[속보] 文, 검수완박 공포안 의결 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 이데일리 검수완박에도…尹정부, 검찰 중심 수사체계 복원 나선다 [윤정부 국정과제] 수사지휘권 폐지·독자 예산편성 추진 강행의사 검찰, 경찰 및 공정위 협력강화…입김 강해진다 安 "검수완박, 경찰에 권한집중…바로 잡을 것" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 매경 러, 5월9일 전승절에 국면 전환할까…전쟁 선포, 점령지 병합설 특별군사작전→전면전 전환하면서 예비군 총동원령 돈바스 지역 병합하고 몰도바까지 전선 확대 관측도 --->펠로시가 우크라 가서 기름을 붓는 미치 짓을 하고, 세계는 확전의 위험에 노출되었다 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선비즈 남욱 “4000억 도둑질, 완벽하게 하자”… 대장동 재판서 ‘정영학 녹취록’ 공개 “유동규, 돈 맡겨놓은 것처럼 빚쟁이처럼 굴어” 유동규, 남욱에 뇌물 요구 정황도 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 러시아 국가 부도 카운트다운 검머외백수 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11412290868 러시아의 ‘국가 부도(디폴트)’ 여부가 4일 결정된다. 시티은행 런던 지점이 들고 있는 이자가 채권자 계좌로 송금돼야 하는데, 이때 미국과 영국이 어떻게 나올지가 중요하다. 미 재무부는 지난달 5일 “미국 은행을 통한 러시아의 달러화 표시 국채 상환을 허용하지 않을 방침”이라고 밝혔다. “(미국과 의견을 조율한) 영국 정부가 러시아 제재의 일환으로 채권자들의 이자 수령을 막을 수 있다”고 보도했다. --> 한국도 러시아 네셔널본드를 가지고 있습니다. 우리도 돈 떼일겁니다. 그것 보다는 러시아 경제는 완전히 개판될 것입니다. 국민들은 거지꼴이 되고 우크라이나에서 전쟁수행 능력은 급격히 떨어지겠죠. 푸틴의 더러운 전쟁을 지지하는 80%의 러시아 국민들. 이 전쟁이 얼마나 지옥인지 이제 몸소 체험 하겠죠. 그래도 푸틴을 지지한다? 미국 영국 등 서방이 그걸 노리고 지금까지 SWIFT 달러 결재 금지조치를 내린거죠. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 중앙일보 마윈 '국가 전복 혐의' 체포설…알리바바 주가 장중 급락 ---->공포 소설로 변하는 중국 정치 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 유럽 에너지 상황. 어서옵쇼 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11412291173 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOVkzC7gyIk 1. 유럽은 러시아 우크라이나 전쟁이후 전쟁이후 러시아 에너지 밴 때림. 2. 러시아 루블이 폭락하자 러시아가 앞으로 모든 국가가 에너지를 러시아 루블 (화폐)로 결제하라고 함 3. 4월달엔 독일 총리가 나서서 이건 계약에 없는 횡포라고 그럴일은 없을거라고 함. 4. 독일 최대 에너지 회사 Uniper포함 4곳에선 결국 루블로 결제를 하기로 함. 근데 이게 졸라 웃김 4월말에 유럽 연합이 에너지 회사들을 위한 가이드북을 발표함. (제제를 피해서 루블로 돈을 내는 방법을 공개한거임) 5. 독일은 개스프롬 (러시아 에너지 회사) 이 거래하는 은행에 계좌를 2개를 틈. 하나는 유로 계좌 하나는 루블 계좌. 6. 유럽이 유로로 돈을 내면, 그걸 은행이 루블로 환전 하는 거임. 7. 근데 문제는 환전은 일개 은행에서 하는게 아니라 러시아 중앙은행이 하는건데, 러시아 중앙은행 밴때렸버렸으니 유럽은 러시아 중앙은행과 어떠한 거래도 하면 안됨. 여기서 유럽 애들이 잔머리를 굴림 8. 정상적이라면, 러시아가 우린 루블로 받겠다 루블로 다오 하면 독일 기업들은 유로 -> 러시아 중앙 은행 환전 -> 루블 이 과정을 거쳐야 함. 그리고 러시아가 응 우리 루블로 돈 받음 영수증 여기 하면 거래가 끝나는거임. 9. 근데 위의 중앙은행과 거래 하면 안된다는 제제를 때려버린 유럽. 10. 그래서 유로애들이 잔머리를 굴린게, 개스프롬 거래 은행에 유로로 돈을 줌. 11. 하지만 은행이 루블로 환전 하고 영수증 받는 거래를 하는게 아니라, 유로 -> 환전 -> 루블 여기서 유로 (거래 종료) -> 환전 -> 루블 이렇게 되어버림. 즉 유로로 돈을 지급을 했으니 그걸 러시아 은행에서 환전을 하던 말던 우리는 제제 협약을 어긴게 아니다 라는거임. 12. 러시아는 원하는 대로 루블로 결제를 받았고, 유럽은 '우리는 유로로 돈을 냈다'라고 말할수 있으니 양쪽이 다 윈윈임. 13. 유럽은 지금도 하루에 800만 유로를 러시아에 에너지 구입으로 주고 있음. 유럽은 러시아 에너지의 17프로를 구입해주는 고객임, 전쟁 중인 지금도. 14. 유럽이 지급하는돈으로 러시아는 무기사고 군인들 월급주고 전쟁을 유지하고, 유럽은 우크라이나에 또 러시아와 싸우라고 무기공급하는 미친짓이 벌어지고 있는 거다. 결론: 유럽애들은 병신들이다. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 가격 인덱스는 인플레의 정확한 척도가 아니다 가격 인덱스는 측정의 단위로 특정 상품을 바탕으로 만들어진 통계적 환상이다 Price Indexes Aren't Accurate Measures of Inflation Antony P. Mueller "Inflation" is back in the headlines, and a lot of nonsense is being said about it. Without much thought whether it makes sense or not, "inflation" is defined as a general rise in prices. Official statistics claim that the "price level" can be measured and its change calculated as the so-called inflation rate, there being almost no critical evaluation of the reliability of these numbers. Rarely is it mentioned that these concepts are statistical constructs, published as "official numbers" and as such, subject to governmental interests. Prices The fundamental problem with the calculation of the price level is the assumption that money would measure the value of goods. This approach confounds value with exchange ratios. Money prices do not reflect the value of a good and therefore they do not measure anything. Consequently, it also makes no sense to speak of a "price level." According to Ludwig von Mises: When people talk of a "price level," they have in mind the image of a level of a liquid which goes up or down according to the increase or decrease in its quantity, but which, like a liquid in a tank, always rises evenly. But with prices, there is no such thing as a "level." Prices do not change to the same extent at the same time. There are always prices that are changing more rapidly, rising or falling more rapidly than other prices. Prices are different from value. Prices only make sense as price relations, as relative prices. As such, they serve the acting man as an orientation about the prevailing market conditions. Prices answer the question of which goods and services cost more and which alternatives cost less on the market compared to other goods. As such, prices are a market phenomenon, emerging as exchange ratios, and cannot arise meaningfully outside of markets. Relative prices indicate the prevailing conditions of relative scarcity. The price ratio is inversely proportional to the exchange ratios. For example, if one unit of good A exchanges for two units of good B, A costs twice as much as B in terms of the respective monetary units. As is obvious with the absolute number of price tags in different currencies, the price figure itself is irrelevant and only makes sense as a ratio to other prices. Money serves as a medium of exchange. The use of money makes it possible to circumvent the need for a "double coincidence of desires" of exchanges in kind, and as such, money itself is a market phenomenon. Money serves as the general medium of exchange. It does not measure anything. Likewise, prices only make sense as ratios. Because both the scale and the measuring object are subject to change, measurement is not possible. The obsession with the "price level" has done much harm to the conduct of monetary policy. Most modern central banks practice so-called inflation targeting without being fully aware that the inflation rate as their indicator is a chimera. By following this concept, central banks ignore that their guidepost is a phantom and additionally that the idea that the price level should rise steadily itself makes no economic sense. In the perspective of the monetary theory of the Austrian school, the consternation of the monetary policy makers in the face of their repeated failure is neither a surprise nor historically new. The official inflation rate misleads the central bankers as well as the financial market operators. Price Comparisons While the price ratios are a definite reality for the individual economic subject and guide the individual on which choice to make, this cannot be said of the so-called price level. The "inflation rate" published by the statistical offices is said to show how the so-called price level has changed over time. Yet what is this level supposed to represent? Unlike relative prices, which can be observed, a price index does not exist in the economy other than as a fabricated statistic. The so-called price level is a highly problematic concept. Its calculation requires as a first step a criterion for which goods to include and which goods to leave out of consideration. In the real economy, there are so many different and differentiated products that it is impossible to include all of them in a representative market basket. Some goods are bought daily; other goods only a few times in a lifetime. Furthermore, there are goods that are substituted by other goods over time and then vanish from the market or lose their importance. Every household, every person, and every region has a specific consumption pattern. Even if all buildings were of the same type, they would be different because of their location and would therefore have very different prices. Even when it comes to such a simple good as an egg, a closer look reveals that much more than size and color distinguishes them. In the modern economy, additionally, new products come onto the market again and again. Some of them are only mild modifications of existing products, but others are uniquely new. How is it possible to compare the price average from one period to the next? How can one claim to know that the price level has risen or fallen when the statistical market basket that serves as the scale is itself subject to changes? How does one determine quality changes? The floodgates are open to manipulation when it is up to the statistical authorities to determine the amount that such perceived quality changes would represent, as happens with the so-called hedonic inflation calculation. According to this procedure, an assumed "quality improvement" is deducted from the price, especially for technical products. These goods thus enter the basket at a lower price than they cost on the market. This procedure lowers the statistical inflation rate and blows up the figure for the growth rate. Even if the choice regarding the selection of products and services to be included in the shopping list could be fully perfected, which is impossible, the problem of how to collect the price quotes follows. Where, when, and how frequently will the price observers visit the shops and the marketplaces to register the prices? Many products have different prices at different locations and at different times. The same flight has different prices depending on when the ticket is purchased. Hotels charge higher rates for the same room and service in the high season than in the low season. Purchasing Power The price index is a statistical illusion based on the chimera of a fixed basket of goods as a unit of measurement. There is no scientific method of measuring the price level. Can the owner of a house call himself richer when the index of the house prices rises? For a person who lives in his own house and has no plans to sell, neither the housing prices nor the height of the rents is of importance. The situation is similar with the stock market. Has the nation become richer when the stock market index has risen? There is no such thing as the price level for the whole economy or the overall wealth of a society. Every person, every family, and every region has a different price structure. Everyone has his own variations of the purchasing power of his money. What one can do is count the costs of one’s own shopping cart and calculate its costs compared to one’s income. Such a calculation shows whether the individual purchasing power has risen or fallen. To do this for an entire economy makes no sense. It is as futile a procedure as the common practice of calculating the overall economic wealth by summing up the prices for property, bonds, and stocks and claiming that this represents national wealth. Ludwig von Mises criticized the methods of such macroeconomic calculations a long time ago when he wrote: All methods suggested for a measurement of the changes in the monetary unit's purchasing power are more or less unwittingly founded on the illusory image of an eternal and immutable being who determines by the application of an immutable standard the quantity of satisfaction which a unit of money conveys to him. It is a poor justification of this ill-thought idea that what is wanted is merely to measure changes in the purchasing power of money. The crux of the stability notion lies precisely in this concept of purchasing power. Only pseudoscales are available as a general evaluation. The assessment of the benefits of a product is subjective, individual. The value of a good depends on the personal assessment of the changing circumstances. According to this subjective evaluation, the individual will make his choice according to the relative price changes. Conclusion Macroeconomic economic statistics are constructs. With the "inflation measurement," both the price as the object of measurement and the market basket as the measuring rod undergo changes. Without a constant scale, no measurement is possible. What can be measured correctly is the money supply. Its change is the right use of the concept of "inflation" and the "inflation rate." Yet what appears to be an objective standard of measurement in price statistics is the flawed effort to measure the unmeasurable. The numbers that get published as official inflation figures are very crude indicators at best. Taking these numbers at face value is naïve and harmful.