Or go to search The Daily Bell site, at: http://www.thedailybell.com/index.asp
JR: [On central planning in China] Centralized planning is rarely, if ever, good for the economy. But the kind of construction you are describing is at the provincial level – not the national level.
BM: The provinces are larger than most countries. This is “central” enough, and I am certain Jim Rogers understands this. Perhaps he is sending a message: don’t look at China as one; don’t look at all of the problems as country-wide, you must understand each province, each district, if you want to invest wisely in China.
JR: [On civil and social unrest] There is going to be more social unrest worldwide including the US. More governments will fall. More countries will fail.
BM: It is a dangerous balancing act that the elite play. Unrest may help them bring in desired change, but how to manage a few billion upset people? Talk about herding cats! This unrest can backfire just as easily as it can work to the elite’s benefit. Perhaps the size of the gamble suggests something about the desperate position the elite’s find themselves in.
JR: [On Europe and the Euro] I think we are getting closer and closer to the point where someone in Europe is going to have to take some losses, whether it's the banks or the countries….
BM: Either lose on the currency or lose on the bonds; this choice must be made. In the end they will take haircuts on the bonds. The currency is too big a tool for control for the elite. To lose it only to usher in something bigger, the SDR? Much easier to build on the foundation of large states as opposed to smaller states, especially after a failed experiment of a common currency. If that is the gamble, it only again demonstrates the level of desperation.
JR: [On the Tea Party in the US] We still haven't seen much action.
BM: Yes we have. They extended every draconian position of the Patriot Act, if my understanding is correct. If Americans believe they can change the system through politics (just play along with me for a moment, as there is no answer in politics as it stands today), vote them ALL out at the same time, and only vote in third parties. Repeat every two years. That will make it fun for a while.
JR: [On continuing American wars and empire] Why are we supporting the guy in Yemen and not the guy in Libya? I can see absolutely no intellectual, philosophical, or even political justification for what we are doing.
BM: I read that the US gave Saudi the OK to go into Bahrain in exchange for Arab League support on Libya. Such is political justification these days.
JR: I don't know there's more military tension between China and the US these days.
BM: Yes, the US believes the western Pacific (including Taiwan) is US territory, China believes otherwise.
JR: Politicians may be railing more and more about China, but that's a verbal encirclement of China, not a military one.
BM: But isn’t this how it always starts?
JR: [On the IMF replacing the dollar with the SDR as reserve currency] I can see if something dramatic happened tomorrow or if people are desperate, but I don't see SDRs working at all.
BM: Is this a hint, where Rogers knows more than he is willing to say? The elite are likely rather desperate. Although he is right, the SDR won’t work any better than any other fiat currency. Just more pain for us little people in the meantime.
JR: [On Bernanke purposely trying to ruin the dollar such that the IMF can usher in a new world currency] That's a conspiracy theory that assumes these people could work together. No, he actually believes in what he is doing and he believes he's going to save us all.
BM: That Bernanke is a true believer in his models and capabilities I have no doubt. This doesn’t negate the possibility that there is an attempt to purposely ruin a currency. Knowing what Bernanke believes about monetary policy, wouldn’t you choose him as the key central banker if you wanted to ruin a currency?
JR: But I would hope that everybody takes out some kind of insurance policy for their money
BM: This is all that gold is. Don’t plan on getting rich off of it, and pray that it returns in price to a few hundred dollars an ounce; a sign of return to some stable money. Like fire insurance on your house, you don’t desire that your house burns down such that you can feel like you got value for your insurance policy; and you don’t feel wealthier if your house is destroyed. Yet, each year, when it doesn’t burn down, you renew the policy anyway.
DB: The remonstrations show something specific about the man and his character. Jim Rogers is someone who will patiently sit through interview after interview (he says he's been giving too many of them) and express informed opinions on any one of a number of topics. This generosity can fool you into thinking you are speaking to an amiable, even low-key gent, and not one of the sharpest most successful investors alive today.
BM: This struck me throughout the interview. Then I thought about how he appears on the TV and YouTube interviews. He says the same words; yet they do not come out sounding so blunt when heard in that southern drawl. Conversely, on the TV interviews, the pleasant southern drawl and demeanor tend to hide the fact that his is a very sharp mind; something that came across quite strongly in this DB interview. Altogether, the same man saying the same words, yet two very different perceptions on my part depending on if it is live TV or the printed word. This DB interview added depth to my view of Jim Rogers.
No comments:
Post a Comment