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
> > > > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "James Powell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > > > > > > "Christian Party" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > > message
> > > > > >

 <snip>

> > > 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.
> >
>
> Let's assume that you just didn't see the link, which means you're a mere
> moron rather than a LIAR, and re-post the url's along with Japan's savings
> figures:
>
> 34% of GDP -- http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/bottomline.htm


Your site. Worthless as a source

>
> 30% of GDP --
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1208/bottomline.html


That is for one year. Interestingly enough, the US is listed at 17% and
canada at 21%.

>
> August 11, 2000, 30%
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2000/0811/bottomline.html
> August 18, 2000 edition
> http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/0818/bottomline.html
>
> December 8, 2000 edition
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1208/bottomline.html
>
> March 16, 2001, 30%
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2001/0316/bottomline.html
>
> March 30, 2001 edition
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2001/0330/bottomline.html
>
> April 20, 2001, 30%
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2001/0420/bottomline.html
>
> November 23, 2001
> http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/yourspace/0,8782,184624,00.html
>
>
> This is a trend which goes back to 1996.  It's not a single data point as
> you claim.
>

What trend? You have posted multiple links to the same data! Do you really
think the savings rate is going to be re-computed on a weekly basis?

> > > 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.
> >

Still unsupported. You just posted multiple references to the rate being 39%
from a much more credible source than you.

> > > > > 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'.
> >
>
> No, you posted ONE data point which is an exception to the rule.  This
would
> be like pointing out ONE data point from December 1999 which shows a
> propensity to consume of only 43% and claiming that it represents the
entire
> data.  It doesn't
> http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/japan1999income.htm
>

Try reading for comprehension. Here. let me REPEAT it again:

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.

> hmm, I just noticed that
> http://web.archive.org/web/19990223223925/http://www.stat.go.jp/156.htmto
> returns "failed connection", but if you'd like to see the original
printout
> to prove that this page above wasn't fabricated, let me know.
>

Naw. Your inability to solve the error above says a lot!

> What were you looking at to conclude:  "other official reports indicates
> this indicator has stayed in the 75-85% range".  As far back as 1990, the
> annual average has been closer to 72% and rose as high as 75% only once.
> Their *official* average propensity to consume in 2002 increased 1% from
> 2000 to 73.1%, meaning that the average household saved 26.9% of
disposable
> income and 22.6% of total income.
>

February 1999
Average propensity to consume: 87.6
Same month previous year: 84.5

http://web.archive.org/web/19990501142307/http://www.stat.go.jp/156.htm

August 1997
Average propensity to consume: 87.4
Same month previous year: 86.1

http://web.archive.org/web/19971018045042/http://www.stat.go.jp/156.htm

September 2003
Average propensity to consume: 87.0
Same month previous year: 89.1

http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/kakei/156.htm

And what orifice are you pulling numbers from?

> This was 121,850 yen or $1,139 each month, $13,668 per year, and over 40
> million households a total personal savings of $546.7 billion.
> So the final analysis of this "crisis" is that each Japanese household
saved
> 1% or $11.39 less each month than they would have saved without the
> "crisis".  As further evidence of this lack of an economic crisis, Bank of
> Japan reports that, at 107 yen/dollar, currency and deposits in 2002 were
> $26.4 trillion, up 2.1% from 2001 (not counting $7.1 trillion in
commercial
> banks).
>

Funny. The last link for September 2003 indicates a maximum of 47259 yen
($441.76) per month available for savings.

I am putting almost that much into my 401(k). Sorry if you do not have the
same discipline.

>
>
> http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/figures/pdf/2004f.pdf
>
> http://members.fortunecity.com/zz8/japangdp.htm
>
> > > > > 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
> >
> >
>
> That's not the way it works, "James".  Our White Christian Israelite
> Founding Forefathers established this putative Christian nation for THEIR
> posterity, intentionally and willfully excluding muds, cruds, and other
> mamzers who have no Constitutional right to even be here.  It's these
> useless eaters who're gonna take a hike.
>
> John Knight

WOW. There was not one ounce of truth anywhere in that paragraph! I am
amazed!

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

James Powell