site at the link above “interpreting” the original data from the original source but you switched off your brain and did not check the original source and think about it. So, the original source said “Of the nation's 80.4 million families, 80.0 percent had at least one employed member in 2013”. That is not the same as “The Real Unemployment Rate: In 20% Of American Families, EVERYONE Is Unemployed” as stated by the “interpretation” at the link you provided.
----------

The conservatives haven't got the votes to it.May I remind you that they're in coalition with the Liberals who are opposed to an EU " In or Out" referendum.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 18:22)

Well, the current Commons approved it already 304 to nil in 2013, so obviously they have the votes. Should I disregard that fact and just believe you because you say so :)
----------
icj1
we're saying the same thing

No we're not.I am showing the process of fractional banking you're not.
(Leonidas, 12 September 2014 10:43)

Who said that you are not showing the process of fractional banking?! You are indeed and with that you are proving my point that a bank profits by building debt. Without your deposit (which YOU described as the very first step of fractional banking) the fractional banking process does not start. And, I do totally agree with that. I’m finding it hard to see where the disagreement is :)