Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Aurum

Zeitgest Addendum á RÚV í kvöld [kl 23:20] farið yfir peningaprentun.

80 posts in this topic

Þessi mynd er þvílíka dellan, sá sem skrifaði þessa mynd hefur ekki lámarksþekkingu á hagfræði, eða stærfræði ef útí það er farið.

Enn og aftur engin dæmi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Þetta er góð mynd en í hana vantar eitt grundvallaratriði og það er skorturinn. Peningaprentun býr ekki til vandann og vandinn er að ekki er til nægilega mikið af gæðum handa öllum.

Sumir hópar geta haldið í raunverðmæti sem ekki er innistæða er fyrir, og ein leiðin er til að ná af þeim þessi verðmæti er verðbólga. Hagfræðin og verðbólga er ekki leið til að sigrast á skorinum heldur leið til að lágmarka skortinn.

Já það er hægt að misnota þetta en kostirnir eru meiri en gallarnir.

Edited by Mildur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Þetta er góð mynd en í hana vantar eitt grundvallaratriði og það er skorturinn. Peningaprentun býr ekki til vandann og vandinn er að ekki er til nægilega mikið af gæðum handa öllum.

Sumir hópar geta haldið í raunverðmæti sem ekki er innistæða er fyrir, og ein leiðin er til að ná af þeim þessi verðmæti er verðbólga. Hagfræðin og verðbólga er ekki leið til að sigrast á skorinum heldur leið til að lágmarka skortinn.

Já það er hægt að misnota þetta en kostirnir eru meiri en gallarnir.

Skorturinn er tekinn fyrir á eftir. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aurum þetta er fínt kerfi, það lágmarkar skaðann af skortinum. Skorturinn er t.d. hungur, atvinnuleysi, dauði og léleg lífsgæði.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aurum þetta er fínt kerfi, það lágmarkar skaðann af skortinum. Skorturinn er t.d. hungur, atvinnuleysi, dauði og léleg lífsgæði.

Horfðu á kaflann um skortinn.

Hann heitir Scarcity og kemur

á eftir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Byrjum á grunni hagfræðinnar. Þetta er einfalda dótið.

Basic Economics

[...]

Principles of Economics:

1. People face trade-offs.

Every decision involves choices, and more of one good means less of another good. Income and wealth are not limitless, since there is only so much time available. Trade-offs apply to individuals, families, corporations and societies.

2. Cost of something is what you give up to get it.

When we make a decision we implicitly compare the costs and benefits of our choices. Opportunity cost is whatever must be given up to obtain something. Some costs are obvious – out-of-pocket expenses; other costs are less obvious but must be included in total opportunity cost.

3. Rational people think at the margin.

Basic economics assumes that people act rationally and try to act so as to gain the most benefit for themselves compared to the associated costs. Microeconomics focuses on small or marginal) changes, and it is often rational to consider the marginal rather than the average effects of decisions.

4. People respond to incentives.

If rational people compare costs and benefits, then changes in either one may change decisions. An example of an incentive that people respond to, are changes in prices. In general, people are more likely to buy something if it is cheaper. If an action becomes more costly, then there is an incentive to switch to other choices. Note that all actions have substitutes.

Explicit costs vs. Implicit costs

The cost of something, say a business, includes both the explicity cost (usually the price) and the implicit costs. One major implicit cost is the opportunity cost. Opportunity costs includes the next best opportunity given up. Only actions have costs; if there are no choices, then there are no costs. Be aware that cost is subjective. For example, compare the psychological benefit of a new computer. Decide whether you would rather have the a vacation to Europe, or a brand new computer.

Disagreement in Economics

Economics is both a science and a study of policy – united by a common “way of thinking”. As a science, economists develop models and deliberately simplify accounts of how cause and effect work in some part of the economy. Based on assumptions of what is important, models are created and used to make suggestions about policy and improve basic economic outcomes. Policy involves decisions about scientific theories, personal values and particular circumstances.

Positive statements are claims about what the world is like, although they may be false. For example, "Minimum wage laws cause unemployment". Normative statements are claims about how the world ought to be, and are based on values as well as positive knowledge. For example, "The government should raise minimum wage". Economists may disagree over either positive or normative statements or both, but the great majority tend to agree over basic positive propositions. As such, most disagreements are over normative/policy issues.

Public Goods

Public goods include things such as fireworks displays, and basic research. A free market is unlikely to provide enough public goods, due to the “free rider” problem. A free-rider is a person who consumes a good without paying for it. Public goods create a free-rider problem because the quantity consumed is not directly related to the amount paid. As a result:

* there may not be enough incentive to pay for public goods through individual action;

* you cannot be prevented from consuming the good even if you do not pay for it and;

* it creates an external benefit on those not involved.

We can decide how much of a public good to produce, by considering a cost-benefit analysis of public goods. The total benefit is equal to the total dollar value that an individual places on a given level of production of a public good. Total Cost is what we must give up to get more of the public good. These are often difficult to calculate - especially the benefits. For example, what is the benefit of saving a human life, and what is the benefit of more flowers in the downtown?

Once we decide on the benefits, then we want to provide enough of the public good to maximize net benefits. That is, total benefits - total costs. The private market will usually not produce enough of a public good. However, it is often done by government because it can compel everyone to contribute through taxes.

The problem is not that people are selfish, per se, but the free-rider problem. If some people do not voluntarily contribute, others who do contribute will feel that it is unfair and may stop contributing as well.

Common Property Resources

These resources include clean air, oil pools, congested roads, fish, whales and other wild life. The problem here is that it is hard to exclude people, but one person’s use reduces that of others'. Over-use of these resources is sometimes dramatically referred to as, "Tragedy of the Commons". This tragedy refers to the common grazing rights in medieval England, in which:

* all families could graze sheep on the common land which was collectively owned and;

* as population and number of sheep increased, common land became over-grazed.

People did not reduce their use, because social and private incentives differed. Each individual’s best move is to get as much of the resource as possible before it is gone. The social optimum is to restrict use. The problem is that each individual creates a negative externality by reducing amount available to others. A few possible solutions were:

1. Custom or regulations could put a maximum on how much each family could use the resource;

2. They could have internalized the externality by auctioning off rights to graze and;

3. They could have created private property rights.

Property Rights

Economists realize that property rights are very important for efficient use of resources. When an individual owns and controls the resource, they have an incentive to increase its value. When everyone owns a resource, or rather, no one owns the resource, there is no one to charge for use, or who can attach a price. An example of such, is air that we breath.

For some goods we can establish property rights, like the pollution permit. For other goods, like national defence or clean air, the government can improve the outcome by regulating or providing the product.

Principles of Economics

[...]

Mankiw's "Ten Principles of Economics"

How People Make Decisions

* People Face Tradeoffs. To get one thing, you have to give up something else. Making decisions requires trading off one goal against another.

* The Cost of Something is What You Give Up to Get It. Decision-makers have to consider both the obvious and implicit costs of their actions.

* Rational People Think at the Margin. A rational decision-maker takes action if and only if the marginal benefit of the action exceeds the marginal cost.

* People Respond to Incentives. Behavior changes when costs or benefits change.

How the Economy Works as A Whole

* Trade Can Make Everyone Better Off. Trade allows each person to specialize in the activities he or she does best. By trading with others, people can buy a greater variety of goods or services.

* Markets Are Usually a Good Way to Organize Economic Activity. Households and firms that interact in market economies act as if they are guided by an "invisible hand" that leads the market to allocate resources efficiently. The opposite of this is economic activity that is organized by a central planner within the government.

* Governments Can Sometimes Improve Market Outcomes. When a market fails to allocate resources efficiently, the government can change the outcome through public policy. Examples are regulations against monopolies and pollution.

How People Interact

* A Country's Standard of Living Depends on Its Ability to Produce Goods and Services. Countries whose workers produce a large quantity of goods and services per unit of time enjoy a high standard of living. Similarly, as a nation's productivity grows, so does its average income.

* Prices Rise When the Government Prints Too Much Money. When a government creates large quantities of the nation's money, the value of the money falls. As a result, prices increase, requiring more of the same money to buy goods and services.

* Society Faces a Short-Run Tradeoff Between Inflation and Unemployment. Reducing inflation often causes a temporary rise in unemployment. This tradeoff is crucial for understanding the short-run effects of changes in taxes, government spending and monetary policy.

[...]

Economics

Economics is the social science that studies the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The term economics comes from the Ancient Greek οἰκονομία (oikonomia, "management of a household, administration") from οἶκος (oikos, "house") + νόμος (nomos, "custom" or "law"), hence "rules of the house(hold)".[1] Current economic models developed out of the broader field of political economy in the late 19th century, owing to a desire to use an empirical approach more akin to the physical sciences.[2] A definition that captures much of modern economics is that of Lionel Robbins in a 1932 essay: "the science which studies human behaviour as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses."[3] Scarcity means that available resources are insufficient to satisfy all wants and needs. Absent scarcity and alternative uses of available resources, there is no economic problem. The subject thus defined involves the study of choices as they are affected by incentives and resources.

Economics aims to explain how economies work and how economic agents interact. Economic analysis is applied throughout society, in business, finance and government, but also in crime,[4] education,[5] the family, health, law, politics, religion,[6] social institutions, war,[7] and science.[8] The expanding domain of economics in the social sciences has been described as economic imperialism.[9][10] Common distinctions are drawn between various dimensions of economics: between positive economics (describing "what is") and normative economics (advocating "what ought to be") or between economic theory and applied economics or between mainstream economics (more "orthodox" dealing with the "rationality-individualism-equilibrium nexus") and heterodox economics (more "radical" dealing with the "institutions-history-social structure nexus"[11]). However the primary textbook distinction is between microeconomics ("small" economics), which examines the economic behavior of agents (including individuals and firms) and macroeconomics ("big" economics), addressing issues of unemployment, inflation, monetary and fiscal policy for an entire economy.

[...]

Supply and demand

The theory of demand and supply is an organizing principle to explain prices and quantities of goods sold and changes thereof in a market economy. In microeconomic theory, it refers to price and output determination in a perfectly competitive market. This has served as a building block for modeling other market structures and for other theoretical approaches.

For a given market of a commodity, demand shows the quantity that all prospective buyers would be prepared to purchase at each unit price of the good. Demand is often represented using a table or a graph relating price and quantity demanded (see boxed figure). Demand theory describes individual consumers as rationally choosing the most preferred quantity of each good, given income, prices, tastes, etc. A term for this is 'constrained utility maximization' (with income as the constraint on demand). Here, utility refers to the (hypothesized) preference relation for individual consumers. Utility and income are then used to model hypothesized properties about the effect of a price change on the quantity demanded. The law of demand states that, in general, price and quantity demanded in a given market are inversely related. In other words, the higher the price of a product, the less of it people would be able and willing to buy of it (other things unchanged). As the price of a commodity rises, overall purchasing power decreases (the income effect) and consumers move toward relatively less expensive goods (the substitution effect). Other factors can also affect demand; for example an increase in income will shift the demand curve outward relative to the origin, as in the figure.

Supply is the relation between the price of a good and the quantity available for sale from suppliers (such as producers) at that price. Supply is often represented using a table or graph relating price and quantity supplied. Producers are hypothesized to be profit-maximizers, meaning that they attempt to produce the amount of goods that will bring them the highest profit. Supply is typically represented as a directly proportional relation between price and quantity supplied (other things unchanged). In other words, the higher the price at which the good can be sold, the more of it producers will supply. The higher price makes it profitable to increase production. At a price below equilibrium, there is a shortage of quantity supplied compared to quantity demanded. This pulls the price up. At a price above equilibrium, there is a surplus of quantity supplied compared to quantity demanded. This pushes the price down. The model of supply and demand predicts that for given supply and demand curves, price and quantity will stabilize at the price that makes quantity supplied equal to quantity demanded. This is at the intersection of the two curves in the graph above, market equilibrium.

For a given quantity of a good, the price point on the demand curve indicates the value, or marginal utility[60] to consumers for that unit of output. It measures what the consumer would be prepared to pay for the corresponding unit of the good. The price point on the supply curve measures marginal cost, the increase in total cost to the supplier for the corresponding unit of the good. The price in equilibrium is determined by supply and demand. In a perfectly competitive market, supply and demand equate cost and value at equilibrium.[61]

Demand and supply can also be used to model the distribution of income to the factors of production, including labour and capital, through factor markets. In a labour market for example, the quantity of labour employed and the price of labour (the wage rate) are modeled as set by the demand for labour (from business firms etc. for production) and supply of labour (from workers).

Demand and supply are used to explain the behavior of perfectly competitive markets, but their usefulness as a standard of performance extends to any type of market. Demand and supply can also be generalized to explain variables applying to the whole economy, for example, quantity of total output and the general price level, studied in macroeconomics.

In supply-and-demand analysis, the price of a good coordinates production and consumption quantities. Price and quantity have been described as the most directly observable characteristics of a good produced for the market.[62] Supply, demand, and market equilibrium are theoretical constructs linking price and quantity. But tracing the effects of factors predicted to change supply and demand—and through them, price and quantity—is a standard exercise in applied microeconomics and macroeconomics. Economic theory can specify under what circumstances price serves as an efficient communication device to regulate quantity.[63] A real-world application might attempt to measure how much variables that increase supply or demand change price and quantity.

Marginalism is the use of marginal concepts within economics. Marginal concepts are associated with a specific change in the quantity used of a good or of a service, as opposed to some notion of the over-all significance of that class of good or service, or of some total quantity thereof. The central concept of marginalism proper is that of marginal utility, but marginalists following the lead of Alfred Marshall were further heavily dependent upon the concept of marginal physical productivity in their explanation of cost; and the neoclassical tradition that emerged from British marginalism generally abandoned the concept of utility and gave marginal rates of substitution a more fundamental rôle in analysis.

Market failure

The term "market failure" encompasses several problems which may undermine standard economic assumptions. Although economists categorise market failures differently,[64] the following categories emerge in the main texts.[65]

Natural monopoly, or the overlapping concepts of "practical" and "technical" monopoly, involves a failure of competition as a restraint on producers. The problem is described as one where the more of a product is made, the greater the returns are. This means it only makes economic sense to have one producer.

Information asymmetries arise where one party has more or better information than the other. The existence of information asymmetry gives rise to problems such as moral hazard, and adverse selection, studied in contract theory. The economics of information has relevance in many fields, including finance, insurance, contract law, and decision-making under risk and uncertainty.[66]

Incomplete markets is a term used for a situation where buyers and sellers do not know enough about each other's positions to price goods and services properly. Based on George Akerlof's Market for Lemons article, the paradigm example is of a dodgy second hand car market. Customers without the possibility to know for certain whether they are buying a "lemon" will push the average price down below what a good quality second hand car would be. In this way, prices may not reflect true values.

Public goods are goods which are undersupplied in a typical market. The defining features are that people can consume public goods without having to pay for them and that more than one person can consume the good at the same time.

Externalities occur where there are significant social costs or benefits from production or consumption that are not reflected in market prices. For example, air pollution may generate a negative externality, and education may generate a positive externality (less crime, etc.). Governments often tax and otherwise restrict the sale of goods that have negative externalities and subsidize or otherwise promote the purchase of goods that have positive externalities in an effort to correct the price distortions caused by these externalities.[67] Elementary demand-and-supply theory predicts equilibrium but not the speed of adjustment for changes of equilibrium due to a shift in demand or supply.[68] In many areas, some form of price stickiness is postulated to account for quantities, rather than prices, adjusting in the short run to changes on the demand side or the supply side. This includes standard analysis of the business cycle in macroeconomics. Analysis often revolves around causes of such price stickiness and their implications for reaching a hypothesized long-run equilibrium. Examples of such price stickiness in particular markets include wage rates in labour markets and posted prices in markets deviating from perfect competition.

Macroeconomic instability, addressed below, is a prime source of market failure, whereby a general loss of business confidence or external shock can grind production and distribution to a halt, undermining ordinary markets that are otherwise sound.

Some specialised fields of economics deal in market failure more than others. The economics of the public sector is one example, since where markets fail, some kind of regulatory or government programme is the remedy. Much environmental economics concerns externalities or "public bads". Policy options include regulations that reflect cost-benefit analysis or market solutions that change incentives, such as emission fees or redefinition of property rights.[69][70] Environmental economics is related to ecological economics but there are differences.[71]

[...]

Þú hefur ekki ennþá komið með nein dæmi máli þínu til stuðnings, þangað til ertu bara að bulla.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BBC er ósammála þér í að Mosaddeq hafi ekki

verið lýðræðislega kjörinn.

"Document reveals the true extent of Britain 's involvement in the coup of 1953 which toppled Iran 's democratically elected government and replaced it with the tyranny of the Shah."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/docume..._20050822.shtml

Þar sem þér er líklega alveg sama um hvort

Mossaddeq hafi verið lýðræðislega kjörinn eða

ekki. Komdu nú með einhverja "staðreyndavillu"

sem ÞÉR líst ekki á. Ef þú hefur ekkert nema

copy/paste af einhverju sem þér sjálfum gæti

ekki verið meira sama um. Þá þarftu einfaldlega

að kíkja á þessa mynd fyrst og væla svo.

Það er engin spurnig að Mossadeq var afar vinsæll hjá löndum sínum sem og erlendis. CIA og Bretar settu hann af því hann fór að vera með uppsteit vegna olíuvinnslusamninga. Mossadeq vogaði sér að vilja eigna Írönum stærri pizzusneið. Bretar sárir fv. nýlenduherrar að tafli með sín dæmigerðu brögð. Amerísk fyrirtæki með mikinn áhuga á að komast í Íran til olíuvinnslu eins og Bretarnir höfðu gert síðan ca 1905-1910.

Ekki bara í landhelgi Íslands eða í gegnum Icesave að þessir Bretar voru að skíta í forðabúr almennings annara landa. Mossadeq var settur af í gegnum leyniþjónustumakk með tilheyrandi áróðri sem stundum virðist skína í gegnum þunna söguskoðun.

Edited by drCronex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Það er engin spurnig að Mossadeq var afar vinsæll hjá löndum sínum sem og erlendis. CIA og Bretar settu hann af því hann fór að vera með uppsteit vegna olíuvinnslusamninga. Mossadeq vogaði sér að vilja eigna Írönum stærri pizzusneið. Bretar sárir fv. nýlenduherrar að tafli með sín dæmigerðu brögð. Amerísk fyrirtæki með mikinn áhuga á að komast í Íran til olíuvinnslu eins og Bretarnir höfðu gert síðan ca 1905-1910.

Ekki bara í landhelgi Íslands eða í gegnum Icesave að þessir Bretar voru að skíta í forðabúr almennings annara landa. Mossadeq var settur af í gegnum leyniþjónustumakk með tilheyrandi áróðri sem stundum virðist skína í gegnum þunna söguskoðun.

Nákvæmlega

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Þessi mynd var hreint frábær!!!!

Ótrúlega margt sem ég hugsaði með mér, sagði ég ekki.. sagði ég ekki..

En þetta var svo sannanlega margréttuð máltíð. Farið víða og margt sem þarfnast frekari skoðunar.

Næsta mál er að stofna sér þráð eða flokk um þessa mynd og Venus-stefnuna. Ég var svona á að sirka 90% sammála því sem kom fram þarna en það voru nokkur atriði sem mér fannst vanta rök við.

Frábært segi ég nú bara og loksins ástæða til smá bjartsýni á mannkynið.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nú þurfum við bara her af vélmannaþrælum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Þessi mynd er þvílíka dellan, sá sem skrifaði þessa mynd hefur ekki lámarksþekkingu á hagfræði, eða stærfræði ef útí það er farið.

Ekki er ég alveg að skilja þennan hroka í þér. Mér virðist þú hafa afskaplega litla þekkingu sjálfur.

Las ég ekki einhverntímann hér að þú gætir ekki lært stærðfræði vegna talnablindu? En þykist samt vera þess umkominn að segja öðrum til...

Bið forláts ef það er rangt, nenni ekki að leita.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Þessi mynd var hreint frábær!!!!

Ótrúlega margt sem ég hugsaði með mér, sagði ég ekki.. sagði ég ekki..

En þetta var svo sannanlega margréttuð máltíð. Farið víða og margt sem þarfnast frekari skoðunar.

Næsta mál er að stofna sér þráð eða flokk um þessa mynd og Venus-stefnuna. Ég var svona á að sirka 90% sammála því sem kom fram þarna en það voru nokkur atriði sem mér fannst vanta rök við.

Frábært segi ég nú bara og loksins ástæða til smá bjartsýni á mannkynið.

Það er svo sannarlega kominn tími á róttæka breytingu í heiminum og á honum. Eins og fram kom (ef ég náði þessu rétt) í myndinni, nýtum við aðeins um 1% (þ.e. af heildarorkunotkun jarðarbúa) af þeirri orku sem kemur frá Sólinni. Við erum að menga algjörlega að óþörfu...því næg orka er til staðar, s.s. eins og vindorka, vatnsorka, ölduorka, sólarorka o.fl.

Peningar munu heyra sögunni til, ef þessi Venus-áætlun nái fram að ganga...og er það vel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ekki er ég alveg að skilja þennan hroka í þér. Mér virðist þú hafa afskaplega litla þekkingu sjálfur.

Las ég ekki einhverntímann hér að þú gætir ekki lært stærðfræði vegna talnablindu? En þykist samt vera þess umkominn að segja öðrum til...

Bið forláts ef það er rangt, nenni ekki að leita.

Talnablinda kemur ekki í veg fyrir að ég viti hvernig kerfi virki. Hvort sem þau eru lítil eða smá.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Talnablinda kemur ekki í veg fyrir að ég viti hvernig kerfi virki. Hvort sem þau eru lítil eða smá.

Þú hefur ekki minnstu hugmynd um það

hvernig peningakerfið virkar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ég veit fullvel hvernig peningakerfið virkar. Enda fylgi ég hefðbundinni skilgreiningu á því.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ég veit fullvel hvernig peningakerfið virkar. Enda fylgi ég hefðbundinni skilgreiningu á því.

Afhverju linkaru þá á ranga Wikipediu grein? Jú

auðvitað, ég gleymdi því að þú lest aldrei linkana

sem þú vísar í, ásamt því að hafa sjaldnast hugmynd

um umræðuefnið sem þú tekur þátt í.

Réttur Wikipedia linkur er hér

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Það er orðið frekar þreitt að saka um að lesa ekki það sem ég linka í. Þannig sá sem sakar mig um slíkt næst mun fá frá mér kaldar kveðjur í formi frekar ljótra orða.

Þetta kerfi er mun flóknara en svo að það snúi bara um peningastefnur ríkja. Þetta snýst líka um stöðu marka, hversu hátt, eða lágt sölustigið er á mörkuðum og hvernig inn og útflutningur gengur. Ásamt því hvernig vaxtastigið, með tilliti til verðbólgu og annara þátta.

Það hefur líklega farið fram hjá þér, en vextir á Íslandi eru neikvæðir um þessar mundir, og líklegt er að verðbólga muni aukast á næstu mánuðum vegna lélegs gengis krónunar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Það er orðið frekar þreitt að saka um að lesa ekki það sem ég linka í. Þannig sá sem sakar mig um slíkt næst mun fá frá mér kaldar kveðjur í formi frekar ljótra orða.

Þetta kerfi er mun flóknara en svo að það snúi bara um peningastefnur ríkja. Þetta snýst líka um stöðu marka, hversu hátt, eða lágt sölustigið er á mörkuðum og hvernig inn og útflutningur gengur. Ásamt því hvernig vaxtastigið, með tilliti til verðbólgu og annara þátta.

Það hefur líklega farið fram hjá þér, en vextir á Íslandi eru neikvæðir um þessar mundir, og líklegt er að verðbólga muni aukast á næstu mánuðum vegna lélegs gengis krónunar.

Hvers vegna er gengið lélegt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hvers vegna er gengið lélegt?

Vegna vantrausts á krónunni og þeirri staðreynd að íslenska hagkerfið var of skuldsett miðað við þjóðaframleiðslu. Íslensku bankanir voru rúmlega 12x stærri heldur en þjóðarframleiðsla íslendinga. Af því leiddi að þegar kerfið hrundi undan eigin skuldsetningu, þá féll verðgildi krónunar og skuldir fengu ekki greiddar af kröfuhöfum í bönkum og öðrum fyrirtækjum. Einnig sem að jöklabréfaútgáfa dældi inn miklum gjaldeyri inn í hagkerfi Íslands, við hrunið þá leitaði þessi gjaldeyrir út. Hinsvegar var það orðið á þeim tímapunkti að ekki var, og hefur ekki verið til nægur gjaldeyrir í hagkerfinu til þess að standa undir afborgunum af þessum jöklabréfum. Við það féll krónan, og hefur síðan haldist veik af þeim sökum meðal annars.

Hrunið á Íslandi er efnahagslegt domino sem hefur verið að hrynja núna í rúmt ár.

Vextir á Íslandi eru orðnir neikvæðir, eða eru að verða það (veltur á vaxtastigi óverðtryggðs bankareiknings).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vegna vantrausts á krónunni og þeirri staðreynd að íslenska hagkerfið var of skuldsett miðað við þjóðaframleiðslu. Íslensku bankanir voru rúmlega 12x stærri heldur en þjóðarframleiðsla íslendinga. Af því leiddi að þegar kerfið hrundi undan eigin skuldsetningu, þá féll verðgildi krónunar og skuldir fengu ekki greiddar af kröfuhöfum í bönkum og öðrum fyrirtækjum. Einnig sem að jöklabréfaútgáfa dældi inn miklum gjaldeyri inn í hagkerfi Íslands, við hrunið þá leitaði þessi gjaldeyrir út. Hinsvegar var það orðið á þeim tímapunkti að ekki var, og hefur ekki verið til nægur gjaldeyrir í hagkerfinu til þess að standa undir afborgunum af þessum jöklabréfum. Við það féll krónan, og hefur síðan haldist veik af þeim sökum meðal annars.

Hrunið á Íslandi er efnahagslegt domino sem hefur verið að hrynja núna í rúmt ár.

Vextir á Íslandi eru orðnir neikvæðir, eða eru að verða það (veltur á vaxtastigi óverðtryggðs bankareiknings).

Mikið rétt, hvers vegna er vantraust á krónunni?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.