Tag Archives: Charles Dickens

Where the coins are

Yup, there it is, I said it. The article (at https://ara.tv/4eecj) gives us ‘US, Saudi Arabia hold high-level defense meeting at the Pentagon’ and right of the bat, we are ‘fed’ a lie (as I see it). We are given “The Pentagon’s top policy chief called Saudi Arabia a “critical, longstanding defense partner” working to become more capable and self-reliant.” Why is it a lie? Well, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been waiting for inclusion into the F-35 program. So, even as Belgium is included into that program, they are still awaiting delivery. Belgium a European nation that was overrun by the German army in 18 days (it took so long as most German soldiers were on foot or on bicycle) that country is more prestigious than Saudi Arabia? #JustSaying

I reckon it is the reason that China is making massive headways into the Arabic nations. And there it is, the additional quote ““The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a critical, longstanding defense partner for the United States that seeks to grow more capable and self-reliant in its defense. We are working hard to partner with Saudi Arabia to enable it to do so,” Colby said in a post on X.” I wonder when the defense department relies on X instead of the world wide news to disperse that information. It is a hard thing to comprehend.

I reckon that America is so desperate for cash (now that they damaged their tourism industry) that they can only turn to China and Saudi Arabia for additional funds. As Saudi Arabia has a lot more oil, the UAE was overlooked. But the setting is here America needs coins and as such I would have thought that someone in the Pentagon (it is rumored that this is managed by people at 1690 Air Force Pentagon, Washington, DC 20330-1670)

That being said, someone should have whispered to them to include Saudi Arabia to the F-35 list, but who am I saying this? I am still happy to get a nice bonus from the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) (at No. 88, Weiyi Road, Huang Tianba, Qingyang District, Chengdu City, Sichuan, China, postal code 610091) If you can’t beat them, join them I say. And I was always happy to get a nice (optionally fat) check. The new apartment will set me back $7M and there is the need to get some cash to the UAE (my optional Yas Island retirement location), as such bringing a customer the size of Saudi Arabia might get me my dream retirement.

As such you might wonder why this byline? That is easy as we are given “Colby welcomed Saudi efforts to build up its self-defense capabilities and “to make greater contributions toward achieving shared regional objectives,” Parnell added. The meeting came amid a series of recent US arms sales to the Kingdom. Earlier this year, the Trump administration approved a $3.5 billion weapons deal that included 1,000 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) and 50 AIM-120C-8 guidance sections.” I say that either Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby has a doofus (aka dodo) as a personal assistant, or he has been missing briefs for years. Saudi Arabia steered to self reliance in several fields (including defense) even before 2019, so the response you read before might be seen as nothing less than a joke. As for the ‘funds’ already spend, as I see it, Chan is just as willing to receive such payment for its abilities for Saudi Arabia to defend itself. I get that there is one stronger and one weaker. But I do not know who that is between these two. As such it might be anyones guess. I suggest you ask someone at Raytheon who has the better equipment and why.

So it is nice to see this article and there is no blame on AlArabiya, but until it refers to America seeing Saudi Arabia as a full fledged partner in global defense by selling them the F-35, these stories come across like that moment in Oliver Twist asking for some more. Charles Dickens wrote about that little orphan in 1838, so it might have been a while. Still the setting of America bothers me, not the meeting with Saudi Arabia, but the building of not-so-good moments in several areas in America going from tariffs to tourism. America is bleeding and through their own actions they are bleeding allies just as quickly as anything else. Not even the penguins on McDonald Island are happy to see President Trump.

So as we are given the final quote ““Both leaders recognized US-Saudi defense cooperation as a force multiplier for regional security, and reviewed opportunities to deepen cooperation,” said Parnell, the Pentagon spokesman.” Well, as a non-Pentagon source might I suggest including Saudi Arabia as another party for the F-35? That should deepen cooperation by a lot. #JustSaying

It is moments like these that I wholly embrace the old saying “Sarcasm is great, when it backfires it become irony” and that is important too, so just in case AlArabiya is hungry for more stories, the address of the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation can be found in the story. 

Have a great day this Tuesday, it’s still Monday in Vancouver, so they get this article in about 14 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

What was that about London Town?

There is a setting that we see and for some reason the media is ‘unable’ to highlight. It reminded me of a setting we saw in Love Actually, the masterpiece by Richard Curtis which included Keira Knightly as the newly created bride, Denise Richards as the pretty one of the family, Claudia Schiffer as the new girlfriend of Liam Neeson. Yet they are not the setting. It is the interaction of Hugh Grant as the Prime Minister and Billy Bob Thornton as the US president. You see, that part reflects on now when we hear Hugh Grant (as Prime Minister of the UK) say “A friend who bullies us is no longer a friend. And since bullies only respond to strength, from now onward I will be prepared to be much stronger.” Words that have been unlikely to come from Keir Starmer. On the side of President Trump it was a good tactic. Divide and conquer. An age old tradition to take the UK out of the race to support Canada. That is my first concern. Our Commonwealth brother is in a tough spot and they need our help. I for one was all about setting the stage of the Commonwealth and it has merit. If Whatever is exported to the USA, should now (for as much as possible) set among us, the Commonwealth nations. Moreover, the tariffs need to include all exported energy to America. The said 25%, fine, Canada can do that too. But the larger requirements are to set exports from America to Commonwealth and Europe. The first setting is oil, Crude Petroleum ($107B), Petroleum Gas ($15.7B) and Refined Petroleum ($15.1B). Then we get to deal with the rest. And as far as I can see, either Australia and New Zealand aren’t on their list, or their parts are too small. So lets ramp up what these two nations can deal with. The benefit there is that Vancouver will get a boost of income through shipping and optionally jobs too. After that there is the option how much can we shift towards Europe, as well as how much more can Canada sell to the United Kingdom. It only takes care of 40% of the current needs, but with America losing the 40% of that, especially oil, America has created their own problem. As far as I am concerned we all need to take America off the shopping lists. Australia has its own settings. Two weeks ago we saw “It came after comments on Tuesday from the US president that there would be no exceptions or exemptions on the tariffs, which will start on 12 March unless Anthony Albanese can secure an exemption.” So was there an exemption? And March 12th is less than two weeks away. For Australia the ‘loss’ is a ‘mere’ 51 billion all whilst we import from America $34.6 billion in goods and services. So what happens if we decide to drop the bigger part of $34 billion and get that from Canada and India? I don’t know if it completely balances its out, but two nations dampening America for half a trillion dollars will have an effect. As such we can state that ‘America first’ could become an essential ‘America first to the sewer’. I like it when life balances the bully into desperation. I don’t know that much about New Zealand but that has its own margins, and when that falls down for America as well, and their goods find another destination, we will have been much stronger against the so called ‘bully’.

In the other side there is nothing against America phrasing ‘America first’ it is a nationalistic setting I never opposed it. Not for Denmark, not for Germany, not for France of any other nation. National pride is essential for any nation. But the larger issue isn’t that America has a Fentanyl problem. It is related to the quote “Since 2013, the illegally manufactured fentanyl problem in the United States has become more deadly and more diverse.” The other side is that federal data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection show Canada plays almost no role in the smuggling of fentanyl or other deadly street drugs into the U.S. Despite that fact, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised in December to step up efforts to secure the northern border. (Source: NPR) so how is “Canada plays almost no role” the setting for the tariffs? It does not. As I personally see it America is now so broke that they have to cut every corner and alleviate every spending that they can dismiss. That is the setting I see and I have been watching this for some years. It might help, but at the most a few months and as we cull the needy Americans from resources they need, that setting will expedite matters against President Trump. And we have a duty to our Commonwealth brothers and now we must unite, because when the Wall Street boat sinks, we need to be ready for what comes next. If you want to guess what comes next. Wait until you see, social funding goes to zero. Veterans, healthcare, pensions, unemployment it all falls down. I reckon that this mess will be ten times worse than the Great Depression, which was a global economic crisis that began in 1929 and lasted until the 1930s. It was caused by the Wall Street stock market crash in the United States. And it will do so again, but this time the stakes are higher. Europe and Japan are directly impacted this time too and what comes next will fuel movies for a decade or two. Perhaps Richard Curtis will create his next gem called ‘Funds Actually’ and its release will be under 5 years after this point is reached. Perhaps a more international cast like the stock broker in Tokyo (played by Hiroyuki Sanada) who sees his wealth and family life dissolve as he trusted the words of Wall Street. And for rockers, the role of Donald Trump played by Alec Baldwin, dropping in on 10 Downing Street asking “Can I have some more please?” I actually doubt that President Trump ever used the phrase ‘please’ but it makes for a better Oliver Twist reference. 

When you see the elements stack up, I see that this is the most prevalent setting and when the numbers are counted, can anyone give rise to the Fox statement “The massive GOP bill would also direct $4 trillion toward raising the debt limit” I think America is about to surpass its debt limit with exceeding arrogance and that is never good, because like gamblers going all in again and again disregarding the issue in front of them just as long as they get one win, that setting is one of the most dangerous. Not only because the current administration is ignorant of the setting of now, but they let the bet it hoping they get some too. When you take approach to the budgets, how does this ever help anyone?

Have a lovely weekend. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, movies, Politics

The counting thought

Several hours ago I came up with yet another optional TV series. I am already working on ‘How to Assassinate a Politician’ (about the end of the politician Geert Wilders) for Al Saudiya and it has hit a few bricks. The first line setting is done, now the detail work and that meets with challenges, especially as Final Draft is new to me. Then there is ‘Residuam Vitam’ which plays mostly in New Orleans and I have for the most, worked it out in my mind and is supposed to be a mini-series. Then there is ‘Kenos Diastima’ which is mostly completed in my mind and is a series set to 3 seasons with an open ending. I did not want to dredge it on and I like the thoughts that Terry Gilliam had on 12 Monkeys and Brazil. The last setting is ‘Engonos’ which my mind is currently developing and I am somewhere in season 2. As such my plate is full and here you as readers are about to get some free IP, feel free to use it anyway you can.

The story has references. There was a TV series once (about 30-40 years ago) which centred about a special effects dude and he uses his skills to give certain targets the idea that there are aliens and exploits them to do the right thing. Then there is A Christmas Carol by the legendary Charles Dickens. This story is lovely and very vanilla, which considering it was published in December 1843 makes perfect sense. The world was very innocent those days (I miss those days) and a such my mind made an overhaul. The first target is that wench Candace Owens who called for an invasion of Australia with its Taliban government. She will do nicely. As a public person she has no expectations of privacy. As one calling for the invasion of Australia (my country) she can be made an example of. 

The stage
The stage is that the episodes start with a person who seemingly is in a nightmare, they (in this case she) are in hell. She faces her darkest nightmares according to Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy and as we go through 2/3rd of the story, we see her struggling with the darkest fears. Then we see that she is set into a medical coma and she is influenced by the latest technologies in a truck, so that she and the setup remains mobile. We see her being bruised by people monitoring her and it reenforces her nightmares, she is naked so that the hot air touches her skin making her darkness deeper. Brambles cut and chaff her and she is wearing a helmet with a visor making the sounds and should she momentarily wake up slightly, the images continue. After 36 hours she is dumped somewhere in a simple Jute gown that is covered in blood and tar. The blood is human and is a mix of dozens of different blood types (to keep the police busy) and the tar is especially created using brimstone (sulphurise coals) with some additional elements in the mix to boggle the mind of scientists. Then we get into the final stretch and we see how actors who were part of the process are around her reenforcing her thoughts in subtle ways outside of the ‘experience’. 

The question we leave out in the open at that point is what would a despicable wench do when we expose her to her nightmares? Now this could be a mini series (3-4 episodes) or a series with multiple people (the real despicable ones). You see, I do not believe that there is a horror story out there that uses the latest technologies for some ‘subjective’ mind screwing. I think that idea has merit and that is as far as I got in 2-3 hours. 

So, if you can make this work, you are welcome to it. The smallest request (from me) is that you use Candace Owens for this example. There should be a consequence of being this stupid and calling for the invasion of Australia. We have our pride and you better not piss us off. The 6 deadliest animals on the planet live here as someone once said. 

Enjoy a more vanilla weekend than I am at present, preferable with a someone you desire more than anything else (real, valid or not).

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, movies, Stories

A nice surprise

It started early this morning, the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65057809) gives me ‘Jack Dorsey business target of Hindenburg report’, so someone is finally asking questions of this person? With the byline “Tech billionaire Jack Dorsey is facing scrutiny, after a report accuses the payments company he leads of inflating user numbers and catering to criminals” one part some people noticed that about Twitter, which is why Elon Musk paid well over twice the price and no one in the media was willing to ask questions. I know nothing about the payment company, as such I have no view. The catering to criminals is new, not sure where I stand on it. As such when I see “Block, which former Twitter boss Mr Dorsey co-founded in 2009 and leads as chief executive, said it was exploring legal action against Hindenburg for the “factually inaccurate and misleading report”.” I stopped my response as I did not want to give more ammunition to Jack Dorsey, but the statement ‘factually inaccurate’ requires investigation and data. So as we are given “Now worth more than $30bn (£24.4bn), it was renamed Block in 2021, to reflect another, fast growing side of its business: Cash App, a payments app that was the focus of Hindenburg’s report.” No one seemingly reacts and that is fine, these places happen. Yet the setting is that it grew by well close to 1,000% over the period of less than 8 years. That implies a 125% year on year growth, that is a bit much and the accusation seemingly makes sense. And the criminals (or organised crime) would see the benefit of a cash app. There would be all kinds of benefits for them. This does not make Jack Dorsey guilty, but after the Twitter debacle it makes sense that a deeper look is given to this event. I reckon that I would be able to find a few more items if I had access to all that data, but that is the second stage. Not merely the data, the income streams would be invaluable for a player like China (or Russia for that matter). So as the BBC gives us “While conducting its research, Hindenburg claimed it had easily created obviously fake Cash App accounts in the names of Donald Trump and Elon Musk and made public records requests, which allegedly showed that Cash App was used to facilitate millions in fraudulent pandemic relief payments from the government.” Which leads to “that reflected “key lapses” in compliance processes” and there is one of the elements I warned for for well over two years. The BBC calls (or quotes) key lapses, but I see another fintech app lacking checks, balances and the ability to vet the correctness of information. And the added ““Former employees described how Cash App suppressed internal concerns and ignored user pleas for help as criminal activity and fraud ran rampant on its platform,” Hindenburg said. “This appeared to be an effort to grow Cash App’s user base by strategically disregarding Anti Money Laundering (AML) rules”” merely gives rise to my thoughts. And the world seems to be stagnant to act to any FinTech when needed. Yes, we see it at the BBC now, but how many more will look into this? How many media will give Jack Dorsey another free pass? I cannot tell at present, but over the last 11 hours the media did not go nuts over this, yet jokes like the ICIJ with their Pandora papers, their Pickwick papers and their cups of tea are seemingly in the dark on too much of this. So whilst some will wonder why Charles Dickens comes into play. Consider “A great hokey-cokey of eccentrics, conmen, phony politicians, amorous widows and wily, witty servants, somehow catching an essence of what it is to be English, celebrating companionship, generosity, good nature, in the figure of Samuel Pickwick, Esq, one of the great embodiments in literature of benevolence.” Now consider that view whilst I edit that part into “A view of FinTech solutions, conmen, phony media, and, silly exploiters, somehow catching an essence of what it is to be a wannabe, celebrating greed, need, and exploiters, in the figure of an unknown person at present, one of the worst instigations of hardship creators” it took less than a minute to get to that part of the equation and the crumbles of the media pie were all over the table for well over a year. So it is good to see the BBC make mention of this, but I wonder who will follow and will there be a real investigation? And I have to make one alteration, the Australian Financial Review got there about an hour ago, so they were on the ball. Yet who else was? Not that many for sure. 

This situation is still fluidic and I will take more looks, because I think I owe people like Elon Musk to take a larger look into this person, merely for the reason that the media refused to do so and that ain’t right. So will Jack Dorsey join the flock containing people like Elisabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried? I do not know, that is for a court to decide, at present it is an accusation. But in this the BBC has for the most been a righteous party, so for now they are getting the benefit of the doubt and the fact that the AFR is supporting that view is not a bad thing either. Perhaps the twist and dance of Jack Dorsey is in its last stage Time will tell. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Grasping change

We all tend to avoid change. Not because it is a problem, but we all believe in the expression: “When it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. You, me all of us tend to go forward in our small circles, because for most comfort is king. Yet where is the moment when continuing the same is no longer an option? There is a lot of consideration in that because we tend to be like the frog in such manner. When you throw a frog in boiling water, he’ll jump out. Yet when you put a frog in a pot of water and put a flame below it, the frog will willingly boil to death. We are like that frog in many ways. Yet this is under normal circumstances, when we see an attack on our quality of life, we tend to get active real fast.

This is seen when our lives revolve around greed. When that happens the numbers go wildly out of control. This we see in the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/10/hard-brexit-threatens-global-financial-system-city-chiefs-tell-mps), where we see people like Xavier Rolet, chief executive of the London Stock Exchange end up being connected to statements like ‘could spark more than 230,000 job losses‘. In all this the people involved are (as I personally see it) scared for their life filled with mistresses, large bank accounts and an overly rewarded quality of life ask questions like ‘clarity on the UK’s future relationship with the EU‘. You see, those people were lulling the masses around them into a false sense of compliance, but the people have lost too much, the gap of incomes too large and what no one was willing to accept is that Brexit became a reality and as the implementation is starting to move forward, those people are scared, their large incomes based on inaction is now in recession, it scares them, so they go into blame mode and flame mode. As Xavier Rolet called for a five-year transition period for the UK to exit the EU, possibly for additional reasons like a maximisation of retirement portfolios, is now confronted with ‘the Treasury select committee were told the triggering of article 50‘, which officially initiates the departure from the EU. Another Fat Cat, namely Douglas Flint has admitted a more playful response in this. “The ecosystem in London is a bit like a Jenga tower: you don’t know if you pull one small piece out whether nothing happens or whether it has a more dramatic impact”, is his statement and as he is allegedly fetching £7.6m a year (Compared to that, I am merely making 0.3% of that), we can feel secure in calling the man a fat cat of the finance industry. Yet he is not alone, the triplets of finance is completed with Anthony Browne, who is adding to all this ‘the preservation of the status quo‘ is the best solution.

You see, these people (some call them numbskulls) refused to listen for well over 4 years pushing everything forward and they all forgot that a nation is not them with their 322 friends who are all living the gravy train, it is the 68 million voters, who all for the longest time have lived a raw deal, they voted and there was enough to make a majority, too many had lost too many levels of comfort. If we push back to the frog in scenario 2, too many were getting too uncomfortable and the announcements from Mario Draghi on more Quantative Easing programs that can now be extended beyond 2017. The people see the debt growing and more important, the second time now has enough evidence that it will not be any better, almost certain that it will be worse. In all this we remember the action of an insane person. A person who does the same thing twice and expects different results. The people have had enough of fat cats drowning banks with cash whilst only the banks and the financial sector see the fallout bonus of those events. The people wanted Brexit and certain people in the English Financial Sector now see that the good times are ending, a few years too soon when they look at their retirement portfolios. In that they do not realise that the bulk of the population will have to work until the day they die, for well over 30% retirement is no longer a viable option. They all forgot about the people. In my personal view, the sooner the UK is out of that mess, the sooner can it actually grow its national value, the value of the British people! The fat cats all forgot about that, because for the most, their fortunes are all set in some mobile ‘currency’ that ‘avoids’, or is that ‘voids’ taxation in legal ways.

So even as some of these Fat Cats will grasp towards statistics like “median disposable income for the poorest fifth of households had risen by £700, or 5.1%, in the year to April 2016, while the richest fifth of households saw their incomes fall by £1,000, or 1.9%, over the same period” (source: the Guardian), yet what is left out in the shadows is that the poorest group is making less than £10,000, whilst the richest is making in excess of £55,000, with the top exceeding well over £275,000, so we can honestly state that those losing out of £1,000 should for the most not feel its impact and the top won’t even notice it. Change happens and only when it impacts our comfort levels (those not impacted by greed), that part has been ignored and now when the die is cast do we see levels of fear mongering, where a small group is hoping if they can get away with it a little longer. Almost like that little girl Beverly Hills Twist going to the front of the Crystal shop asking for a little more. Charles Dickens would roll in his grave is he witnessed this. I particularly like the Guardian Quote (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/10/uk-inequality-working-people-pensions-ons) “it calculated that the average FTSE 100 boss earned more than £1,000 an hour, meaning it took less than three days to earn the UK average salary“, the start of a new Beatles hit ‘three days a year’, greed run amok. Let’s be fair, I am for the most a capitalist. I have never objected to bosses making more than me, yet when their incomes with bonuses sets my income (me with two University degrees) at 0.3%, we can state that the imbalance is too far out of control. In that regard, I will need to be slightly less diplomatic and refer to the joke that is ONS senior statistician, Claudia Wells who said “a strong rise in pensioner incomes was behind much of the increase in incomes, especially of those in the bottom 40%“, perhaps she would like to show us evidence, especially when we see places like ageuk.org.uk give us:

  • 1 in 7 pensioners (1.6 million or 14% of pensioners in the UK) live in poverty, defined as having incomes of less than 60% of median income after housing costs.
  • A further 1.2 million pensioners have incomes just above the poverty line (more than 60% but less than 70% of median income)

So in all this, when she hides behind that ‘increase in income‘, how much increase? Because the bulk is not getting any place anywhere soon, too much data shows that. In all this they also tend to miss out on entitlements like Housing benefits because of several reasons. I expect that a lack of social housing is likely to be a first reason.

In this we need change. We will need to consider how business in maintained. The clamp down on tax avoidance was a first, yet the EU borders are too open and too many facilitators for lower taxation remain. With Brexit squarely in place the banks will need to reconsider, try to avoid taxation a little longer by moving, or in light of the European changes stay and pay a fair amount of taxation, at that point only the fat cats lose out, which gave us the three wise crackers at the beginning. When the tax comes rolling in, we will also see a change for the NHS and other parties who have been ransacked due to full infrastructures without properly taxed representations.

In this we need to face a few facts, not just from the HMRC, we see that the Diplomatic Corps needs to take a close look at themselves in the mirror. When we get quotes from the Guardian like ‘Ed Llewellyn told MPs his staff were making contacts with other French presidential candidates‘, whilst stating ‘his embassy will not be forging links with far-right presidential candidate Marine Le Pen because the UK government has a policy of not engaging with her party, the Front National (FN)‘, he better get his head in the game real fast, unless that order came from Her Royal Highness directly. Apart from these people engaging in discrimination, should Marine Le Pen be elected (not a guarantee at present), the UK will have no options but to sit at the table with France, France is one of the economy pillars for Europe and even as the UK is also one, there is enough indication that player number 4 (Italy) will be entering a very deep valley of recession for some time to come. At that point only Germany remains as a sizeable business partner. Perhaps Ed Llewellyn would be so kind on informing the people of England how often an option of one worked really nicely for the UK, like ever? In this Crispin Blunt is asking questions as should we all, Llewellyn’s response “would be a matter for ministers” will in my humble opinion not hack it as they are making connections to the other political players in France. The consequence of these choices could potentially be expensive for the UK, in a time when the required policy of turning every penny is squarely in place.

That wisdom was given by Natalie Nougayrède of the Guardian in September last year with ‘Angela Merkel and Marine Le Pen: one of them will shape Europe’s future‘. Their visions are opposite and there is no clear evidence where the future of Europe is going. Whilst stating that, we do know that Merkel is in seriously warm waters (read: wibbit, wibbit), as Sigmar Gabriel is challenging Chancellor Merkel, there will be an age of polarisation within the German SDP. This will intensify as my earlier blog now gets a new side to it all. Thomas de Maizière a member of the CDU will have options to influence this polarisation, especially if Sigmar Gabriel is willing to offer a better centralisation deal on German intelligence, which is a dangerous reason to change to say the least. So having France in the UK preference side is going to be rather essential, alienating the current number two in that race is not the best actions, in that regard, the anti-Trump actions within the UK are equally not the good an idea, at some point we get to be thankful for Nigel Farage taking open positive interest in the inauguration of Donald Trump. In this we need to realise the ‘blunder’ Sir Kim Darroch made when he decided to dismiss him as “an outsider and an unknown quantity“, I am not a diplomat (far from that) and even I could have phrased that better. So as the UK diplomats bungle one side of the Atlantic river (that narrow brook between the USA and the UK), blundering on the other side of the North Sea might not be the best action to undertake. This when we look back at a leaked telegram by Sir Kim Darroch, making it interesting why a telegram? How encrypted was it? A little embarrassing that this is happening to the former national security advisor, it could just be the irony of the universe.

So as we are trying to grasp change, the people around us are doing the same. In fairness, like you they are catering to the needs of themselves, we cannot fault anyone for that, yet when their incomes is in excess of 300 times your income, how much leeway should they get? I have never opposed differences of income. Someone made Facebook and got wealthy beyond all means. So did the person who came up with Windows, with Oracle, with Google and a few others, yet those who merely ‘facilitate’, those who live of the vulture principle, those who do not actually create anything, how should they be seen? I cannot claim to know the answer, but there is a massive difference.

What changes do you grasp and who is making them for you?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Whinging from a desperate left

This is how I felt when both ‘We must stop Angela Merkel’s bullying – or let the forces of austerity win‘ by Owen Jones (at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/28/syriza-merkel-economic-greece-europe) and ‘Bank of England governor attacks eurozone austerity‘ by Larry Elliott (at http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/28/bank-england-governor-attacks-eurozone-austerity) passed in front of me. It is a unique issue, the political left in league with the banks. It is likely to be a first. The left want the image of cost of living relief, which is a ludicrous fantasy to begin with and that fantasy seems to be all about getting to spend money. We have a similar ‘BS’ joke like this in Australia. That person is called Bill Shorten. You see, as I see it, the banks want ease so that this generation can get a few more millions in commissions before it all collapses.

Let’s take a look at the youthful Mr Oxford (Owen Jones). It starts with the opening premise: ‘Angela Merkel is the most monstrous western European leader of this generation‘. No, she is not! Let’s take a look at the past. Around 2009 Merkel stated that enough is enough. She introduced austerity measures and she sliced back on German spending by a lot. The German people were in pain, they all were. The consequence was that the debt had gone down by a lot, so when harder times came, Germany had shed some of its debt and as such, lower costs on interests and therefor the pain that followed in 2011 and 2012 was suddenly not as painful for the Germans at large. I remember seeing the news. The Dutch did not adhere to such notions, they were all in the mindset like ‘it will get better next year’, at that time the Dutch Finance minister was Wouter Bos. It would not be so good. To be honest, the pain the Dutch felt would not have been that extreme if they had tightened the belt from 2009 onwards as well, but they were all adhering to their ‘good news cycle’, whomever came next had to clean up the mess. It was not just the Dutch, the French, the Italian, the Spanish, as well as the United Kingdom, they all went overboard in spending trillions.

So when I read the deluded word by Owen Jones, it just makes me a little sad. the quote “The Greeks have rebelled against machine men – and women – and they are crying out for others to follow“, that sounds nice as an epitaph for Don Quixote as he marches against the next windmill (possibly a Dutch one), but the Greeks created their own mess. Their inadequacy to deal with corruption, tax collection and a host of other issues got THEMSELVES into the mess they have. Would it not be nice to clearly state that?

Then Own comes with “As Krugman notes, the troika – the IMF, European Central Bank and European commission – promoted “an economic fantasy”, for which the Greeks have paid. They projected that unemployment would peak at 15% in 2012, but it hurtled to over 25% instead“, which is a part I do agree with. There was an economic fantasy, because the austerity measures needed where on lethal levels which cannot be denied, how do the Greeks react? With a series of strikes and vandalism events which only got them into deeper water. A watery grave the Greeks had created for themselves. They now have a debt of well over 325 billion for a population of 11 million, so how wealthy are those 11 million Greeks? If not, where did that money go? The fact that Greek bonds are now at 9.85% should be an indication that Greece is now almost denied existence, it for the most, only has itself to blame, since 2009, how many Greeks actually went to court and to prison for what was done? Of the 2069 Greek accounts in Switzerland (as mentioned in a Greek magazine), who besides the journalist has appeared in court? It seems that making Germany the scapegoat for something the Greeks did themselves is absent of loads of logic.

Then we get another quote that is up for discussion: “Germany ploughed money into countries such as Greece and Spain – that’s the “magic” of deregulated markets – and in doing so “lent more than they could afford”. German banks and their political champions should have known this would end in disaster“, I disagree. Greece was given an option, but was also informed of the intense pressures that this causes. What did they do? Whinge and whine like faulty politicians with the spinal cord of a paperback, not a hardcover amongst them! Instead of going after tax dodgers and those who had made bad calls, to see what they could get back, they went into states of denial, like flaccid applications to a concrete wall, not a scratch was made and when the time was up, they again, whined for more cash, an idea given to them by Charles Dickens in his story Oliver Twist. Then suddenly miraculously, the crisis was over and suddenly they went back to the bond market for more. None of those events are in this article.

Last we get “The future of millions of Europeans – Greek, French, Spanish and British alike – will be bleak indeed. That is why a movement to defend the already ruined nation of Greece is so important. Defeated Germany benefited from debt relief in 1953, and we must demand that for Greece today“, how about the clarity that debt relief came and Greece did nothing, and now, they are whinging and whining (again) for more cash, less debt (through forgiving current debts). However, nobody is making any headway in aligning the justice system and the law to take care of those evading taxation. It will not be anywhere near enough, but it will be a clear signal that Greece is serious about taking a stance for resolving debt and fortifying its annual income. Oh and when the debt is forgiven? Who pays for that money not coming in? The IMF or divide the debt over all the EU nations, who are all beyond their maximum borrowing points? Perhaps option 2? Let the ‘Grexit’ commence and let’s see how the Drachma will leave the Greek people in a state so much worse. At that point the people will dream of those good old austerity times.

Let’s face it, it is not fair to the Greek people, not one bit, but I have seen enough BS in regards to blaming the Germans for what some Greeks did to Greece. If we look at 2013, the quote “The state collected less than half of the revenues it was due to receive last year as it appeared unable to ensure that taxes and fines found their way to its coffers, according to a State Audit Council report submitted in Parliament on Tuesday by its president, Ioannis Karavokyris“, this was an article from November 2013, almost 4 years after the mess they themselves created. (at http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_wsite2_1_05/11/2013_526451), so as the Greeks drop the ball over and over again, who do they have to blame but themselves? So as I take my leave from Owen Jones, we look at the second Mr Oxford in this equation. With Owen I am willing to concede that he has his ideological heart in the right place, with Mr Smiley Smiley Canadian Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of Canada and the current Governor of the Bank of England, the gloves come off. So let’s introduce Marky Mark to the business end of a two by four in the shape of a keyboard!

It starts quite lovely, immediate of the bat with “Mark Carney says eurozone is caught in a debt trap and should ease hardline budget cuts just days after the Syriza election directly challenged policy“, just under the title. Why should we ease up? If we ease up after an election, the Greeks can forgo debt by having 12 elections over the next three years. It is the cost of doing business and as such, the Greeks themselves have not shown one iota of intent from 2009 onward (the lack of artful tax dodge prosecution could be regarded as evidence piece number one).

The second whopping ‘miss-statement’ might be seen in “Speaking in Dublin, Carney said the eurozone needed to ease its hardline budgetary policies and make rapid progress towards a fiscal union that would transfer resources from rich to poor countries“, when we see parts like ‘transfer resources from rich to poor countries‘, in my view (and in the view of some others), it reads like ‘as big business transfers corporate structures towards economic ailing areas. This was achieved through a subsidy structure that gave way to spreading business opportunity to less fortunate areas’. It also translates in the non-written text part of that statement as less tax liable options for big business, already far beyond normal wealth, move towards areas where labour laws are even less protective, optimising profits for big business.

So when he states as a bank governor the following “Carney made it clear that he thought the failure to complete the process of integration coupled with over-restrictive fiscal policies risked driving the 18-nation single currency area deeper into a debt trap“, which is not untrue, yet the part as a banker, that he does not mention is that he and his buddies profit greatly from spending sprees, if governments suddenly get a hold of their budgets, banks lose out a lot. This can be seen in the simplest way when we consider the Greek bonds. When that market opened up again (which should never have been allowed), the Greeks did not just add to their debt, someone in the banking world ended up with a 65 million euro bonus (in total) for selling these bonds, I am certain that the ‘wealth’ was spread around a little, but some of these financial people just cannot make ends meet on 350K a year, supporting a wife, kids, a Ferrari, a Ducati and two mistresses. You need that bond bonus to feel secure in your way of life as I see it. I wonder if the easing up has anything to do with meetings that places like Loomis Sayles ‘might’ have had with Natixis, perhaps Mr Carney attended a social event in such settings?

I agree with the premise we read in the quote “Since the financial crisis all major advanced economies have been in a debt trap where low growth deepens the burden of debt, prompting the private sector to cut spending further. Persistent economic weakness damages the extent to which economies can recover. Skills and capital atrophy“, I agree with that premise, yet this was a given already in 2011. I foresaw these events in 2012 and I read as bankers all over the place were hosting to ‘bright weather forecasting‘ whilst not taking the cautious steps that should have been taken. We can either state that politicians were too stupid to consider the dangers, or they were happy to leave the mess to those who followed (like Labour left hundreds of billions in debts to the Liberals in Australia), after that we see banks and the media in cycles of ‘bad news management’ slowly lowering expectation and forecasts, whilst the money had already been spend. So, yes Mr Carney, you state a good quote, it is just incredibly incomplete!

So, when we read “Carney has been vocal in his support for the European Central Bank’s decision to start buying government and commercial debt in its own version of the quantitative easing programmes, but said the Frankfurt-based central bank was unable alone to eliminate the threat of a prolonged stagnation“, we see nothing wrong. It is to the smallest degree commendable, only to the smallest degree, because several governments had entered a state of overspending, followed by ‘bad news management’ an intertwined cycle that would undo whatever headway quantitative easing would bring. The need for greed will always win in the end, so those programs are just a fantasy, Greece has some evidence of that part too, as they were part in both sides of that game. Isn’t it nice when the bank plays player one, player two and acts as the bank in the middle. That part truly sucks if you are player three and four in a game of monopoly. If we see Germany as player 3, than who is player 4?

I’ll let you do the math there!

You see, the actual solution would have been to take a stronger position on IP rules and regulations. An approach to ease the path for the small innovator of newly designed products. As several IP sides were all about setting goals towards ‘business’ (read big business), they forgot that when we look at the period between the 50’s and the 70’s, innovation came from the small inventors. Nearly every economy starts stepwise from small players and small innovators. Today, the players are so focussed on the large amounts, they tend to focus on large players like Apple and Microsoft and they forget that these companies, for a larger part live of the premise of the Vulture cycle, you pick the carcass until the hunter shoots a new prey, then they wait until it is feeding time. Small innovators (like Markus Persson with Minecraft) have the actual idea, which a large company then buys for 2 billion plus. As small innovators are given space to proceed and as larger players are denied blocking patents to force amalgamation of the true visionary into their moulding process that is the moment when economies will truly move forward. That is how you get forward momentum!

So when we see the final quote by Mark Carney “Carney said the eurozone’s unemployment rate of 11.5% was more than double that of the UK, but its fiscal deficit – the gap between tax revenues and spending – was only half the size of the UK’s. The eurozone, he said, should be using a “constructive” fiscal policy to support demand and mitigate the “tail risks of stagnation”“, we should wonder who he is catering to. As I saw it, the article was all about policies that are interesting for the boards of directors of the corporations, but the people will only be allowed the conceptual benefit on the tale end. Benefits that might have been a realistic form of support for treasuries all over Europe if they had done something actual to properly set up tax policies. Catering to big business stopped being constructive or lucrative for governments for half a decade now, how much longer will you take until you figure out that big business only caters to their own board of directors?

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics