Tag Archives: Oliver Twist

A change to pacing

That is what I learned about an hour ago. We all have pacing and we tend to adhere to the pacing within us. In the last few days we see that most are setting the pacing to whatever President Trump says it is. Ukraine is suddenly the dictator and the war is wrong. President Putin is the poor poor puppy who is caught in the middle. This is not a truth. Russia attacked, Russia advertised that it was a small war of mere hours, days at the most. This is not a truth. The Russian-Ukrainian war is well over 1080 days old and it will continue at present. Even as America is too broke to intervene, they set the tempo and now Europe takes over, seeing how broke America actually is they have committed over a billion pounds to reinvigorate the Ukrainian missile defenses. I am assuming here that it is for defense purposes. It seems that UK PM Keir Starmer and President Emmanuel Macron of France are setting the tempo of averting Russian invasion tactics. In this the settings of stages are altering. Soon (I hope) the media will see the upcoming bankruptcy of America in the limelight. The simplest setting we see it that the world will realize that no matter how much spin America shows, how much they are bullying other to think that the rose garden of America is no longer in existence. You see, I saw at least 5 years ago that the current $36,220,000,000,000 in federal debt requires at least $724,400,000,000 in interest payments (based on the 2% rule) and the IRS reported that in the fiscal year 2024, the US federal government collected $4.9 trillion in revenue. That leaves America with only 85%, 15% goes to paying the interest of the debt they have now. And all this whilst the 2025 budget proposes $11.4 billion in discretionary funding and $4 billion in mandatory funding. Can you see the setting? They merely have 85% of 4.9 trillion available whilst they set out a budget that is 271% of what they have. Whenever did that go smoothly? There is no “We have big options coming” or “AI will save America” it is too late for that (apart from AI being an actual reality for well over a decade). The non America nations are catching on and as such I was not surprised that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia took steps like the Saudi Gazette showed me an hour ago. The story (at https://www.saudigazette.com.sa/article/649806) is showing me through ‘Saudi Arabia invites misguided individuals abroad to return home under amnesty offer: State Security chief’.

Here we see “Saudi Arabia has invited misguided individuals abroad, who were exploited by external entities to attack the Kingdom, to return home without facing consequences, as long as they were not involved in grave crimes, according to President of State Security Abdulaziz Al-Howairini.” It makes sense. America has shown itself to be a lot less that an actual ally and when things get hard, nearly everyone will use these dissidents to harm the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and I personally don’t see America pulling punches. If they can get the President of America (President Trump) to do an Oliver Twist asking for up to a trillion, I reckon that many others will try to do the same and Saudi Arabia is still to some degree vulnerable to these dissidents trying attacks to the image of Saudi Arabia. Especially when the media is unwilling to report the actual news, merely partially limelight whatever gives them digital dollars. 

We have seen American options towards Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri (through the CIA) and there are additional setting towards this man, al whilst Al Jabri isn’t even in America, but in Canada. So I believe that this setting is close to essential and whilst we see “President of State Security Abdulaziz Al-Howairini emphasized that the state focuses on rehabilitation rather than punishment and assured that their return would not be publicized” we can see the damage reduction Saudi Arabia will have by these returning dissidents all whilst evading damage through involved extremist parties. So whilst we accept that we are given “The program’s latest episode focused on Saudi Arabia’s counterterrorism efforts, featuring top security officials who shared insights into the country’s progress in combating extremism in recent years.” I personally would like to add that it might not be enough. America has shown its tactics in the Ukrainian folly in the White House last week and I think at will be essential for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to seek actual allies, not wannabe when the going is good allies. I would personally like that the Commonwealth would be the ally of choice (I am a Commonwealthian) but I think that an alliance between China and Saudi Arabia is much more likely. When America goes under, it will be essential to have a strong deviance and Russia is not to be trusted, as such Europe and China are much safer choices. As America could drag Europe under to a much larger setting I believe the choice that remains is China and I don’t like a choice of one, As such I am voicing the need for the Commonwealth to step up. In light of the tariffs it seems that it would hand Canada an option of a new delivery address for the aluminum and steel they have. The UK could use that same setting and Saudi Arabia gets choice to get their goods from both the Commonwealth and China. This is merely a speculation on my side, but the merit for Saudi Arabia is decently clear.

So what will happen?
That remains to be seen, but the damage to Saudi Arabia will be reduced if this dissident plan goes into action. They might not get all the dissidents, but as the numbers of returning Saudi’s increase, the risk of damage its reduced and with that President of State Security Abdulaziz Al-Howairini made a stellar move. To that part of the equation I have little doubt. And I applaud creative thinking towards any solution, so this approach makes me happy. Families are reunited, risks are negated and impacts are lessened.

Have a creatively great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, 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

Oh boy, there was more

It all started 4 days ago when I wrote ‘I honestly don’t get it’. I comprehended the stage just fine, it is the lack of comprehension of greed, what people will do to fill their own pockets at the expense of everything and everyone. You see Basel III was published in 2010 after the first meltdown, it was extended to 2015 with extensions going as far as January 2023. So 13 years and the whining bitches (aka banks) still will not learn. SVB is merely one example and the actions by congress made perfect sense. Now we have Credit Suisse and the setting changes.

It now needs (and apparently just received) 45 billion to be ‘secured’. This is a little more than the national budget of Qatar which is 53rd on a list of national budgets with 228 nations with on last place Wallis and Futuna. To give you a better picture, it is twice the amount Oman has for its citizens, they are in 68th position. They need THAT MUCH money. The issue is that big and do not talk to me about journalists or those clowns at the ICIJ. They are all about their Pandora papers and what a joke they are. 

You see, I stated in the first article the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) and now we see the BBC give us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64964881) giving us “After Credit Suisse shares plunged on Wednesday, a major investor – the Saudi National Bank – said it would not inject further funds into the Swiss lender”, it matters and I will get back to this. In the mean time The Guardian gives us “The bank had been forced to delay the publication of its annual report last week after a last-minute call from the US Securities and Exchange Commission relating to what Credit Suisse described as the “technical assessment” of revisions to cashflow statements going back to 2019. The bank said those discussions had now been concluded” I believe it is more, I personally believe that was why Yellen got involved in day one. I think the SVB and others have too many bonds and they are not ready to mature yet and with interest up these things are making banks bleed money and they are bleeding a lot. You see, there is an estimated total of TWENTY THREE THOUSAND BILLION DOLLARS in US government bonds floating around and I reckon the SVB and Credit Suisse are now in levels of pain, they had too many of those. As such the outstanding part, not merely these two represent $23,000,000,000,000 and no one can cover it they are all stretched beyond thin. This is what I expect is happening and I warned for this as early as 2016, there is a point of no return and the banks are way past that. Putting your IP in the USA is about to become one of the most expensive jokes tech firms have faced in well over half a century.

Could I be wrong?
Yes, that is the case, but that can be tested quite easily. You see, if you make a tally of where all these US government bonds were and you set that tally in a mineable solution especially with pre 2016 and past 2016 when Dodd-Frank got cancelled you will learn a few things and this is what I saw on day one, but weirdly enough the media is not going there (neither is the ICIJ), so you get to wonder why.

Oil in the family
now we get back to the Saudi National Bank. In this I agree with Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman. Oil is a commodity, there is no cap, if you need oil more and more, you are working from the wrong business plan and if that relies on exceeding your budget by over 30 trillion dollars you get what’s coming to you. In addition I would add the Republican Party making small talk stating that they need to pull away from Ukraine, I lose the little sympathy I had left for them. The US has slammed Saudi Arabia again and again, in some cases with the assistance of a United Nations essay writer. There is only so much people will take. They had the option to help Saudi Arabia create a nations defence strategy, they bailed out and now China is there. They made fake promises and most were not kept and now we see banks asking Saudi Arabia (in Oliver Twist style) can we have some more please? 

As such we see event after event and now that things are on the rails, the train has speed and they just ran out of rails. This is early and before I expected it, but I never considered the impact of Russia being stupid and attacking the Ukraine, it merely escalated things. 

America has two options, does it become part of China or part of Russia. It seems that the Republicans want to be part of Russia, the rest I do not know, but we are now in the process of the final financial act. And my evidence? Investigate the CET1 setting of EVERY bank (especially the two in trouble) and then look at where the bonds are and how many of these bonds are/were with the SVB and Credit Suisse. I have no doubt they both have too many. Then consider Basel III and see how many banks hold up at that point. They were warned for 13 years, so let them rot, let them collapse and let the investors and share holders take the fall and live life in minimum wage. 

And in all this, too many of the media are all about flaming and not doing too much about it, merely pushing towards bailouts. That time has gone as I personally see it. 

All whilst the Australian Financial Review gives us a mere 45 minutes ago “The failure of Silicon Valley Bank has exposed fresh divisions on Capitol Hill over banking reform, as US lawmakers from both parties trade blame for the lenders’ collapse and squabble over future legislation to shore up the financial system” squabble on something that was shown 13 years ago. Still think I am wrong? 

Enjoy the money you have, there might be a lot less soon enough.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

She just doesn’t get it

OK, I have been sitting on this for a few hours. It started when I saw the article (at https://www.theguardian.com/global/2022/oct/17/senator-raises-alarm-saudis-could-share-us-defence-technology-with-russia) titled ‘Senator raises alarm Saudis could share US defense technology with Russia’, I wondered who wanted to play the daily mail card with a title like that and of course, everyone favourite political tool and least acceptable journalist Stephanie Kirchgaessner was there. The person who bashes Saudi Arabia whenever she can. So I decided to take a gander towards PROPERLY informing the people. Well, we all need a hobby, don’t we?

It starts from the very beginning. “A senior Democratic lawmaker has raised alarms about the possibility that sensitive US defense technology could be shared with Russia by Saudi Arabia in the wake of the kingdom’s recent decision to side with Moscow over the interests of the US” this is the first shovel of BS. The kingdom doesn’t side, it seeks a path that is the best for any nation, its own nation. And in continuation the US did this to themselves! So when we get in continuation “following Opec+’s decision to cut oil production, said he would “dig deeper into the risk” in discussions with the Pentagon.” OK, OPEC+ decided to cut oil production, this is the right of OPEC+. Now, we can argue if it was Russia pushing that button, which might make sense, but I did not see the papers on that meeting, so I actually do not know the exact setting there. But oil production was cut and here lies the rub. “If you want cheap oil, you do not bite the hand that feeds you that cheap oil. President Biden promised to make Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman al Saud a pariah and he did keep his word. But it was never based on any actual facts and any factual rulings. So when this happened the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was treated as a lessened ally. This has CONSEQUENCES! So I was pretty much howling with laughter when President Biden and Boris Johnson went like shivering little chihuahuas asking for cheap oil. OK, Boris Johnson probably took a page out of Oliver Twist and asked “please sir, can I have some more?” But both faltered and failed. 

As such we now get “The decision was seen in the US capital as a sign of Riyadh siding with Russia in its war with Ukraine, and as a possible attempt to hurt Joe Biden and Democrats ahead of next month’s critical midterm election by raising the price of petrol at the pump” Now, I personally disagree with the Russia setting, but I get that some might think that. Why? Because they are missing the obvious especially some journalist who is friends with an UN essay writer named Eggy Calamari (or something like that). To see this, you merely need the use of a calculator or an Abacus. We get part of this from Robert Kaufman in Newsweek “The U.S. imports oil because consumption of oil products—about 20 million barrels per day—is greater than the quantity of crude oil it produces, about 18 million barrels per day” this is supported by the EIA (Energy Information Administration) who gives us “the United States exported about 8.54 million b/d of petroleum to 176 countries and 4 U.S. territories.” So it sells its own oil for $100 per barrel (fictive example number) whilst expecting that it can buy crude oil from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for $60 per barrel (also fictive example number) hence pocketing $40 per barrel in its own pocket and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia basically says that this stopes now. The US can buy oil at the Brent Crude Oil price and the greedy people do not want that, so now they need to do with less, even though they know that they sell the bulk of their oil, leaving the US and its citizens without oil. And no one is looking at that part of the equation. 

So when I saw “Both Biden and his Democratic allies in Congress have expressed frustration with the move and called for a realignment in the Saudi relationship, with the US president warning that Saudi would face “consequences” for the move”, my living room just filled with laughter. What consequences? The KSA can watch the US implode upon itself and it better realises that there is also a consequence to it selling its oil. You stopped treating the KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) as an ally years ago, you wasted time by censoring too much of the actions by Iran on the KSA and Iran’s actions in Yemen. All this was enough to stop the pumps and Russia would not have been a factor. It is my personal speculation that the KSA is keeping a distance between them and Russia, too close ties might make them lose a lot more friends and the KSA would be left with Russia, Lithuania and North Korea, two nations it does not care about for one inch. And that was all visible, but the wannabe journo does not give you that, does she?

There is however one side that is valid. It comes from Senator Blumenthal. “Richard Blumenthal  seeks reassurances from Pentagon that ‘they are on top of’ risk of sharing information with Gulf state” I believe the question to be unfounded, but it is a fair question. There is an essential need for the US to seek the best path for America and keeping classified out of Russian hands is a fair call to make. Yet the added “siding with the Russians in this manner – is so dramatic. I think it calls for a response” is partly false. You see OPEC+ is a group of 23 members and Saudi Arabia is only one of them. That majority is a lot larger and I do not know (but expects) that Saudi Arabia was one of them. This is the consequence of dropping Saudi Arabia as an ally. The BS sanctions in the US and the UK with the tea granny organisation (CAAT) all whilst Iran is attacking without consequence and now that Iran is sending its drones to Russia, will these two players do anything at all? or will thy merely pretend to make calls to Tehran all whilst they know perfectly well that this will have no consequence? When you drop a friend from your party you should not cry over the fact that there are consequences of that act. Even on the premise of all this, I was happy to offer my IP to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. If this enables more power to them to include technology and social media, my choice will give me the same pebbles but now with a much larger stage where the other wannabe’s can cry over even more spilled milk.

So when we are given “Jeff Abramson, a senior fellow at the Arms Control Association, said Saudi Arabia had been a major purchaser of US military equipment, including some of its most sophisticated weapons systems, for decades” true, but not lately isn’t it? That is why China is at the gates of Riyadh ready to sell THEIR equipment to Saudi Arabia, making the US lose even more billions in revenue, and in part this was paid for with millions of barrels of oil per day, as such the United States did this to themselves, but I do recognise that they want their secrets to remain THEIR secrets, especially as we see that Russian hardware is buckling all over Russia and the Ukraine. And it is then we see the larger screw up. It is given with “It is plausible that the Saudis have information about those weapons”, this implies that Jeff Abramson is not clear or is in cautious denial implying that there is no danger or he just doesn’t know what the commercial people informed Saudi Arabia about and it seems to me that Stephanie Kirchgaessner never picked up on that because there is no follow up on the foundation of ‘plausible’ and in addition we see “Prince Khalid bin Salman, said on Twitter that the decision by OPEC+ to cut oil output was made unanimously for “purely” economic reasons” which raises the question of what the US will do about the other 22 votes? This article raises one decent question and hides it in the BS of several other sides. Yes, the Guardian is really proud of the journo they have there, aren’t they?

I wonder what comes next, but if I have my way that would be a moot point because the impact would cost tech firms well over $500 million a month, they will not lose all that money, but they will lose a chunk of it and with that a lot more in the aftermath. Yes, these people really keep their eyes on the price. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Military, 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