Jul 12

As we survey the reality of a Europe run by rhetoric, bullshit and idiotic grasp of economics. We realise we have a poor hating cretin hive in London one wonders where the fuck are the left? Oh they appear in distressed countries as do the fascists and bottom feeders. Why this void? The answer is they do not have the economics or understand the problems. As said before the neo Lib’ right has run down the disposable wealth/income of most people in Western societies and we have not noticed. ‘Left’ parties like Labour have morphed into a moving peg marginally to ‘the left’ on some issues but covering up for this with an authoritarianism that sees the Obama/Brown Administrations de facto wanting cameras in everyone’s homes [exaggerating for effect].

The neo Lib Left want to protect people for a slower exploitation by the logic-less tenants of neo Liberalism and the neo Lib Right to protect Finance and Corporates from any kind of economic dynamism and proper controls – Zombie economy. In the face of this open goal of ridiculous views the actual Left have nothing to say but cling to Climate Change and other issues and high moral ranting? It’s a mess with no effective opposition we can expect enough people to keep re-electing it. That only requires 25% buy in in the UK and US. Indeed in Greece the greed of older generations and the desire to hang on to the Silver turds means that even a country where it makes no sense clings to its Euros even as they gut their own banking system to hold them.

We can cry for Greece or the poor or realise this is a race to the bottom and our opponents will do anything they can sell with blame rhetoric. Being nice winning arguments and feeling moral will win nothing bar the odd equality victory which costs nothing and achieves only marginally more.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,

Jun 28

No doubt if you looked at graphs real wages have flat lined for years and but but our houses are worth a shit load apparently. Well anecdotal will do today….

I was in London drinking in Hammersmith not a particularly posh borough in the past. Yet if I earned a 100 grand and had a wife and 2 kids could I even afford to live there? If I was on average household income of £38,547 could I?

I was put in mind of the 70s lifestyles of Lunchtime O’Booze journalists who crushed beers all afternoon every day. Could you on a hundred grand a year sit in a pub every afternoon and live in or around central London? Never mind a journalist’s salary?

The subsidy of housing is if not making us poorer in the way income is measured is certainly changing what we can and cannot afford. How close to London we can live and hence how far we commute.

As with Greece the unwinding of these artificial economic constructs will be harsh. The eventual great sell off of housing by income poor boomers will lead to a correction as the ‘wealth’ they have appropriated in pre existing bricks and mortar disappears. The problem is of course now they force up land prices and we are forced to the ‘burbs as London property becomes the money laundering tool of preference [HSBC excepted] and the UK Govt pours in subsidy to make the criminals and landlords richer.

Thus us the people better off? Unlikely.

Losing an hour a day to travel to work. Lost lifestyle choices no longer available. Quality of life lost. Unarguably.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , ,

Jun 20

Will it make it easier on you now
You got someone to blame
U2 One

It’s said by some that Socialists eventually run out of other people’s money. With neo Liberalism it’s might be people to blame – if that is possible.

Its central construct is that all taxes and debts are the responsibility of taxpayers. The problem with this construct is it requires low interest rates to support the resulting debt mountain caused by transferring assets/subsidies to and inflating assets of the wealthy and debt to the populace. It requires Govt to cut back everything else to take on more debt from companies.

Thus with no solution since taxing the wealthy and rentier incomes not wage earners would be as anathema as it would be good Capitalism we have to blame someone and subject them to below normal standards of humanity, as after all it is their fault. Hence the unemployed who receive £2.4 Bn in Job Seekers Allowance are targeted when RBS gets that every year just in direct subsidy. There is talk of the health service not treating people who [over] consume legal products like cigarettes and foods designed to make you over eat.

In Europe the Greeks are targeted because after being imposed an unworkable deal, as the sane members of the IMF accept and the insane Lagarde does not, their economy is tanking. Europe seems to want them on a drip feed so they can never grow. This will of course involve selling off their assets cheap to the Wealthy and turning public services into a stream of income for German pension funds. Now because their debt has been nationalised by ECB and EU Govts they are subject to the political whims of economic illiterates who get elected pimping people to blame! For all the talk of Game Theory by Greece the only people using Game Theory here are the neo Liberals.

After the Greeks it will be Italy and Spain. Maybe the worry is if Greece gets a sustainable path they will want one too not one that ultimately leads to subjugation. Equally it could be any perceived positive for Greece will lead to the election of Govt’s less committed to blaming their own people and delivering the anodyne world for the majority that Christine Lagarde, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair see as so desirable. The end result will be poverty the norm but if you join voluntary work camps you’ll get a bowl of rice after all your poverty is your fault. Conservatives go along with this nonsense too I think partly because it is veiled in the language of The Market and involves hating on the poor but also because for all the bluster and fibs they love to run all powerful States too.

Of course as said the neo Liberal world will be all about equality and as long as you’re not poor or a woman you’ll be OK or enough of you to vote correctly any rates.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , ,

May 30

Economics whether practised by what can be called left or right/neo Classical/neo Liberals can come across as an esoteric practice. It allows enough phonies to practice it that politicians can always find solace in some nutter – our own George Osborne uses a crack smoking woman beater for instance.

The myth spreading was particularly apparent in the Election. Labour was accused of profligacy and numbers produced to show the debt was not that high historically. I made the point Labour were profligate and spent badly and as incompetence of graft via war, PFI and the massive subsidies to Finance and other industries – whether this was historically significant incompetence is moot. The Conservatives were accused of halting austerity but again mathematically the deficit reduction slowed was not stopped and hence you can claim it was still austerity. Yet Britain has not run a budget surplus even ignoring interest on prior debt. In the end one cannot crib the recovery in GDP save to say it’s still lower per capita than in 2007. One can also say it’s even less evenly divided – worse as of course more people now working. Better to argue that it’s a recovery in rents and asset prices is pointless and does not reward work or rebalance the economy. The glut of low wage jobs contradicts the Govt’s stated aims on Immigration and costs a fortune in subsidy. It has so far been austerity for the poorest and barely saved a brass razoo other than emasculating possibly essential investment.

The other well umm is this is the most anaemic recovery in 300 years and whilst the UK’s not on a cycle with other powers meaning we grow faster now whilst others slow it is clear to all bar Labour supporting cheerleaders that it’s not exactly been a gangbusters recovery anywhere. Again far better to point to the whole world’s neo Liberal nuttery as a cause of stagnation. You can draw lines on a graph and say growth should be 3% and inflation 2% but to me that is meaningless drawing lines between selected points on graphs and saying that used to be a path in a time period. Arbitrary End Point analysis.

The ultimate was of course Ed Balls double dip obsession. Seriously which is worse 0.1,0.1,0.1 0.1 0.1 quarterly growth rates or 1%, -0.1%, 1%, -0.1% 1%? Why not say weak growth not some contrived phrase?

The point is Economics needs to escape this world of silly rules and definitions and esoteric arguments. One of the central precepts of neo Liberalism is to make semantics and legality high priorities regardless of right or wrong or value of ideas and commentary. If I were an economist I would clearly aim to be Heterodox.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

May 08

Were it not for polls I think I would have assumed this was quite a hard election for the Conservatives to not win. The economic good news may not survive a decent economist’s gaze but since when did they have any say. Sure poorer workers actually trying to work hard and earn know it’s a load of bollocks. People like me know it’s an unsustainable subsidy bubble where debt subsidises shit companies like Tesco. However for many exposed only to national media and the BBC this narrative of growth is fixed.

Farmers, Bankers and City workers, Large Corporates, Tax avoiders, Oil companies, outbid bearded rail franchise holders, landlords, owners of valuable property, Housing Association tenants etc is surely a thick end of the 24% of the populace who voted Conservative – the rest just brainless tarts who think that they can be rich and all former groups earn their dosh. Just as until Brown lost them in an incompetence fest had public sector managers, well paid public sector workers, Scots, Tax Credit families etc.

As it is an illusory boom that is only fueled by immigrants (per capita it reeks), has a productivity no show and funded by large amounts of debt please do not expect me to respect this judgement by the populace albeit with little actual choice and a positive economic narrative 24% of the electorate may be seen as unconvincing..

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,

Apr 26

I’ll also leave out they support the same policies as the Tories whatever the Tory fiction about massive cuts – after all SNP, Libs and Labour have the same spending plans too. We’ll leave out their obvious racism where they try to sound marginally slower swiveling of the eyes than the Tories. We’ll even credit them on Syria not bombing to help our friends al Queada and now enemies IS. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mar 07

Watching Professor Richard Werner who apparently coined the term Quantitative Easing induce cognitive dissonance in Max Keiser with his solution to economic ills was eyeopening. Keiser talked maniacally and in the end the difference was not causes of crisis or any dispute bankers were fraudulent creeps. The difference was sad to say an almost corporate conformist what we do now counts from the Prof and worse I agreed with him! Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Feb 13

UK, USA and Japan have had years of QE and it has not achieved investment or inflation or trickle down.

Thus you may ask with this actual evidence and the Euro tanking anyway why the ECB would do QE? It apparently wants inflation which it will not get. Never ending QE?

Given it is either ineffective or unnecessary for the usual goals it can therefore only be to transfer wealth to the rich? The ECB can hardly claim they do not know what it does now after the examples given.

Anyone who doubts this is not a kleptocratic or plutocratic system probably believes in the tooth fairy.

written by reaction \\ tags: , ,

Nov 09

There is a moment in the excellent initial episodes of the early “The Thick Of It” when it was actually funny when Tucker tells the minister when his expert disagrees with policy to get a different expert. Expertise is well not a singular or even right.

Take Monetary Policy. There are the absurd who think all problems can be solved by Central Banks buying Govt debt and hence creating money. This may have some use at creating temporary liquidity but as the surge in Asset prices has shown it further dampens what those of us would call the real economy that creates real wealth. The absurdity of all the GDP stoking shown in static tax revenues and per Capita GDP. You tell the man on the street this policy and his reaction will actually be nearer reality than Nobel Economists. No accident the so called Nobel Prize in Economics was created by the Swedish Central Bank in the same way that Obama and Kissinger won the Peace Prize created by arms manufacturer Nobel. Sweden loves irony.

As an aside the funniest part of many Modern Monetary Theorists like say Paul Krugman or Kruggers for short is that until he was argued into a pathetic position he did not acknowledge any role for banks in the economy other than as some black box conveyance. Missing that money can be created by issuing banks and Central Banks. For instance HSBC decide to lend me 10 grand where does that money come from? Some one types +10000 into a computer and then I buy drugs and behead people or at least that’s how it worked in Mexico.

There is a lot of expertise in looking at numbers not in the economy. Sadly those with the easy solution of buying Bonds are just digging a deeper hole. Money and Wealth creation are 2 different things.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,

May 05

David Cameron showed he is a populist Kleptocratic leader. The man who uses 10s Bns in tax revenue to subsidise Banks, The Arms Industry, City, Big Oil and Hedge Funds said he was upset airlines deliberately put up holiday prices in the school holidays.

Um yeah!

Whether you’re Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Marx, Benn, Huhne, Cable or a fucking idiot but not as dumb as Call Me Dave what else would you expect? Continue reading »

written by Jon \\ tags: , , , , , , ,