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 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: , , ,

Dec 30

This is not a demand for Coal or indeed a desire to go back to the days of deep cast mining. Having all but stopped coal production in the UK to now go back would be insane. Why would we in the era of AGW being the accepted science of Govt and main opposition go backwards? Leaving aside the issue to some fact to me of Climate Change. Why would anyone want the pollution and particulates if nothing else. Talk of Clean Coal is like fat free Suet.

Yet what prompts this blog is that even with 0.5% base rates the UK Govt has apparently guaranteed loans to the oil industry. That and generous tax breaks leads to the question Why? When rates are low only strategic industries should get subsidy, especially in an era of alleged Austerity. To pay for pollution and carbon release defines insanity?

Only a few weeks ago Fracking was still being mentioned in the budget by Osborne. In Norway’s not so much,  fracking gas reserves were estimated at 83 Trn Cubic Feet in 2011 by 2013 the more realistic figure was 0 cubic feet. It’s a technology that does not deliver and any Americans who think it will last to 2030 never mind 2040 as POTUS says, haha.

Equally it is only generous subsidy that allows the lunacy of BP to try to drill for Oil in the Gulf of Mexico and North of Scotland. That its lax attitude to human life added 11 deaths to the 15 murdered in Texas prior can be added to the sheer stupidity of subsidising them to do anything. Yet no fear the UK Govt still subsidises BP deep water drilling – BP also involved in Currency [FX] fraud we now find. The point being apparently it was wrong to subsidise nationalised industries to make Steel and Coal yet we will subsidise the uneconomic environmental rape of Fracking and Oil exploration. Activities so uneconomic even with Base Rates at 0.5% they cannot get funding without subsidy and with the Oil price dropping are not economic even with 0 cost of capital thanks to the subsidy.

It’s 30 years since the miners strike clearly Cameron and co would have been on Scargill’s side had he been a private company head with a credo of corporate manslaughter to his name.

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

Jan 08

Govt taxes workers and small companies (henceforth SMEs)  these taxes go into a fund to pay welfare and subsidise selected large business and pay down interest on Govt debts.

These subsidies lead to profit for large corporates and the taxes on that are paid offshore as the local balance sheet in a so called advanced Western Country has debt loaded on it – see almost all big corps.

Young workers come along but with no union power and lots of more of them than jobs they take low wage jobs that need Govt subsidy – see Wal Mart, Tesco. They contribute little tax as much of their consumption is rents and loan repayments often to people who pay little tax.

Older workers wages go down in real terms and their debt is rising again too.

Now suppose interest rates rise on Govt debt and hence student debt and SME debt. Or even the debts grow for another 10 years even under Zero Interest Rate Policy.

You don’t have to be a genius to see the mass subsidy and Beggar Thy Neighbour tax strategies of so called wealthy nations is unsustainable. Indeed even the big Banks and Corporates are cutting their own throats long term as without consumers of products (wage earners) what is there?

The prevailing Western Government meme will not work.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Jun 05

In the run up to the 1997 Election with the economy stable the savant Brown decided to say he would follow Clarke’s policies. Which he did up until 2001. This he supposed would quieten the so called markets and the press and it was successful. Also whilst the Major boom might have been joyless it was working and certainly not as joy-less as the money/debt illusion boom of the new century.

This based on Balls appearances the other day would appear to be Labour’s policy again. Only this time they are accepting economics no one sane on the right or left would take seriously. A withering austerity that threatens to leave millions in poverty and a society of indentured servitude for graduates and mortgage holders. A society where free expression and thought will be sackable offences.

Why would Ed Balls who pushed massive stimulus 3 years ago, along with kicking out the immigrants, to be leader of the Labour Party now be in favour of austerity? Can we conclude that the master of failed City regulation and PFI fraud is a broken man? A cuckold of Miliband? Having to peddle a line drawn up by the moronic prejudice of  focus groups of floating voter flotsam?

Either way only a few technocrats imposed by Germany on Greece, Spain and Italy with Labour, Liberal and Tory parties in the world now support this economics of Austerity. Whilst I dislike Balls intently and think him a functioning moron nonetheless like Vince Cable you have to wonder if to his panoplia of faults being a gutless self first career creep may be added.

No wonder Osborne sponsored his marathon run. They agree on almost everything.

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

May 09

Interesting how Germany deals with the Dutch given the shellacking the southern Europeans and Ireland got. Yes they’ve had cheap money and a housing bubble and now have debt!

The fact is, whatever Keynesian economists say, QE and or low interest rates = bubbles = zombie economies = gutless short term politicians who won’t take the hit. Continue reading »

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

May 01

The state of Connecticut is apparently considering a 10 day moratorium on gold buyers. What next background checks? Spain is starting to consider fleecing foreign property owners with a wealth tax -> the UK will be right along soon after so don’t worry unless you have property in both countries.

The point is that all the debts will be paid for somehow if the rich and banks are to survive intact. The day that happens is likely to be closer if more and more ordinary citizens never mind Billionaire’s squirrel money into Metals and Bitcoin or equivalents to protect themselves from the likes of Osborne, Carney and Bernanke.

The attempt last week to end the Gold Bug-gery Bull run has just brought about a decimation of the Paper Gold market and the start of a separate physical Gold market it seems – people sold paper promises of Gold and people bought cheaper bullion! Seriously you have the absurdity of a shortage with a lower price! However as more metals shift to the East how can a bunch of crooks in New York and London control that? Then Govts have to look for things to take ala Cyprus. To take wealth off people to fund their debt. After Cyprus only nutters would put money in a bank so that leaves property and wealth in Gold and its ilk.

Anyway it seems Americans’ll soon find it easier to get a gun and make money through crime than buy Gold. I guess it’s a zero sum game even if you end up with wealth it will be stolen in a wealth tax in each country you have property or Gold etc.

Time to fight back?

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,

Feb 10

A lot of people making public comments about Paul Gascoigne. A lot of people publicly helping Gascoigne.

Very little water cooler reaction to the sheer scale of death from Labour’s chase for future money for financiers from its NHS’ ‘reforms’. Indeed the Baby Boomers are content to hold debt over their own children. They are happy to deny them union rights. To make their education a form of indentured servitude. To force them into more and more subsidised jobs that do not increase the Gross Domestic Product.

The point being people’s seeming inability to rationalise the problems of individuals compared to the seeming mere statistics of real death and tragedy.

On Gascoigne do people and especially his friends so prominently seen to help him this week think this attention has ever done any good? Is the intention of people much like with the wasted emotion of guilt to use their caring to suggest they are somehow good people? Good people who keep electing Govts who callously condemn thousands to deaths? Govts working in the interests of a smaller and smaller number of people? Good people who demand no change as they and their Children’s pensions and wealth are pissed away.

Jimmy Greaves today makes the point Gascoigne does not have a reason to stay sober. He has little in his life. Thousands of people with reasons to live will die because of our indifference. Our care or not care will not change Gascoigne’s fate.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Dec 03

Now that we’ve had 30 years to assess the Thatcher Govt I think we can say that its central ideas failed. That despite Blair and Brown’s slavish devotion to her private sector and markets the result is that we’d have been better off with council houses and monolithic public enterprises and maybe even producing our own subsidised coal.

Yes privatising has made sacking workers easier but has it actually saved money? Have we not been paying through the nose for energy and other essentials? Has extra investment taken place? Do we have any slack to cope with disasters? Are we closer on Green issues? No. Indeed it’s only fringe stuff like airlines etc that we may say that state involvement is best the way it is.

Indeed what the utility companies which are mostly foreign owned have done is cut to the bone. The company left behind is a debt laden holding company and what investment does happen has to be guaranteed by the Govt. If these companies fail the Govt has to step in. This debt allows them to pay little or no tax by posting phantom losses in the UK.

In short it’s difficult to think of 3 bigger disasters than Thatcherism’s core of Big Bang, selling council houses and privatisation.  The latter leaving individuals spending more and the service skeleton before we get to the prospects for future necessary investment.

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

Nov 23

The Kleptocrats are fond of throwing the Socialism label about and damning state intervention. Yet they only mean state intervention to give more than subsistence food, shelter and clothing to the poor. State non intervention to prevent the cost of their pollution being paid by them. State non intervention to make them pay the long term environmental cost of just digging up the land and forests. Continue reading »

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