AMI Talks in FLV format

[video src="http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/KeenAMI2010WhyCreditMoneyCrashes.flv" width="500" height="400" ][video src="http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/HudsonAMI2010Talk.flv" width="500" height="400" ][video src="http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/HudsonAMI2010Discussion.flv" width="500" height="400" ][video src="http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/AMI2010PanelDiscussion.flv" width="500" height="400" ]

flattr this!

I made the mistake of posting the talks from the AMI conference in SWF rather than Flash Video format; I'll amend that post shortly, but in the meantime here are the talk by myself and Michael Hudson, and the panel discussion.

Keen Talk: Why Credit Money Crashes

Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast 

| Open Player in New Window

Hudson Talk

Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast 

| Open Player in New Window

Hudson Discussion

Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast 

| Open Player in New Window

AMI Panel Discussion

Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast 

| Open Player in New Window

About Steve Keen

I am a professional economist and a long time critic of conventional economic thought. As well as attacking mainstream thought in Debunking Economics, I am also developing an alternative dynamic approach to economic modelling. The key issue I am tackling here is the prospect for a debt-deflation on the back of the enormous debts accumulated in Australia, and our very low rate of inflation.
Bookmark the permalink.

110 Responses to AMI Talks in FLV format

  1. Frank says:

    Yes I see. The mul­ti­a­gent model would need to imple­ment agent behav­iour that had been made to fit the macro-data any­way. Per­haps with that aim the banks them­selves could help: they don’t have all infor­ma­tion but a more accu­rate sim­u­lacrum could be con­structed with anonymised trans­ac­tion and account data from mul­ti­ple banks over a long history.

  2. mahaish says:

    One last point. Many of the rich and pow­er­ful here in the States are “pri­vately” say­ing that the States will default on their debt within the next two years”

    impos­si­ble for the US gov­ern­ment to default soho,

    the rich and pow­er­full, well thats a dif­fer­ent mat­ter, they can default, unless the gov­ern­ment bails them out

  3. Alan Gresley says:

    @soho44 75

    Doing some latenight research and came across some 2012 pre­dic­tions. Not the Celente/Dellinger/Kaiser “the world’s going to end tomor­row” stuff. But what are your thoughts on this?”

    Haven’t heard of Dellinger.

    Infla­tion is still going up State­side. Some say the govt. has been bla­tantly lying about the rate for years.”

    It is a many tier econ­omy. You have the FIRE sec­tor and other sec­tors. Each sec­tor is expe­ri­enc­ing defla­tion or infla­tion and each sec­tor has a dif­fer­ent flow of veloc­ity of money.

    The CPI (Con­sumer Price Index) for Aus­tralia has risen around 3% annu­ally. Wel­fare has increased each 6 months to reflect the rise in the CPI. Those on wel­fare are plainly aware that infla­tion for neces­si­ties, rent, food, etc rises about 5% to 10% or more annu­ally. The Aus­tralian Gov­ern­ment is bit by bit, mak­ing the stan­dard of liv­ing worst for those who are poor. Such things are nor­mal for a Cor­po­ra­toc­racy dressed up as democracy.

    Has gold reached it’s peak yet? There’s still a lot of posi­tion­ing going on to main­tain that bubble.”

    No, gold will rise in respect to USD. Pos­si­bly US $2,000 by the mid­dle of next year. In AUD, the price of gold may just be the same.
    Using gold as a hedge against infla­tion may not help. Who was seen in the Amer­i­can MSM often from 2007 to now? Peter Schiff. One point of is argu­ment may come true. That is the USD may become worth­less but this may only apply inter­na­tion­ally. For those in Amer­ica, it may be a case of the con­tin­u­ous debate of if there is defla­tion or infla­tion. If the USD become worth­less than imports from China would be expen­sive for Amer­i­cans. Remem­ber, for Amer­ica to become a great pro­duc­ing nation again, a big change in work ethic must hap­pen. That means less time watch­ing foot­ball, base­ball, Amer­i­can dad and Amer­i­can idol.

    More cur­rency fights will hap­pen. Every­one will nat­u­rally say, what, OUR cur­rency is too high? Devalue it? We don’t think so.”

    For 2009, the GDP prod­uct of var­i­ous coun­tries or regions was (mil­lions of USD):

    EU 16,414,697

    US 14,119,050
    Japan 5,068,894
    China 4,984,731

    Now if the Chi­nese Yuan appre­ci­ated by 20% to the USD the GDP of China would be 5,981,677. If the Yuan appre­ci­ated by 40% to the USD the GDP of China would be 6,978,623. So Chi­nese GDP is not 35% of the size of US GDP but rather 42% or 49% of it’s size. Does this make sense to you?

    Jim Rogers: The sec­ond (and much worse) eco­nomic melt­down is roughly 2 years away. What does he base this on? First, the above. Sec­ond, the lock that China has on the State­side economy.”

    I know of his name. Con­cern­ing China, see below.

    If you really think another coun­try is an out-of-control empire builder, what bet­ter way to bring them down a few lev­els than thru their economy?”

    China has a 2 Tril­lion dol­lar war chest. Half of which I believe is tied up in secu­ri­ties (etc) denom­i­nated in USD. Any­way China is fac­ing the New Great Game by build­ing Oil and Gas pipelines and not dream­ing up some visions of grandeur sit­ting in ivory tow­ers trum­pet­ing the virtues of truth and free­dom in some 21st cen­tury world order.

    Do you agree that another one will come that soon? If not, what do you base that on? Another aspect: the Novem­ber elec­tions. If the neo­cons win, Obama’s essen­tially a 2nd half lame­duck leader.”

    The US Titanic by math­e­mat­i­cal prob­a­bil­ity (if not cer­tainty) is going to sink if it does not change course now.

    I base this on falling amounts in US income tax and pay­roll tax, uneven growth, thus uneven debt growth by the var­i­ous sec­tors (see D.1) and the dis­tri­b­u­tion of wealth in Amer­ica.

  4. soho44 says:

    @Alan,

    I agree w/some of your points. But as for others:

    To me, Peter Schiff has no cred­i­bil­ity. First, he keeps play­ing off the “social­ism is evil” mantra that so many neo­cons fol­low. Sec­ond, in an old SBS inter­view with Negus and Steve, he basi­cally said there’s no such thing as home­less­ness in the States. We have plenty of empty houses. If that’s true, then how come so many hom­less peo­ple aren’t allowed to live in them as shel­ters? I’ve been home­less twice. So to me, that’s very offensive.

    Re; com­modi­ties. Yes, gold will always be a haven to many. As for other things (sil­ver, water, oil and oth­ers), there’s either a shrink­ing sup­ply in some. Or, rich and pow­er­ful play­ers in the mar­ket are try­ing to manip­u­late them and posi­tion them­selves to make a killing. Exam­ple: T. Boone Pick­ens and nat­ural gas. Part of his approach is to again exploit the “Obama and Democ­rats are a bunch of social­ists” idea. He’s the only one with the guts to actu­ally do the “right thing” to fix this. Which is why the busi­ness MSM here eat this stuff up.

    Does one per­son lit­er­ally have the power to destroy the mar­kets? No. Not even George Soros (despite all the busi­ness MSM peo­ple in the U.K. who love to have a go at him).

    One key that I’m see­ing? Lots of coun­tries pub­li­cally say nice sound­bites about work­ing together, bi-lateral agree­ments and more. But the real­ity is that’s all rub­bish (no sur­prise, right).

    Obama crit­i­cizes China for “cur­rency manip­u­la­tion”. Yet, he’s manip­u­lat­ing the dol­lar into the ground. What’s the jus­ti­fi­ca­tion? “To main­tain our way of life”(to main­tain our supe­ri­or­ity in the world).

    How many EU coun­tries stick to the treaties that all mem­bers have signed? Very few. It’s no big shock then that many peo­ple are short­ing the Euro to cash in on the EU pos­si­bly falling apart?

    Nobody will honor their agree­ments. Nobody will pay atten­tion to intl. law on var­i­ous issues (unless it clearly ben­e­fits them). Nobody will devalue their cur­rency. What’s the jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for all of this? Many of the rich and pow­er­ful say that’s how the “real world” works. So it’s ok. But, if I have a busi­ness and I go bank­rupt, I’m expected to just take it and declare bank­ruptcy because, well, that’s how busi­ness is done.

  5. sirius says:

    Off topic” — but do you see the pat­terns and connections ?


    In July, hedge fund Arma­jor pur­chased in a sin­gle trade a quan­tity of cocoa beans equiv­a­lent to 7% of global pro­duc­tion, help­ing push cocoa prices to their high­est level in over three decades. Arma­jor had effec­tively cor­nered the world mar­ket in ware­housed cocoa beans.


    The report pro­vides a clear analy­sis of how finan­cial mar­ket dereg­u­la­tion has cre­ated a world in which the price of vir­tual food, traded through exotic finan­cial instru­ments, can drive move­ments in the price of real food — and with it drive up the num­ber of hun­gry, which in 2008 sur­passed one bil­lion peo­ple.

    http://cms.iuf.org/?q=node/552

  6. Jason Murphy says:

    Folks I have enough ideas to keep me going for weeks! Thanks for the lit­tle direc­tional nudges.

    The time has come to build! [Though I expect the first attempt will be very much the stick man of models!]

  7. TruthIsThereIsNoTruth says:

    there is no such thing as con­tin­u­ous time, either in trad­ing or eco­nomic events, but also there is not such this as con­tin­u­ous time in com­puter sim­u­la­tion. Even Vis­sim must dis­cre­tise the sim­u­la­tion somehow.

    The key to dis­creti­sa­tion is get­ting it right, sim­ply trans­form­ing the equa­tion into it’s dis­crete coun­ter­parts may seem like the right thing to do but in fact it is not. The cor­rect way to do it is with a Tay­lor expan­sion, I’m not pre­sum­ing this is not known but the descrip­tion of the symp­toms sounds like the dis­creti­sa­tion may not be done prop­erly. But we may also be talk­ing about dif­fer­ent things altogether.

    In terms of the agent sim­u­la­tion, in my opin­ion there must be an ele­ment of ran­dom­ness in the agent behav­iour. You may argue that agents actions are not ran­dom, but when aggre­gated they are effec­tively ran­dom, I would be look­ing at repli­cat­ing a dis­tri­b­u­tion of out­comes rather than an out­come from a spe­cific macro model.

  8. Pingback: American Monetary Institute presentation | Economics for People

  9. Mike Stasse says:

    Well that’ll learn ya! I gave up on win­doze more than ten years ago. THIS lap­top came with win­doze 7, but I [almost] never use it.… a CONSTANT source of aggro and frustration.

    As soon as I bought this com­puter, I loaded it with Ubuntu, my favourite dis­tro of Linux, and have never looked back.…. never crashes, never catches ITD’s (Inter­net Trans­mit­ted Dis­eases) and is eas­ier to use. And it’s FREE! As is every other piece of soft­ware that works in it, and I use scientific/graphic/communications spe­cial­ist stuff.

    Ubuntu comes with a “soft­ware cen­tre” which allows you to down­load HUNDREDS of dif­fer­ent kinds of soft­ware, all free. Just yes­ter­day my wife needed new busi­ness cards.… down­load a small pro­gram that did a great job. FREE.

  10. Pingback: Why credit money doesn’t have to crash. And why it always does. « Pengar? Nej tack!

Leave a Reply