Jump to content
Nigel Watson

Evan Davis comedy gold

Recommended Posts

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9570000/9570723.stm

 

A great example of government propaganda

 

A Radio 4 piece on rising commodity prices without................

 

1. Refering to this change as inflation

 

2. No mention that the cause of rising commodity prices is QE and ultraslack monetary policy

 

OK, Jim Rogers gets 10 secs at the end, but the inference is that he's a doomsday wacko - certainly no analysis of how QE Lleads to a fall in the £, which then creates cost push inflation

 

It kind of reminds me of all those economically illiterate debates on how can we have inflation without getting money into the peoples' hands

 

hyperinflations are currency exctintion events creating crushing cost-push inflation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've almost given up on Today.

 

I think in the last three years Rogers has been on twice, Peter Schiff once. Never enough contrarian views. The business slot just has fund managers who of course say "buy the dips" and "investing is a long term business". I have friends piling in to the market. They see me as a crank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've almost given up on Today.

 

I think in the last three years Rogers has been on twice, Peter Schiff once. Never enough contrarian views. The business slot just has fund managers who of course say "buy the dips" and "investing is a long term business". I have friends piling in to the market. They see me as a crank.

 

To play Devil's Advocate for a second, it could be argued that a lot of the podcasts that regularly feature the likes of Rogers, Schiff, Turk et al also suffer from a distinct lack of contrarian view. Or contrarian contrarian view, if you will. How often do KWN or Al Korelin have a non-gold bull view, for example? Not defending the BBC, but the issue of balance applies to both side of the debate. Both sides have their own agenda, deliberate or otherwise. Turk is unlikley to ever talk down gold, for example, and to me that casts a slight cloud over his opinion. Likewise, as entertaining as Max Keiser is, he's never going to present a balanced or qualified view because if he does, the need for him to exist goes away. He has his unique selling point but at the same time is constrained by it. He can only ever present information from one viewpoint. It may well look to be true at the moment, but again, presentation plays a big part in that and it should attract as much scrutiny as the likes of Peston or Davis, otherwise we're not being scientific. No harm in taking a little from column A and a little from column B IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To play Devil's Advocate for a second, it could be argued that a lot of the podcasts that regularly feature the likes of Rogers, Schiff, Turk et al also suffer from a distinct lack of contrarian view. Or contrarian contrarian view, if you will. How often do KWN or Al Korelin have a non-gold bull view, for example? Not defending the BBC, but the issue of balance applies to both side of the debate. Both sides have their own agenda, deliberate or otherwise. Turk is unlikley to ever talk down gold, for example, and to me that casts a slight cloud over his opinion. Likewise, as entertaining as Max Keiser is, he's never going to present a balanced or qualified view because if he does, the need for him to exist goes away. He has his unique selling point but at the same time is constrained by it. He can only ever present information from one viewpoint. It may well look to be true at the moment, but again, presentation plays a big part in that and it should attract as much scrutiny as the likes of Peston or Davis, otherwise we're not being scientific. No harm in taking a little from column A and a little from column B IMO.

 

 

Just logic. Do the arguments make sense, or are they moronic?

 

Evan Davis spouts the view that the UK economy will be saved with more debt fuelled consumption

 

Now, does he really beleive this, or is he just a presstutute?

 

I think that it's the latter, same applies to Flanders - they'll have plenty of PMs stashed offshore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've almost given up on Today.

 

I think in the last three years Rogers has been on twice, Peter Schiff once. Never enough contrarian views. The business slot just has fund managers who of course say "buy the dips" and "investing is a long term business". I have friends piling in to the market. They see me as a crank.

 

So true. I find Today just so short-sighted. They really don't get it. Like you say, it's all fund managers interviewed every week, saying the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear what you say, Philder. We all have a point of view except that Peston, Davis, Flanders and that Geordie bloke should present both sides - listen to the Austrian, listen to the New Keynsian. Journos should be neutral after all, the BBC is becoming outrageously partisan in all topics. The Biased BBC blog has excellent coverage of this.

 

For what it's worth, I think the greatest interview in recent times was with Jeremy Grantham back in November I think on CNBC.

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

×