Tag Archives: Switzerland

May 11, 2023 · 00:38

The bigger shift

The news that caught me today is (at https://dohanews.co/saudi-arabia-mulls-launch-of-english-news-channel-to-rival-al-jazeera-reports/) giving us ‘Saudi Arabia mulls launch of English news channel to rival Al Jazeera’. I actually originally got it from the Financial Times, but they are behind a paywall, so I cannot use them as a source. So Saudi Arabia is now considering an English News Channel. This changes things. First E-Sports, now sports (Messi And Ronaldo), Formula one and now we get “A Saudi state-backed media organisation is considering the development of an international English-language news station, seen as an effort to counter Qatar’s flagship Al Jazeera network and boost the kingdom’s media influence”. I personally think that there is another reason. You see, if tourism develops in Saudi Arabia, the need for an English Channel rises and it’s need will rise exponentially. It also allows to dig into advertisement funds that have been denied them for decades. You see, the advertiser goes to where the people and the money is. The money is already in Saudi Arabia, but soon so will be the people. The stages of sports will allow Saudi Arabia exclusive news channelling and that leads to more revenue and more visibility. Even as we are given “The Saudi Research and Media Group reportedly approached media consultancies to assess the viability and scope of the endeavour, according to a number of people familiar with the project, the Financial Times reported. They said it will be the second-largest English-language broadcaster in the Arab world, after Al Jazeera English, although the preparations are still in the early stages.” And this is not all, there is another reason. As western media ‘embraced’ their Share holder, stake holder and advertiser approach to filtering information. They lost credibility and the audience. Most places no longer call it news, they refer to it as information entertainment (Fox anyone?) In addition to this, the west would finally get real information on Aramco (not filtered by Brent), on SAMI (not filtered by the pentagon) and sports. It would even propel interest into things like Camel racing, the Emirates Ice Hockey League and from that we could see the development of a Saudi Ice Hockey league. We know that they are still not a member of the International Ice Hockey Federation, but to see Saudi Arabia grow teams in Jeddah, Dammam and Riyadh, taking on the UAE teams from the Emirates Hockey League (EHL). We could see names like Abu Dhabi Scorpions, Abu Dhabi Storms, Al Ain Theebs, Dubai White Bears, Dubai Mighty Camels propel all over the western TV stations. 

If the west is embracing sports Saudi Arabia has the making to replace a whole collection of news channels that lost too much credibility. And it isn’t merely influence. As I personally see it the KSA lacks perception and awareness in the view of the non Arabian people and this could be a first step to open that door. Beyond that there are several markets where the KSA could set foot into and in this world in this current economic climate that will go a long way, what is important that the first steps are made setting the larger stage towards doing something and that is where it is at. Will it happen? This happening is a logical step after setting claims towards E-sports, Formula 1, Football and Ice hockey. Beyond that is the stage where the people will get first looks on the Line (that long building) and several other innovations coming towards us from Saudi Arabia. 

A bigger shift is underway and the US with their deceptive ‘entertainment’ like Fox and even CNN, they will have nothing to counter it. In the last 5 years they wasted too much credibility opening the door to other players and as I see it the KSA stands to add an audience of close to half a billion in the first 2 years, would you like to see the advertisement money on that pool? 

Enjoy the day before Friday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, sport

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May 5, 2023 · 22:14

A state of banking

Yes, the banking issues remain and they are seemingly getting worse. This is seen in the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65467019) where we are given ‘Credit Suisse: Asia investors sue Switzerland over bank collapse’, which reads funny, but that is the effect of lawsuits. Yet that article and the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65370751) named ‘£55bn withdrawn from Credit Suisse before rescue’ gave me reason to pause. This was not some setting of chance. Can you grasp how much £55,000,000,000 is? That is not some account, some people. That is the works of a few titans and someone gave THEM the heads up. So when we are given “The Swiss banking giant said 61.2bn Swiss francs left the bank in the first three months of the year” there I an issue, this is not merely a bank run. Then this many multimillionaires are running for the hills, someone set the watchtower on fire and stated, run for your life. Yes, it is highly speculative, but 55 billion pounds? That is serious cash in any economy. So when we consider the first article and we see “Already a Credit Suisse client for several years, he bought around $500,000 worth of bonds in January despite the bank having been hit by a series of scandals and compliance problems over the past few years” as well as “The type of bonds he bought from Credit Suisse are known as AT1 bonds, or contingent convertibles. They normally carry high yields for investors but are considered among the riskiest bonds that banks issue”, so in January this person decided to take a high risk setting, and in that time, or at least over the next 6 weeks when a staggering amount of billions pulled out, that person sat still? I know there is a sucker born every minute, but this comes across as the emperor of all suckers. Then we get the mother of all issues “Central to their claim is who was given priority when the bank failed. The terms of the bonds, seen by the BBC, show that bondholders are, if possible, supposed to be compensated first, after which come shareholders. But in practice, shareholders were allowed to exchange their Credit Suisse shares for UBS shares, albeit at a vastly reduced value.” There we see two parts. The first is ‘if possible’ which is a dangerous subjective term, the second is the stage of when they were alerted? How reachable were they?

Then the second article gives on tiny sliver. It is “Credit Suisse had been loss-making and had faced a string of problems in recent years, including money laundering charges.” As such, at what moment in delusional time is buying bonds in a loss making company a good idea? That is beside all the legal issues (including money laundering). In which situation (when it is not a government) are you investing in bonds in something that is losing money? Those in March (if they had done their homework) would have seen dozens of billions of pounds leaving that ‘sinking’ vessel. Only those with a peculiar sense of delusion are setting their up their portfolio in such a place. And when we see the end of the article giving us “The deal, when it was announced, valued Credit Suisse at $3.15bn (£2.6bn), whereas on the Friday before the settlement was reached it had been valued at about $8bn.” A place that is a mere 32% of its value in a week and 55 billion went the way of water whilst the bank went the way of the dodo. When a bank is a mere 8 billion and 55 billion left its shores? Even if half leaves the shores, I would be running like Forest Gump and no chocolates would be required. So I ask you are these investors that banked on governments saving their coin (and hide)? Is that what governments do now, all whilst they fail to hold banks to account?

I will let you decide, enjoy the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Politics

Tagged as , , , , ,

April 13, 2022 · 19:55

Inclination of letters

We tend to act in certain ways. I am no exception (as you are about to find out). Yet, before we have a go at the BBC and another go at the ICIJ, lets take another look at how Microsoft has FAILED its audience. Now, this is not out in the open and I do not really reveal what has happened, but I am making a jab at it as it will set fortunes to Adobe and this is for their eyes only. So, there I was watching several presentations in the last 24 hours (from several sources) and something occurred to me, it was the third time when I heard something. My mind started to race and suddenly I wondered why Microsoft had left all this in the open, unsolved, unattended for a DECADE. It was so out in the open that I was wondering what on earth they were doing. Yes, their 365 solution is all about making sure their customers pay, and that I fine, but to leave gaps in their office solution out in the open for over a decade, how stupid is that. Yet, no fears. Adobe will fill up that hole nicely with their adjusted suite of programs which will start a new age in corporate needs and Microsoft will be looked at with the look of ‘How could you have been this stupid to such a degree?’ Yet I will not care, I will be giggling in a corner. Watching the wannabe’s seek jobs and seek solutions. 

So now we get to the main event. It is the BBC article ‘Hidden wealth of one of Putin’s ‘inner circle’ revealed’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61028866). There is so much wrong here, I almost do not know where to start, so the beginning it is. 

We see from the start “They reveal how a Swiss tattoo artist was falsely named as owner of a company that transferred over $300m (£230m) to firms linked to Suleiman Kerimov. They also show how $700m of transactions – and the secret ownership of luxury properties – went undetected. The investigation exposes failures of the banking system and the obstacles impeding Western sanctions.” It sounds nice, it really does. But lets take a closer look, shall we? 

“Transactions worth $700m linked to Suleiman Kerimov and his closest business associates were reported as suspicious by banks between 2010 and 2015” So was anything done? Were ACTUAL crimes committed? ‘Suspicious’ is merely a word that shows no side towards legality. Then we get “Swiss accountant Alexander Studhalter posed as owner of properties actually owned by Mr Kerimov” So were laws broken? Was anything illegal done? The BBC shows itself to be as big a loser as the ICIJ shown it is. And when we get “Mr Kerimov was the secret owner of properties on the French Riviera and in London, including the most expensive terraced property ever sold in the UK” we see again the small setting ‘If he was a real secret owner, how did they find out?’ But the larger stage is whether LAWS were broken. The BBC does not really inform us of this, do they? They merely illuminate how useless journalists have become. Who is Suleiman Kerimov? I actually do not care. He is not part of my life, I never expect that to happen. But the BBC, the player claiming to be so trustworthy, where are they? Where is the list of broken laws? Where is the EVIDENCE showing us that laws were broken in Switzerland, the UK, and France? We can grasp at the Oligarch foundation all we want, but if we are a nation of laws we need to be shown the laws that were optionally (and allegedly) transgressed upon. So when we are finally given “Experts say Western countries have a lot of work to do because, for years, they have taken a lax approach to the fight against dirty money and failed to hold banks to account.” We see a clear path to something I have been stating for DECADES. Internationally tax laws need to be overhauled and politicians were lax, politicians were all about inaction and now we see the BS tap turned open all whilst we are not given the real deal. What laws were transgressed upon? I reckon that the answer will be none. I cannot tell because I am not a lawyer, I am not a tax lawyer and I am not an attorney. I have my Master of Intellectual property and when (or if) Amazon (or Google) buys my IP, my ship will arrive and I can retire nicely. Yet in this I have questions and the BBC answers none of them, so when we are finally given “In 2020, Swiru Holding accepted its involvement in evading the tax and was fined €1.4m and made to pay another €10.3m to settle the case. Mr Kerimov’s lawyer put out a statement saying that the French courts had “officially dismissed the allegations made by the former Nice Prosecutor against Suleiman Kerimov of having carried out money-laundering operations.”” We basically see a fine less then €12,000,000 for avoiding a taxable amount of €127,000,000 so as it seems crime pays and that is the part we do get to see. So when we are given how $700m of transactions were seemingly ‘undetected’ were laws broken? We are shown the transgression of 20% which was dealt with, but we have no information on the large amount and whether laws were broken. How come? We are given “The transaction was just one in a series of wire transfers carried out from 2010 to 2015 totalling $700m reported to US authorities as suspicious”, yet there is a large gap between ‘suspicious’ and ‘criminal’ and neither the ICIJ or the BBC give us anything on that, merely the alleged indignation. So is the BBC as useless as the ICIJ is showing itself to be? That is my question and I feel that this is not on James Oliver, Nassos Stylianou or Steve Swann. I believe that it is Francesca Mary Unsworth, chief editor of BBC News that needs to come forward and do some explaining on what should be seen as reporting and what should be seen as trivial filtering of news. 

I will let you decide what is what, but I reckon that the entire ICIJ mess needs a long hard look by a few people in all kinds of business walks.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 16, 2022 · 20:42

Ko Inky Dink?

Before I begin, there is something you need to know. I understand and agree that we ALL need anti viral protection. In the old days there was Norton (not that great) and McAfee. There was also Virex (an unknown for Mac’s), over time the setting evolved and in the last 20-30 years it was about the 4 big players Norton, McAfee, Sophos and Kasparsky. I stuck to McAfee and later on Norton. Norton had improved its system and it was basically a turn of a friendly card when I went onto the Norton highway. So for the most I remained in the dark. I hd a program, it seemingly works (you don’t know until things go wrong) and so far no issues (touch wood). It was about 4 weeks ago when I saw something pass by. It was (at https://www.cpomagazine.com/cyber-security/kaspersky-discovers-about-100000-new-banking-trojans-and-warns-about-increasing-mobile-malware-sophistication/) with the serious ‘Kaspersky Discovers About 100,000 New Banking Trojans and Warns About Increasing Mobile Malware Sophistication’, for me it was not interesting. I do not trust banking apps, not one of them, the more they offer, the more dangerous they are and as such I do not touch them. I know from the past the X-25 issues that were there and I will not bank online, I will not bank mobile. Some things are better the old way, at least they are somewhat more secure and I have set up triggers to alert me if anyone wants to activate my online banking and mobile banking. So as the article gives us “Kaspersky’s Mobile Threats in 2021 report noted that the number of mobile trojans detected almost doubled in 2021, while the total number of mobile attacks declined during the same period. Sadly, the increased sophistication of the attacks, malware functionality, and attack vectors, coupled with the emergence of new players in the market, compensated for the reduction in the number of attacks.” I saw this coming (to some extent) a mile away, that is why I created a 5G solution that reduces the risk. It does not nullify it, but the transgressions are limited to the high tier hackers, I speculate that I can stop a third of the danger, which is not bad. At that point I did wonder why it was Kaspersky alone that reported it, nothing from the other three, but I left that in the air. So today (late last night) I got alerted to ‘Remove and replace Kaspersky AV, says German cyber intelligence’ (at https://www.itnews.com.au/news/remove-and-replace-kaspersky-av-says-german-cyber-intelligence-577390), which is odd. The timing is definitely off. I am not judging, I cannot tell whether it is true or not, the article does give us “In 2017, the United States banned government agencies from using Kaspersky products, with the European Union following suit the year after.”, as well as “BSI has now extended the advisory to all Kaspersky customers, telling them to swap out the Russian antivirus with an alternative security product.” So what evidence was there. Why was this not in places like The Verge? 

And when we get ““A Russian IT manufacturer can conduct offensive operations itself, be forced to attack target systems against its own will, or be spied on without its knowledge as a victim of a cyber operation, or be used as a tool for attacks against its own customers,” the BSI wrote.” OK, I get it, there is OPTIONALLY a risk and people need to be aware, but if this risk was known in 2017, why was it only now and not two weeks ago that we were informed. Moreover, why is this merely the German intelligence, why does Reuters not have an American point of view with all the ins and outs? There is also “Kaspersky had moved its data infrastructure to Switzerland to counter hacking and spying allegations by Western nations”, which I get. In the end I have questions, is Germany merely an American tool spouting McCarthyism to a larger degree? I wonder why the German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) did not counter or support the Switzerland element in that equation. If Russia has tools and support in a place like Switzerland, I reckon that the Swiss would want to know. 

So personally the issue with a coincidence factor is just too weird here. I am not stating the BSI is wrong or misinforming us, but personally I feel that the articles in Reuters and ITNews would require adjustments. The search (Google) gives nothing on Kaspersky and the LA Times, New York Times and Washington Post. Why not? The articles are 18 hours old, one of these three should have picked them up at least 8 hours ago, as such I have questions. Don’t you?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 5, 2022 · 05:46

Where are we heading?

That is the stage we comment on and most comment on events in Europe, most would and that is not bad. But something happened in Lebanon that got my attention (something is always happening there). You see, many might have noticed ‘UAE set to be put on money laundering watchdog’s ‘grey list,’ report says’ (source: CNBC), we are given quotes like “The Financial Action Task Force, an intergovernmental organisation dedicated to combatting money laundering and illicit cash flows, is set to put the United Arab Emirates on its “grey list” over concerns that the Gulf country isn’t sufficiently stemming illegal financial activities”, now I am not debating it, it might be true, it might not. I cannot lay claims to events I have no data on. But whilst we see that, Reuters also gives us (at https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/lebanese-bank-closes-over-30-british-held-accounts-after-uk-ruling-depositors-2022-03-04/) ‘Lebanese bank closes over 30 British-held accounts after UK ruling-depositors’ group’. There we see “A Bank Audi official told Reuters the bank was “asking that the UK residents apply the terms applicable to anyone opening a new account: no international transfers, no cash withdrawals””, so just to help me out. You create a bank account and you are not allowed to withdraw cash? How does that make the bank a bank? And we also get “More than $100 billion remains stuck in a banking system paralysed since 2019, when the economy collapsed due to decades of unsustainable state spending, corruption and waste”, as such my question becomes what on earth is the Financial Action Task Force doing monitoring banks? First Credit Suisse, through state sponsored hacking and now we see Bank Audi. Two elements showing a massive cash stage running into the hundreds of billions. So what the hell is the Financial Action Task Force doing? Why are they not investigating banks? We see the mention of Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, the mention of nations, not banks. Banks are seemingly flying below the radar and we see an alleged flaccid response from action groups. Oh and it would be nice to see specifics. Not some journo’s BS approach towards emotional garbage. I discussed this in ‘The presumption is mine’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/02/21/the-presumption-is-mine/) where I wrote “so all that space on what amounts to 0.03% of the entire amount. Just like the ICIJ, shortsighted and a waste of time. So we get repeated invitations to explain 0.03% of what is such a massive leak? Is anyone waking up yet?”, now if the FATF did its job and also gives us why the UAE needs to be on a grey list and NOT the bank it becomes a different story, optionally an acceptable one. That same setting applies to Switzerland, home to 242 banks and Credit Suisse. Oh, and before I forget the data leak never explained (it never will) why such harsh methods needs to be applied to the other 242 banks. No one ever asked that question, not other authorities, not the wannabe journalists either. Is that not weird too?

We need to see where we are going and what games certain parties are playing. I saw the Credit Suisse for nothing but a simple fishing expedition. A chumming exercise by the NSA (most likely culprit) to get some of the fish out there. And no one saw that? I am clever, but I am not that clever (compared to self proclaimed clever people), which (as I personally see it) implies orchestration. 

Am I right, am I wrong? I also ask that question from myself. The Switzerland setting alerted me to weirdness of it all, the UAE draws the setting to the surface. The UAE and its 20 local and 30 foreign banks. Yes that is also the case, so the FATF better come with a very good and very large folder with evidence on a whole range of banks. And before you think the UAE does nothing, we saw a week ago “The government confiscated assets worth $625m last year.” As such I hope that the FATF can prove its setting of “concerns that the Gulf country isn’t sufficiently stemming illegal financial activities” it seems that the UAE has proven activities, so is the FATF merely blowing its own horn? Perhaps it needs to look into the Audi bank and a few other banks too and several of them are not in Switzerland or the UAE. When we see quotes like “About $227.8 million money laundering in USA in 2020 according to our calculation that based 2020 Money Laundering Offense Report”, so how much did the US confiscate? Just asking.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 22, 2022 · 10:15

The speculative rage

Yes, there is speculation, there is rage, there is the play and there are the consequences. As I stated about a day ago in ‘The presumption is mine’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/02/21/the-presumption-is-mine/) where I stated “so all that space on what amounts to 0.03% of the entire amount. Just like the ICIJ, shortsighted and a waste of time. So we get repeated invitations to explain 0.03% of what is such a massive leak? Is anyone waking up yet?” A stage play and the Guardian is milking it for EVERYTHING it can, but in doing so it gives a larger play away, and this is not presumption, it is speculation. Yet to see this we need to look at more than one article.

The first one is seen (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/feb/21/revealed-king-jordan-used-swiss-accounts-hoard-massive-wealth) where we are told ‘Revealed: king of Jordan used Swiss accounts to hoard massive wealth’, all yada yada, bla bla and more emotion and the basic part of evidence is missing. What crimes did the King of Jordan commit? We get “According to a massive trove of data leaked from the bank that names both royals as account holders, one account would later be worth a remarkable 230m Swiss francs”, again and again the mention of leaked data, all whilst we need to consider there was no leak, but more about that soon. Now we see 0.28% of the total money mentioned. Then we go on with the next article (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/feb/21/tax-timeline-credit-suisse-scandals) where we are treated to ‘Crooks, kleptocrats and crises: a timeline of Credit Suisse scandals’, we see the list and I am not debating the list, yet how much ‘effort’ did the media do when it comes to investigating players like Price Waterhouse Cooper? You see, it is not about this, or about that, we see the larger play with ‘Switzerland at risk of EU blacklist after Credit Suisse leak’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/feb/21/switzerland-at-risk-of-eu-blacklist-after-credit-suisse-leak), and again the mention of leak. This is (a personal speculation) the EU and US needing to button down, but with a place like Switzerland, there is no stopping what they desperately need, they need revenue and they need their cup filled, the bankrupt are now desperate.

The leak never made sense. I have worked in several places where I get access to data, but never to this degree and that wasn’t even a bank, the bank laws in Switzerland are no fun for bankers. This, as I personally see it, was state orchestrated. 

To see this we need to take the quote “The fallout from a huge leak of Credit Suisse banking data threatened to damage Switzerland’s entire financial sector on Monday after the European parliament’s main political grouping raised the prospect of adding the country to a money-laundering blacklist.” We cannot get the EU to agree on anything. Consider the Politico quote on the EU and covid “The Council press office said the Nice summit took over 90 hours in a tweet Monday afternoon to rein in already spreading rumours claiming the ongoing summit could become the longest by midnight.” There has been a long standing issue on Switzerland and the EU, but times are dire and something will have to give. So when we see “A move to the blacklist would mean Switzerland would face the kind of enhanced due diligence applied to transactions linked to rogue nations including North Korea”, this is one setting, but the larger stage is that the people they want could move their fortunes to the UAE or the Bahama’s all zero tax nations. And in all this with all these articles we still have not seen any collection of data that sets the stage to 7.5%, you know why? Because that was the PWC oversight regarding Tesco, a mere $6,000,000,000 and we see less than that here. But the biggest failing is that we see no transgressions of Swiss Banking Laws. We are given “how a massive leak of Credit Suisse data had uncovered apparently widespread failures of due diligence by the bank”, it is not the leak (well that too), but it is ‘apparently widespread failures’, ONE BANK! Yet now we get “When Swiss banks fail to apply international anti-money-laundering standards properly, Switzerland itself becomes a high-risk jurisdiction”, a statement by Markus Ferber, the coordinator on economic affairs for the EPP, the EPP or sometimes referred to as the sanctimonious Christian fucks of the European Union. So we have one bank, the Credit Suisse Group AG is a global investment bank and financial services firm founded and based in Switzerland. And we optionally have ONE bank transgressing, but for this the entire nation is set on fire. And that is before some people realise that a leak of this nature is not possible under normal conditions. It requires a state player like the NSA, GCHQ or DGSE to get involved. So who was it? 

And in all this the Guardian is again and again all about emotion and less about evidence, why is that? 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

October 14, 2021 · 06:07

Is wealth $$$?

An article threw me yesterday. It was given by the Dutch News agency NOS, it was not merely the title, it was the entire setting that threw me. So as we are considering the translated title ‘Dutch in 4th place richest citizens worldwide’ (at https://nos.nl/artikel/2401433-nederlanders-wereldwijd-op-4de-plek-rijkste-burgers) we should consider the list that Allianz seemingly gives the viewers. In that list we see: 

  1. USA (218.000 euro) 
  2. Switzerland (212.000 euro)
  3. Denmark (149.000 euro)
  4. Netherlands (129.000 euro)

Now, that would be fine were it not that there is a place in Europe called Monaco where the average wealth is 1,824,177 Euros, it might be all those billionaires and multi millionaires in that place. Then there is Luxembourg with the average 663,661 euro’s and that took seconds to check, so what does Allianz think it is doing? They give us “The report ranks the assets and debts of nearly 60 countries” I see this as a report that heralds filtered information bringing. Some call it lying but I think they are bonkers. It seems that news, the media, and politicians are all about filtering the information. It reminds me of someone. Ah yes, was that not a premise in George Orwells 1984 as well? 

And when we reconsider “nearly 60 countries” what are the chances that none of the zero tax nations are part of that? And when we consider “Switzerland ranks well on the list because the country attracts a lot of wealthy people, due to its low taxes.” Might this all be a ruse? I have no idea where they are going with all that, but they have a plan. A place like Allianz has the German grundlichkeit, so something is up. Now if that report had a separate section for Zero tax nations I might have had some peace with it. Yet when we search further we see “According to BMO, the average Canadian household now has more than $1 million in total assets, even after accounting for debt”, we got that last July, as such is seems that the average Canadian is twice as wealthy as an American, so what is Allianz doing this and more important, what the fuck is the Dutch NOS doing publishing an article without proper vetting? 

And that leaves us to think, is wealth really about ‘$$$’, ‘£££’, or ‘€€€’? Me and many others (especially as we do not have it) believe it to be so, but I will accept that money gives less complications and as such we would be happier. And there we have the rub, do we really have less complications as we are being lied to? 

In this is filtering the information we get a new form of lying? That took me back to 1984 (not the year). I remember when I read it and a few parts never made sense. One of those were “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought”, I had an issue because if we (me claiming to be me) are of pure thought (not some paedophilic clergy edition) how can we be corrupted? I learned that over the years. I was lied to from basic school onwards. The christian invasion in the middle east was not to protect any land, not even a fictive holy one, so as we go on we were lied to more and more and it was not a point of view, the Crusades gave us that part. It would be a few more years as I got a hold of one sided information and later on filtered information the circle was nearly complete and now we see a larger stage, the last bastions of actual news reporting are now falling. The pointing powers behind the screens are now afraid of everything that comes and they will force new slogans like ‘tax the rich’ onto the people setting us up for some small version of civic war, but they will call it something else. Some form of social war. 

Yet there is more, The Global Wealth Report 2021 (at https://www.eulerhermes.com/content/dam/onemarketing/ehndbx/eulerhermes_com/en_gl/erd/publications/pdf/2021_10_07_Global-Wealth-Report.pdf) gives us more. Allianz gave that report to the world and even as the NOS bongs it, it does not mean that I need to do the same, does it? And on page 38 I see the first part, the part that shows grundlichkeit. There we see “Debt in the US represents 81.5% of output, while in Canada household liabilities are 114.7% of GDP. The ratio increased substantially from 2019 (US: 76.6%; CAN: 105.3%), not so much because of the increase in liabilities, which was also at highs not seen since 2007 (EUR522bn), but rather because of the sharp economic contraction of 2020”, as well as “There are still 2mn borrowers in debt forbearance who are vulnerable to financial distress once the forbearance programs come to an end. As of today, debt delinquency is not a problem. But going forward, when the pandemic protections expire, the historical debt burden in the US, not just among households, but also related to the government, might become a risk factor in the road to recovery.” OK, so that sounds better, well not that much better but at least there is a large solid pedestal it is all build on. On page 19 we see some graphs that explain the list (even as Switzerland was number one) and the other charts show that there is a larger story and we also see that none of the Zero Tax places are included. 

So as a non-economist I do grasp decent parts of the report, but what boggles the mind is how the NOS set the stage to what it published. Especially when we consider page 38 giving us “the historical debt burden in the US, not just among households, but also related to the government, might become a risk factor in the road to recovery.” When we read this with a debt of $28,000,000,000,000 How are they the richest player? When that debt goes south, they will be worse off than Mexico ever was (my speculated view). And when we see the list on page 52, we see where the NOS got its list, yet when we consider ‘by net financial assets per capita’ or to the right of that where the Swiss are number one and USA is number two giving us ‘by gross financial assets per capita’, I feel there is a lot missing (mainly that I am not seeing it all), but the report does show a whole range of issues. It also gave me the surprising view that Germany is way behind nations like Belgium, New Zealand, Italy, France and Israel. A stage I never expected, but that happens when you have a partial view, I personally believe that this is report is a partial view but that is not a bad thing. It is not some filtered view, it is a partial view of the elements that set the assets and equities (a stage that I feel happy I never understood). And that is not on Allianz, but the flaky article that the NOS is giving its Dutch citizens is on the NOS. For the life of me I have no idea where they expected to go, a 55 page report created by a dozen economists reduced to a 5 bullet-point article by someone who could never have been an economist. That’s today’s media for you. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 5, 2021 · 16:39

Kill the law

Yes, that moment has finally arrived, I for the most was against the need to do that, if only the politicians and lawmakers would not have been such a collection of pussies, it might not have been an essential act, but the stage we are on now is one is one that Shakespeare gave us in Henry VI, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”, yet at moments away we have arrived at this moment. A few things happened, first there is the stage of the British wankers on ski’s, then there is ‘UK judge blocks extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to US’, in this the BBC reports that “because of concerns over Mr Assange’s mental health and risk of suicide in the US. Mr Assange, who is wanted over the publication of thousands of classified documents in 2010 and 2011, says the case is politically motivated”, he was such an outspoken great man when he released the documents, we can’t have him being a pussy now, can we? Even as I am still in the mindset that he is not a traitor as some call him, he is in a stage where he broke the law and so far half a dozen nations went out of their way to cater to him. A stage of law breaking without accountability, as some would say. And in all this, the one winner is Stella Moris, in all this she gets the limelight she needs to cater to her career. 

Then there is ‘Covid-19 in Switzerland: Mutated UK virus strain found in several cantons’ (at https://www.thelocal.ch/20210104/mutated-coronavirus-strain-found-in-several-regions-of-switzerland), the British pussies (or cunts) that slipped into the night afraid of being in lockdown travelled all over Switzerland too get to France, to get to Freedom, and as I personally see it infecting the Swiss along the way. Now this speculation should be matched by investigation, I understand that, yet if any are found and the British tourists find themselves out of prison instead of in prison for a decade, the basic line is set that the law has become useless and serves the mere large corporations in legally avoiding taxation, to smite the common man in a ruleset that they break again and again. So when we see “Several other cases of the UK variant were also found at the end of December in Zurich, Graubünden, Valais, and Bern, and one case of the South African strain was detected in Ticino, according to the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH)”, we need to wonder what is next. So when we see all kinds of versions of “British tourists have fled the Swiss ski resort of Verbier “clandestinely” under cover of darkness rather than submit to a new quarantine imposed on UK visitors, a local official says”, all whilst the British governments are solent on the matter (as far as I know), we see a stage where we cannot accept the irresponsible acts of others. I wonder if the UK has considered what the larger contemplations are when Switzerland calls for the UK citizens to be pronounced ‘Persona Non Grata’, not one, not 200, but all. I wonder if the law suddenly sees a setting where they either pucker up or they will find themselves left no longer being considered valid by the largest group of people. 

Lacking a proportional response?
Yes, one might say that and it would not be entirely wrong, yet when we are told “More than 2,500 break virus restrictions at illegal rave” (France), even as some sources state that the group had reached 10,000. As well as ‘Demonstration party in Duindorp’ (Netherlands), there are a few more, but they are instances not the common field and we acknowledge that, yet the law cannot sit by, it has to be strict and it has to be firm this time around, if only to get to some specific tourists, they have no valid defence, no matter how they slice it.  This is seen in the larger stage, COVID-19 was a reality for the longest part of the year, they could have let go of this one holiday, until it was safe, they decided that ego was more important, as such they should pay. Yes, we know that the lockdown was not initially in play, but we have had two already and other nations have other stages and settings, they also have the new viral strain and no action was promptly taken until it had spread to 40 nations. In one stage I can say, the more that die, the more valuable my services will be, some will say that is inhuman e, but they decided not to act when it mattered, now it does not. And with 86 million people diseased, we will see the death rate go up beyond 2,000,000 and those are jobs that can go somewhere else, optionally solving unemployment to a much larger degree. In the US there are 12 states where masks are not required, which implies (an unproven imply) that the disease will have a lot more fun in those 11 states (Yes I mentioned 12), Alaska is perhaps the only one that is a bit out of shot, they got a partial save by weather and environment. I reckon that the initial clouds will rise after march, if there is any healthcare or NHS left, we will need to massively address tax law issues on an international scale, if we falter again there is every chance that the uprising against the law will turn massively violent, I myself am totally against the Nanny state (my Republican blood), yet there needs to be a level of accountability and so far the law has merely served those wanting to evade accountability, and the people are stating to notice this and they are putting two and two together, I speculatively reckon that being by tech senator will prove to be a lot less healthy in 2021 than ever thought possible, but I could be wrong.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 9, 2019 · 16:50

Is it progress?

We have at times a fair feeling of what costs are required in any business, we are at times a little off, we are at times a little bemused, but what is the feeling that people got two days ago when the Financial Times gave us ‘Europe’s banks slash 60,000 jobs as outlook turns negative‘? The story (at https://www.ft.com/content/e17ee0f2-183b-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385) seems to hand over another part of a story, but not the one that is out in the lighters. When we are confronted with ‘European bosses have been left with little option but to slash tens of thousands more jobs to try to address their chronically poor profitability‘, we might think that banks are unprofitable, yet the entire debt issues seemingly takes that out of the equation. When you look around in your area, are there more banks or less banks? There is another side, any debt driven errors and system malfunctions are now clearly in the hands of the banks, this means that THEY must give rise to repairs, to paying for the issues at hand and they are not allowed to pass these costs onto the customers. You see 60,000 jobs are ‘suddenly’ regarded as ‘poor profitability‘. It seems that the data dimensionality of banks is almost literally set to ‘profit through inactions‘ and as such they must pay for the blowback because inaction is never a cause of non stop profit.

So when we see: “lenders across Germany, UK, France, Spain and Switzerland have collectively announced more than 60,000 jobs cuts this year” and we investigate the stage, we would come to very different conclusions. Yet the picture is not that clear, the graphics that the article show, an image that include those trading below book value and those above book value gives a different picture, it shows a remarkable group of European and Rest of World banks trading below book value, so they are trading at a loss, which is of course debatable at the best of times. In that group we find ING, HSBC, Deutsche bank, Santander and a few others, the question becomes, why were they allowed to trade below book values in the first place? and it opens up a can of worms on several sides. As such we see a repetition of the Dutch bad bank issues when we are confronted with “resulting in 18,000 job losses and the creation of a new “bad bank” to dispose of €288bn of unwanted assets” Yet what happened to the commissions of hundreds of staff members as close to a third of a trillion is not returned? We merely see banks that wanted to look good whilst there was no reason to see them as good, so as such “chief executive Christian Sewing announced a retreat from investment banking over the summer, resulting in 18,000 job losses” makes me wonder about the levels of stupidity allowed at Deutsche Banks, does that not count for you? I wonder if we get an article on just how much the bunglings of Christian Sewing got him paid, in base income and bonuses. The fact that Deutsche Bank is losing one in five jobs is a larger issue, the idea that one in five jobs are lost in a bank shows that they have been playing the numbers and in all this europe will see another wave of bank responsibility whilst it is done AFTER the fact, so why was the EU not on top of this? And people complain about me mentioning the entire EU gravy train, I reckon that this example should set the straight, the EU have been facilitating to a much larger degree and the taxpayer gets to pay the bill, or did you think that shoving ‘a new “bad bank” to dispose of €288bn of unwanted assets‘ was done for corporate responsibilities. 

It gets to be a lot worse, Moody’s which does not have the greatest reputation when we look at financial meltdowns is stated to have said “Moody’s, which this week changed its outlook for global banks to negative from stable, warns that the “profitability gap between euro-area banks and global peers will widen further” in the medium term despite the large headcount reductions” yet when we mull over the numbers (Deutsche Bank with one in five jobs lost) gives out a whole different stage when we are confronted with “this week changed its outlook for global banks to negative from stable“, all whilst the numbers show that this was a flaw in the making, months in the making, as such it makes Moody’s a joke, not a reporting entity.

So all in al it is not consolidation, but a lack of oversight that is causing additional pain to the industry, I wonder how long it will take the other newspapers to catch on, and this is not limited to banks, this will take on a larger role all over Europe. Yet the gravy train will ignore the pains and it will support its own interests through recommendations.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 21, 2019 · 14:36

Our BBC alarm clock

It is Thursday, I just finished a baguette with salami and I was just going over the news (as one does) and I was hit by something stated in the BBC. I was not sure on how to react, but it made me take another look at certain matters. The event was initially about Saudi Arabia and their need for a nuclear reactor, they want to diversify their energy options. The one nation where sunlight would imply the need for large Elon Musk batteries to light Riyadh at night, whilst they get charged by free sunlight during the day, that one element is seen. Yet, they want a nuclear reactor requiring a huge water source to cool the entire matter. OK, that is their choice, and I am fine with it (no one cares what I agree with, I don’t care myself either). Yet the setting changes when I am confronted with two parts. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47296641) gives a few elements that become debatable in more than one way. So as I am listening to golden oldies like Atom Bomb Baby by The Five Stars (my sense of humour remains in place), as well as Civilization (Bongo Bongo Bongo) by Danny Kaye, songs that matter in this case. The first quote is: “Whistleblowers told the panel it could destabilise the Middle East by boosting nuclear weapons proliferation“, so why whistle blowers? Political impact does not require whistle blowers, there is no guarantee that it would result in destabilisation (it is likely though), and WHY EXACTLY did the BBC ‘hide’ behind the Whistle-blower statement?

The second part in all this is: “Lawmakers have been critical of the plan as it would violate US laws guarding against the transfer of nuclear technology that could be used to support a weapons programme“. So how does that relate to the Iran nuclear accords? America might have left it, but they were in the centre of all this. So, exactly why is there optionally a law against it and seemingly Iran was catered to, to begin with, and is still catered to at present by Europe. At this point everyone needs to sit down and really consider what their political representatives are up to all over the globe, because things are not really adding up at present.

Finally we get: “They also believe giving Saudi Arabia access to nuclear technology would spark a dangerous arms race in the volatile region. But concerns around rival Iran developing nuclear technology are also at play, according to US media“, if that is the case why allow talks with Iran to get it in the first place? And how exactly is ‘according to US media’ a valid response? And exactly who are the players in that US media mess? Does that not worry you?

Then we get the house report, based on whistle-blowers (who exactly?) where we see: “within the US, strong private commercial interests have been pressing aggressively for the transfer of highly sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia”

There is a larger play in this; the issue becomes who exactly are those ‘private commercial interests’? It seems that the media (including the BBC) is all about creating awareness whilst those writers are all about ‘not stepping on any toes’ and in light of the linked term ‘nuclear weapons proliferation‘, yet the BBC does not disappoint. We also get:

The commercial entities mentioned in the report are:

  • IP3 International, a private company led by ex-military officers and security officials that organised a group of US companies to build “dozens of nuclear power plants” in Saudi Arabia
  • ACU Strategic Partners, a nuclear power consultancy led by British-American Alex Copson
  • Colony NorthStar, Mr Barrack’s real estate investment firm
  • Flynn Intel Group, a consultancy and lobby set up by Michael Flynn.

Now we are off to the races! You see, even as IP3 International is visible on their website (at www.ip3international.com) with: ‘A global enterprise to develop sustainable energy and security infrastructure‘, we need to realise that this is a presentation play (everyone is allowed to do that). Sustainable is often used as it more than not can be replaced with renewable energy (which is still not the same), the larger issue is that there is a sizeable debate as it is also an increasing controversy over whether nuclear energy can be considered sustainable energy.

The textbook gives us: “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs“, which is reflected in: Kutscher, C.F.; Milford, J.B.; Kreith, F. (2018). Principles of Sustainable Energy Systems, Third Edition, I believe that IP3 International is revenue driven and one tends to go to the players that can pay their bill, I would see it as an innovative thought to go to Saudi Arabia, if only (according to law) it was not illegal. Yet there is the second stump in all this, you cannot start that conversation with Iran and not optionally refuse to have it with Saudi Arabia. And now the music is still on par with the events in play, because the song at present is ‘Grandma Plays the Numbers’ by Wynonie Harris. It is not a bet and the players are not hedging their bets, the issue becomes Politico (at https://www.politico.eu/article/mohammad-javad-zarif-iran-to-eu-give-us-more-to-preserve-nuclear-deal/), which gives us “On the nuclear deal, from which Trump’s withdrew last year, Zarif said a so-called special purpose vehicle set up by the EU to allow European countries to keep trading with Iran despite U.S. sanctions fell short of what Europeans had promised. In a clear message to European powers, he said domestic support for the deal was fragile — with 51 percent of Iranians in favor, according to an opinion poll“, it is not about the deal, it is to some extent as to where 49% of Iran wants to be as the margin is too close to call an actual win. What is important is where the hardliners stand and what path they want to walk on, it makes all the difference in this.

The other party that draws attention in this is Michael Flynn and his Flynn Intel Group. Even as it is seen as a consultancy group, the issue is optionally seen with “In January 2017, National Security Council staff began to raise concerns that these plans were inappropriate and possibly illegal, and that Flynn had a potentially criminal conflict of interest“, the imperative part is ‘possibly illegal‘, it does not state ‘should be regarded as illegal‘, the difference makes for all the difference here and the fact that this is not clearly stated implies that this is a political push, optionally against Saudi Arabia, and optionally to keep nuclear energy out of the middle east completely. When we realise that the issue changes, it does not merely require Europe to stop any Iran nuclear deal, it gives different levels of rise to the political pressures in play. The fact that we see (source: Ars Technica): “Flynn had decided to adopt IP3’s plan to develop “dozens of nuclear power plants” in Saudi Arabia during the transition while he was still serving as an advisor to IP3. Harvey also said that Barrack would be made a special representative, with credentials equivalent to an ambassador, to guide the plan“, yet the entire matter of ‘there is bi-partisan concern regarding Saudi Arabia’s access to nuclear technology‘, we seem to get a little less informed that this is not about the material itself, it is about upgrading the fuel required to upgrade it to weapons grade, that is the actual turkey in the oven.

And it is at this point that Bing Crosby starts sing Pistol Packin’ Mama. You see, we seem to forget that there are a few ways to upgrade Uranium towards a less acceptable use. It’s like stone washing your jeans (a small reference to alternative ways to upgrade Uranium), when you start looking into the matter, you can find several ways to upgrade the fuel to a boom point. That is where the issue is hiding at and when we go back to the case where people re happy to in like Flynn with Saudi Arabia, we get confronted with a memo that is seemingly linking former NSA Director Keith Alexander, when we look at the sources, there is a lot alleged, implied and not a whole lot valued as evidence (which does not make it true or false). The part that matter is that this is a lot larger and there is not a whole lot of information on the legality of it all (in one way or another).

The mess goes on and even NPR gets involved. We are all treated to: “Let’s take a closer look now at what a transfer of highly sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia would mean for U.S. national security“, yet how valid is that today? The first nuclear reactor was built in 1942, it is an energy solution that has been in place for almost 77 years. There are now 31 nations that employ nuclear energy, nations that include Armenia, Argentine, Romania, Netherlands, Sweden, Slovakia, the UAE and Switzerland. So how sensitive is that technology? If the technology is up to date (which might be sensitive) does that not also include that the reactors are safer? Should safety not be the largest concern in all this?

Well that is not entirely the story and it is Ars Technical that gives us: ““We remain concerned that the Saudi Government has refused, for many years, to consider any agreement that includes so-called ‘Gold Standard’ requirements against pursuing technologies to enrich uranium and reprocess plutonium-laden spent nuclear fuel,” the senators wrote in their letter to Trump.” that was the part that the BBC did not give us, so even as part of that still needs to be vetted, yet if true, there would be a partial issue, yet in all this we still see that Europe is willing to give it to Iran and as such, should Saudi Arabia not be entitled to that choice too?

When we see the elements in play is it actual about stopping Saudi Arabia getting a nuclear reactor, or is it about stopping a handful of former admirals and generals laying their fingers on $200 billion? In the end whatever happens, the players forget that Russia is eager to serve Saudi Arabia with the 20 nuclear reactors that Saudi Arabia in committed to switch on in under 36 months. It seems to me that the United States or those reporting via the US media are all about removing the US as the larger economic power. That is how I personally would read it, the entire mess has too many angles and too many ‘possibly illegal‘ and ‘concern regarding access to nuclear technology‘, whilst the list of nations with nuclear reactors is already way out of control, and we read this, whilst we know that Russia and China are eager to put their fingers on that much revenue, when you want to buy a car that does at least 250Km, are you going to wait in front of the Ferrari door, or do you accept that Lamborghini and Aston Martin are not second choice cars, they are equally great choices in really fast cars. When we realise that part of the equation, we might consider that the Americans: General (ret.) John M. Keane, U.S. Army, General (ret.) Keith Alexander, U.S. Army, Rear Admiral (ret.) Michael Hewitt, U.S. Navy, Admiral (ret.) Kirkland H. Donald, U.S. Navy, Lieutenant General (ret.) Patrick J. O’Reilly, U.S. Army are not merely Americans, they might be the few true Americans left in that place. We catered to Wall Street for so long, we forget that innovation and had work and proper commercial deals made America great, short selling stock a lot less so, and even as we ‘acknowledge’ that these fine gentleman are still being mentored (or is that insightful advised) by Robert McFarlane, we need to realise that the entire media mess is set in motion for very different reasons. I am not pretending to know the reason, yet those so called whistle-blowers have their own alternative need, I wonder if we ever get the truth on that part of this much larger equation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,