If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Even the article you linked concedes that was in the past.
"Concedes"? It is just a fact that no one has denied! You are using emotionally loaded words to mask a threadbare argument again.
"But then the bubble burst, leaving Spain with much reduced domestic demand — and highly uncompetitive within the euro area thanks to the rise in its prices and labor costs."
But as Spain was already "fiscally responsible", with surplus budgets and a low debt, how could this happen? After all, "fiscal responsibility" is your formula for success!
From your example, it appears prices and Labour costs have to come down.
Which, if Spain ran it's own currency, could be done fairly painlessly with everyone taking that cost equally.
But since it doesn't it must put the burden on the victims whilst the people who caused the problem in the first place will get richer.
Also, the housing bubble part of the article suggests to me the percentage of debt to equity in must have been high. Too much debt and not enough equity.
Got some actual evidence of this? Or are you just making up facts to avoid having to possibly change your mind?
Isn't Spain into the green energy? Can they afford this now?
We see the final descent into the utterly irrelevant.
Last edited by Ed Seedhouse; Tuesday, 9th February, 2010, 02:34 PM.
Paul - do you live in the Southern Hemisphere ?
Here in Ottawa we are still in winter - actually Winterlude :) i.e. frozen canal, -10C average etc. etc.
Comparing 240 cm on an average winter with 95 cm for half a winter doesn't seem very "scientific" to me.... pretty al(l)-gorish in fact.
"Concedes"? It is just a fact that no one has denied! You are using emotionally loaded words to mask a threadbare argument again.
The problem is you're hung up on an article which in the part I quoted highlighted the folly in the path Spain had taken.
Are you sure you understand the situation? Had they been so fiscally responsible they wouldn't be so highly uncompetitive now.
You should really stop carrying on about nations having their own currencies unless you would put your own money into that currency and their debt instruments. Any suggestion of such a thing would likely cause a flight of capital from Spain before a change over to a worthless currency.
And yes, the author concedes the good times are in the past. Without that part the article becomes a head scratcher. Did you even see that part before I highlighted it?
I notice that Krugman short of glossed over the real estate bubble part. Seems that many people, including much of the Bush II and Obama administrations, just didn't see this coming.
I think Canada is in a real estate bubble. Banks are lending money to buyers. Those buyers can often barely afford their mortgages, put almost nothing down, rely on having two stable incomes in these uncertain times, need historically low interest rates, and expect their real estate to increase at a rate greater than the increase in wage rates. I just don't see how this is sustainable. It strikes me as pure speculation.
I am sure, however, when the bubble bursts the government of the day here will try to bail buyers out. Governments are good at that - bailing out the stupid, irresponsible, and incompetent with other people's wealth.
How can a house, which is just a depreciating box which people live in, go up faster than wages (you know, the things that are needed to pay for the mortgage) indefinitely? If anything the box itself should be going *down* in value, just like almost every other thing as it gets older. The land might go up in value, but I just don't see why land in the suburbs should increase in value when all a homebuilder has to do is knock down the woods over the hill and start building new boxes on unused land over there.
It is true that governments provide some services that everyone needs, and they should be applauded for that. I draw the line at providing services, obtained only through the use of implied force (e.g. incarceration for non-compliance), which require taking money from Peter to pay Paul. Even if done democratically, this is criminal behaviour.
As for this idiotic stimulus spending ... sheesh.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
I notice that Krugman short of glossed over the real estate bubble part. Seems that many people, including much of the Bush II and Obama administrations, just didn't see this coming.
The real estate bubble happened Europe wide and was not confined to Spain. Bush certainly didn't see it coming, but it was long over by the time Obama took office, so you are rather ingenuous to try to spread the blame to him. Krugman though, saw it coming and warned about it well in advance. He was not alone in that, but he was one of a relative few.
Of course the Spanish made lots of mistakes, but high deficits were not one of them. It behaved according to the dictates of the deficit hawks and yet it crashed, and crashed much harder than other countries who didn't. Yet the hawks ignore this evidence, because it disagrees with their ideologies and so it must therefore be wrong.
As for this idiotic stimulus spending ... sheesh.
The countries that are coming out of the crash most quickly are those who are doing the most stimulus spending relative to the size of their economies.
I think what many Americans were doing was when the value of the houses went up, they would borrow against higher value.
In Alberta, I think it is, they have no recourse mortgages on probably most of the mortgages. That means they can walk away from a mortgage and the mortgage holder can't come after other assets. I don't think that applies to Canada Mortgage financing. Also many of the U.S. mortgages are non recourse.
A house is actually an appreciating asset. War time houses have appreciated considerably. Insured value would likely be replacement cost which would be more than the original cost. Then there is the value of the land.
I don't know what the banks are lending but it might only be 80%. For more a person would need Canada Housing and Mortgage corporation or at least a second mortgage.
A person can only afford X amount. When he/they buy a house, the payments can't exceed X, and he/they have to be deemed capable of making those mortgage payments. It doesn't matter what the principle and interest rate combinations amount to just so the total isn't more than X (not for everyone but for a lot).
If mortgage rates go up, even if the person can still afford to make the payments, it's harder to sell the house because for the owner to get his money back and even break even the value of X is higher for the next person. Selling the house for what it cost and add an extra few percentage points to the mortgage gives a higher payment.
I don't think government will be in too big a hurry to raise interest rates much here. Not unless wages and prices are also rising. Kind of chicken and the egg.
Have a look at what happened to Alberta real estate around 1980, I think it was. When the bust came people were walking away. Some were turning over title to Canada Mortgage for $1. to get out from under the load.
Canada is in pretty good shape with debt to GDP of only around 35%. Our government has done a pretty good job for us. Some of the basket case nations have percentages around 100% or more.
Disparaging remarks about the U.S. dollars should subside for awhile.
Last edited by Gary Ruben; Tuesday, 9th February, 2010, 07:54 PM.
The real estate bubble happened Europe wide and was not confined to Spain. Bush certainly didn't see it coming, but it was long over by the time Obama took office, so you are rather ingenuous to try to spread the blame to him. Krugman though, saw it coming and warned about it well in advance. He was not alone in that, but he was one of a relative few.
What?? Obama's advisors are many of the exact same advisors that Bush uses. "Helicopter" Ben Bernanke for example. Anyone reading this go to YouTube and type in "Ben Bernanke was wrong" and see for yourself how well he predicted the future. Krugman is just as bad. He thinks the solution to all problems is to take from the productive and give to the unproductive. Brilliant.
The countries that are coming out of the crash most quickly are those who are doing the most stimulus spending relative to the size of their economies.
North Americans have become addicted to cheap money in the same way that drug addicts become addicted to cheap drugs. By stimulating spending - of money that we don't even have! - the government is just shooting us with another dose. Sure, it doesn't seem to hurt, but that's because the economy is just high. Like all drug-induced highs, the longer you are high the bigger the crash. I expect that the next "recession" is going to make this one look like a walk in the park. Who exactly are they going to get to pay for all that spending?
The government should be encouraging *saving*, not spending, but what do we get? Almost nothing from your savings account and all sorts of incentive to spend whatever little money people have left. Incredible.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Guys, you are way off topic. What does this have to do with chess or climate change?
Gary, you have indicated that you are not able to read anything in depth on climate change, just newspaper articles. Fair enough.
Are you able to watch movies? I would suggest the BBC series with Iain Stewart on The Earth. It is very recent and just came onto BluRay, the footage is fantastic and the animation is great and it does explain the workings of the earth, oceans, atmosphere, volcanies and interrelates everything together nicely. I bought it recently but I am sure that the libraries will carry it or can order it for you.
Highly recommended. You could even watch it while you were posting on chesstalk, so it wouldn't cramp your style...
Guys, you are way off topic. What does this have to do with chess or climate change?
You don't think that the (poor) way the world governments handle the fiscal crisis is an indicator of how (poorly) they will handle the climate crisis?
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Well, Vlad can never admit it of course, it being against his ideology, but most people can see, for example, that the safety that is provided up to a point by police forces and armies obviously add to our wealth. People value safety, so safety is a form of wealth.
There you go again Ed, going all Alice in Wonderland Humpty Dumpty on us and redefining the word wealth so that it is unrecognizable. Did the Vancouver police add to the wealth of the man whose door they went to by mistake and who they then proceeded to beat to a blood pulp?
Eventually I suppose they did because he is suing the taxpayers for millions of dollars and it seems that he will win some large sum of money as a result. Should we ask him if he feels safe?
If you rely on government for safety, you are in for a rude awakening.
A little actual thought will multiply in one's mind the things governments do that add to the common wealth. I myself worked in a government organization for many years which returned far, far more dollars in wealth than the citizenry paid in taxes to support it. But I suppose Vlad would not step inside a public Library for fear of becoming infected with communism!
Libraries are one of the few things that governments do that I would support and I do use them. Unlike you, I actually read some of the books in them and know that you are stretching the meaning of the word wealth into unrecognizable forms.
If you ever put down the slogans and memes that blind you Vlad, and started looking at the way things actually are, you would see many many ways in which governments contribute to the increase of the general wealth. Show me a country with no government and I will show you a very poor country where the people live short and blighted lives in great poverty.
That great socialist utopia of North Korea comes to mind as a country with a strong government where the people live short and blighted lives in great poverty.
There you go again Ed, going all Alice in Wonderland Humpty Dumpty on us and redefining the word wealth so that it is unrecognizable.
And yet Vlad doesn't provide the definition he says I misuse. As so often with him, a claim with no evidence.
Did the Vancouver police add to the wealth of the man whose door they went to by mistake and who they then proceeded to beat to a blood pulp?
Eventually I suppose they did because he is suing the taxpayers for millions of dollars and it seems that he will win some large sum of money as a result. Should we ask him if he feels safe?
Good old sample of one fallacy. Vlad, I could write a book on faulty reasoning using only the examples you provide in this thread.
If you rely on government for safety, you are in for a rude awakening.
I have relied on it for more than sixty five years and here I am, but no rude awakenings have occurred yet. Contra-wise, I have been saved from danger by the police on more than one occasion.
Libraries are one of the few things that governments do that I would support and I do use them.
So by a single counterexample the claim that governments do not produce wealth is disposed of as the irrationality it is. Vlad claimed that governments don't produce wealth and yet he agrees that Public Libraries, run uniformly by governments in this country, do produce wealth. So either he will now admit that his original claim was wrong, or he will (more likely I am afraid) continue to believe in two mutually contradictory things.
Unlike you, I actually read some of the books in them and know that you are stretching the meaning of the word wealth into unrecognizable forms.
The fact is that I average about a book a day, and have since I was a teenager. Vlad's insults really are becoming rather crude lately, don't you think?
That great socialist utopia of North Korea comes to mind as a country with a strong government where the people live short and blighted lives in great poverty.
As usual Vlad can only come up with an irrelevancy. Show me a country with NO government that is wealthy, Vlad.
Well, at this point my hope and intention is to get back to the thread subject and intend to only reply to messages about climate change. Being only human I may fail in that but I hope I may be forgiven if tempted beyond my natural level of restraint which is, admittedly, becoming lower as I age.
The fact is that I average about a book a day, and have since I was a teenager. Vlad's insults really are becoming rather crude lately, don't you think?
Fiction or non fiction?
I don't see what you call "Vlad's insults". All I see is a point of view which differs from yours and intolerance toward his points.
A senior is someone who collects a pension and becomes part of a group many politicans target for votes. You see the politicans visit the seniors clubs (which they so generously provide) just before they need the votes.
That is obvious, but then you have already shown many times on this board that there is much that is perfectly obvious that you cannot see.
Ed insulting Gary not seeing Vlad insulting Ed not defining Vlad faulty reasoning Ed redefining Vlad not believing Ed whopper lying Gary not remembering Ed correcting Gary false ideas Paul Beckwith doesn't know the difference climate vs weather.
Wow, what a thread!
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Tweet
Comment