Re: Does Japan's $93 trillion monetary base include their Postal Savings Accounts?

"Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "James Powell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > "James Powell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > "Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > "James Powell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "James Powell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > > "Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "James Powell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > > > > "Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > > > > ps--here's a hint.  The AVERAGE workers' household in Japan in
> > > > December
> > > > > > 1999
> > > > > > > socked away another $5,000 in savings in just that one month.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So? And how do you know that was not the total scraped up for
the
> > last
> > > 6
> > > > > > months, deposited at the end of the year when it was determined
to
> > be
> > > > > > "surplus"? I routinely 'siphon' money from my checking to my
> savings
> > > > once
> > > > > I
> > > > > > have determined it won't be needed for immediate expenses.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That big jar of pennies you keep in the closet will break long
> before
> > > you
> > > > > get to 0.2% of what the Japanese banked that month, James.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > You are so funny.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't take a bath when the market went down, probably because I
am
> a
> > > more
> > > > intelligent investor than you. What is YOUR average rate of return?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > What does that tell you about this PSA report?
> > > > > > > http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/japan1999income.htm
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That we only have your word these numbers really exist.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > James Powell
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Did you follow the links?  Do you really think I made this up?  If
> so,
> > > why
> > > > > on earth would I do that?  If you want to see the original
printout,
> > > just
> > > > > ask, but don't infer that a single figure at that url was
> fabricated.
> > > If
> > > > > you even attempt do that, I will prove you to be a liar, James.
> > > > >
> > > > > John Knight
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > What links? The only links are to spreadsheets on YOUR site. If you
> have
> > > an
> > > > original printout, then scan it in and make it available as a pdf.
> BTW -
> > > > Since the figures are from 1999, they are no more valid than a
> snapshot
> > of
> > > > our economy in the same year for making predictions about the
current
> > > > situation.
> > > >
> > > > Given your history, I would infer the numbers are either (a)
> fabricated,
> > > (b)
> > > > 'massaged', or (c) misinterpreted. You have no clue what you read.
> > > >
> > > > James Powell
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This is so typical of you, "James".  You're undoubtedly incapable of
> > > comprehending trends, averages, or anything else related to 2 x 2.
Just
> > for
> > > grins, though, try to understand why a data point in 1999 which shows
a
> > > savings RATE is just as valid (or invalid) today as it was in 1909.
Try
> > to
> > > appreciate that you can never demonstrate that there has ever been
such
> a
> > > huge change in Japanese savings habits that a data point from a mere 4
> > years
> > > ago could be invalidated.  You cannot do that, so this savings rate is
> > just
> > > as valid (or invalid) now as it will be a thousand years from now
> (unless
> > > you can somehow predict that Japan's savings habits will change over
> that
> > > time).  Since you cannot do that, the 1999 figure is just as valid (or
> > > invalid) as the 1997 figure which is just as valid (or invalid) as the
> > 2003
> > > figure.
> > >
> >
> > The rate was valid for 1999. It is not valid for 2003. It tells us what
> the
> > Japanese economy was doing in 1999. It tells us nothing about what that
> > economy has done since then. Therefore, it is useless, except from an
> > historic perspective. You cannot, although you try so hard, extrapolate
> from
> > a single data point. Now, show the relevant figures for all years 1999
> > through 2003 and we will see if there is an actual trend worth
discussing.
> >
>
> You have nothing to suggest that the historic trend in savings in Japan
> changed even one iota, "James".  But more importantly, the 1999 data point
> is not an extrapolation "from a single data point"--it's one of numerous
> data points which have been posted and linked to on this very forum which
> report (erroneously) that Japan's savings rate has varied between 30-34%.
>

You have not shown that this one data point represents a trend, historical
or otherwise. You also show a lack of basic reading comprehension.

> The REAL savings rate is 49% of GDP, not 33% as Asian Week reported.
> http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/japangdp.htm
>

Unsupported assertion by a known loon.

> > > It's obvious that you're not a man, "James".  It's obvious that you're
a
> > > woman who "thinks" just like a woman, and that means you "think" that
> math
> > > is just like a rubber yard stick which can be bent to fit your
> "feelings",
> > > which it's not.  Japan's official savings rate varied between 30-34%
> each
> > > and every year in the half century that we have figures available, so
> it's
> > > very unlikely that the 1999 figure would be off by more than 4%.  And
> even
> > > if it was, that would be an important data point to have to analyze
> > Japan's
> > > long term savings trends, further invalidating your absurd claim that
> > "they
> > > are no more valid than a snapshot of our economy".
> > >
> >
> > No. You 'think' the rate varied between 30-34% each year. You have not
> shown
> > that the average Japanese saved at this rate, nor do the official
Japanese
> > numbers. I point out that the 'propensity to consume' for February 1999
> was
> > 87.6% (according to the archived version of the link).
> >
>
> Yes, and this IS an attempt to "extrapolate from a single data point",
which
> IS meaningless, because it omits a LOT of other data which needs to be
> included to calculate the savings rate accurately.
> http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/japangdp.htm
>

No. It is a data point as reported by the Japanese government. A look at
other official reports indicates this indicator has stayed in the 75-85%
range.

You have already proven you are unable to correctly calculate anything, let
alone the 'savings rate'.

> > > Why don't you check out the errata at the bottom of
> > > http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/japanpsa.htm , apply your superior
> > > women's intuition, and prove yourself by telling us where you think
the
> > > error is, "James".
> > >
> > > John Knight
> > >
> >
> > Between your ears, as usual.
> >
> > Note the report is for February 1999, not December!
> >
> > http://web.archive.org/web/19990501142307/http://www.stat.go.jp/156.htm
> >
> > It shows the average income at 512,994, not the farcical "1,080,114 yen"
> you
> > quote for December. Are you going to state the average Japanese worker
> > DOUBLED their monthly income in 10 months?
> >
> > Hell, prove that and I will move to Japan tomorrow!
> >
> > James Powell
> >
> >
>
> No you won't, James.  They don't let morons, mamzers, nor usurers into
> Japan, a sane policy which is very contrary to our immigration "policy"
> wherein all muds and mamzers and the other dregs of humanity are welcomed
> with open arms.  They wouldn't even let someone who can't comprehend a
> statistical trend or an average sit at a window seat.
>
> John Knight

In other words, you cannot prove it. Therefore, your numbers are
unsubstantiated.

BTW - You are welcome to get your sorry ass out of this country if you
disagree with its policies so much. Of course, you have to find another
country willing to let you in.

James Powell