Sep 132019
 
 September 13, 2019  Posted by at 7:03 pm Primers Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  2 Responses »


Max Ernst Untitled 1913

 

No, I don’t want to talk about last night’s US Democrats’ debate. That’s just lousy comedy. But I’ll admit I’m happy to see Tulsi Gabbard demolished DNC favorite Kamala Harris’s chances before the same DNC managed to get rid of Tulsi. She should have been at that debate just for having that kind of influence.

Instead, unfortunately, and I’m almost apologizing, I have to revisit Brexit yet again. Hey, at least it’s better comedy. But I’ve addressed it a bit much lately. I did find it interesting to see Julian Assange’s view the other day in Assange, Varoufakis, Brexit. After all, Julian’s been in Britain for so long he could probably apply for citizenship. That makes his view more interesting than for instance mine, I think.

By the way, he was in court again today, Friday the 13th. Or not really in court, he appeared via videolink. Only to be subjected to more derogatory nonsense from the British court system. I’m sure he saw that coming, he never even requested bail, but still. These people lack all decency.

Julian Assange To Stay In Prison Over Absconding Fears

Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange is to remain in prison when his jail term ends because of his “history of absconding”, a judge has ruled. He was due to be released on 22 September after serving his sentence for breaching bail conditions. But Westminster Magistrates’ Court heard there were “substantial grounds” for believing he would abscond again. [..] District judge Vanessa Baraitser on Friday told Assange, who appeared by video-link: “You have been produced today because your sentence of imprisonment is about to come to an end.


“When that happens your remand status changes from a serving prisoner to a person facing extradition.” She said that his lawyer had declined to make an application for bail on his behalf, adding “perhaps not surprisingly in light of your history of absconding in these proceedings”. “In my view I have substantial ground for believing if I release you, you will abscond again.”

I don’t even want to get into the reasoning behind that insulting behavior. But it does make one think about the deep dive the UK justice system has taken. I would propose no longer using the word Justice to describe it. A court system that functions as political theater it not worthy of the title.

 

And that’s a good link back to Brexit. A few days ago two different courts in the Once-United Kingdom, the Inner House of Session of Scotland and the High Court of England and Wales, issued entirely opposite judgments on the legality of the prorogation of Parliament by Boris Johnson’s government.

Or, rather, to get the details right, the Scottish court said the matter was ‘justiciable’, and the prorogation was unlawful, while the English court simple said the case was not ‘justiciable’, and it’s Parliament that has to decide on this. Yes, the same Parliament that has effectively been shut down.

Longtime friend of the Automatic Earth, Mike ‘Mish’ Shedlock, has been running quite a series of articles on Brexit lately. Since he’s American, his views are no more relevant than mine, but whereas I am -or try to be- fully neutral on the issue, Mish is a fervent supporter of Brexit. He sees it as something fair and just. I have my doubts on that, but I do agree with Mish that the EU is a pretty bad institution.

It’s just that I also think the UK has prepared itself very poorly for leaving the EU, and that this lack of preparation will end up hurting the British population, a substantial part of which is already suffocating under a yoke of extreme austerity. Britain is very much still a class society, and Boris Johnson and his ilk will be fine, but millions of others will not.

 

I saw something in Mish’s latest today that I though I’d highlight. See, I think it’s obvious that there are not two, but three ‘factions’ in the UK today where Brexit is concerned. There are those who want to Remain in the EU, there are those who want to Leave no matter how or what, and as we’ve seen a lot off late, there are many who want to leave but only if a deal with Brussels has been agreed.

Now, the tendency has become, as the bickering worsens, to group that third faction, which wants a deal before leaving, in with those who want to Remain. If you’re not with us you’re against us. This has appeared as a sort of tactical move for the Leave campaign. Here’s Mish quoting Eurointelligence:

If the Supreme Court, as we expect, does not intervene on prorogation, that leaves Hilary Benn’s legislation – requiring Johnson to seek an extension to the Art. 50 withdrawal period – as the main tactical approach left for Remainers.

It’s obvious that those seeking that extension are not only Remainers. Many are not, there are for instance a lot of Labour party members and voters who favor Leave, but with a deal. Jeremy Corbyn himself is one of them. There are many in the Conservative party who want to leave only with a deal. 21 MPs were banned from the party for exactly that. Casting these people in with the Remainers may be a dangerous game.

Beacuse let’s play with the numbers a little. If that third faction, Leave With A Deal, makes up one third of all Leave voters, which seems quite reasonable if not even lowballing it, than what does that do to the 51.89% majority for Leave in the June 23 2016 referendum? I’ll go with 51%, easier to play with. One third of 51% is 17%. Add that to the 48% who voted Remain, and you’re at 65%. Almost 2/3 doesn’t want to Leave without a deal.

That leaves the ‘pure’ Leavers with just 34%, little more than a third of total votes. Does that still sound like The Will of the People to you? And the people behind Boris Johnson who wish to push Leave through even if there is no deal (some would prefer that) can say all they want, but Boris doesn’t even have a majority in Parliament anymore.

If you must suspend Parliament to push through something that will affect the country for decades and that 2/3 of people don’t want, you are on very thin ice. And it doesn’t look like you’re executing The Will of the People, at all. Because many would not have voted Leave if they had been told it could take place without that deal.

And of course when you see EU commission head Juncker’s successor Ursula von der Leyen setting up an office for the “Commissioner for Protecting our European Way of Life”, you too think “get me out of this asylum, and fast”, but you can’t do that unless that is The Will of the People.

This will end with the Supreme Court deciding what that will is. Which is far from ideal. But Boris can call an election; he just needs to agree not to Leave without a deal. Because that is the Will of 2/3 of the People’s chosen representatives.

Canada’s Globe and Mail newspaper this week defined British politics as “what results from the collision of an unstoppable force, an immovable object and a clown car.”

Good theater. I rest my case.

 

 

 

 

May 112018
 


Pablo Picasso La lecture 1932

 

‘Everything’ in Argentina is 20% to 30% Overvalued – Lacalle (BI)
About That FBI ‘Source’ (Strassel)
The Art of Breaking a Deal (Escobar)
China Walks A Fine Line In Iran (Dorsey)
Capitalism Is Collectivist (CA)
Karl Marx Sacrificed Logic On The Altar Of His Desire For Revolution (Keen)
Theresa May Turns Brexit Into Role-Reversal Game (G.)
Third of British Homeowners Priced Out Of Their Own Property (Ind.)
Greece Sees Spike In Waivers Of Inheritance (K.)
The Answer To Life, The Universe And Everything Might Be 73. Or 67 (G.)
Palm Oil Producers Are Wiping Out Orangutans (G.)

 

 

“Obviously the economy will shrink, but it shrinks to reality..”

‘Everything’ in Argentina is 20% to 30% Overvalued – Lacalle (BI)

“Everything” in Argentina is 20% to 30% overvalued, making a financial crisis inevitable, Daniel Lacalle, an economist and fund manager, told Business Insider. A financial crisis has been building in Argentina for years but was hidden by an inflationary bubble which politicians refused to address because they wanted to “avoid the pain,” said Lacalle, chief economist at Tressis SV and a fund manager at Adriza International Opportunities. “Argentina was an accident waiting to happen… Right now GDP [in Argentina] is a fabrication… a complete invention. Obviously the economy will shrink, but it shrinks to reality. It needs to face reality,” he said.

The Argentine peso has been struggling against an increasingly strong dollar. Two interest rate hikes in 24 hours failed to prevent the fall of the currency’s value and the country is seeking billions from the International Monetary Fund, according to reports. The news shocked Argentines who are still traumatized by the last IMF loan which coincided with austerity and the financial crisis in 2001 that caused social and economic chaos. The next crisis could already be underway. “The crisis is already happening. You have seen prices go through the roof, discontent, the economy is not growing as it was supposed to grow,” said Lacalle.

He added that the problems have been building for years but were disguised by a “massive bubble” which came from an “extreme inflow of cheap dollars” during the end of QE and helpful “tailwind” conditions. The tailwind has now reversed thanks to an increasingly strong dollar and the prospect of an interest rate rise from the US Federal Reserve. The result is a crisis which interest rate rises have failed to stave off. It was disguised by politicians who wanted to “avoid the pain of facing the problems, so they tried to indebt their way out of it,” Lacalle said.

Read more …

Planting a spy in a political campaign may cause a problem or two.

About That FBI ‘Source’ (Strassel)

Did the bureau engage in outright spying against the 2016 Trump campaign? The Department of Justice lost its latest battle with Congress Thursday when it allowed House Intelligence Committee members to view classified documents about a top-secret intelligence source that was part of the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign. Even without official confirmation of that source’s name, the news so far holds some stunning implications. Among them is that the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation outright hid critical information from a congressional investigation. In a Thursday press conference, Speaker Paul Ryan bluntly noted that Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes’s request for details on this secret source was “wholly appropriate,” “completely within the scope” of the committee’s long-running FBI investigation, and “something that probably should have been answered a while ago.”

Translation: The department knew full well it should have turned this material over to congressional investigators last year, but instead deliberately concealed it. House investigators nonetheless sniffed out a name, and Mr. Nunes in recent weeks issued a letter and a subpoena demanding more details. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s response was to double down—accusing the House of “extortion” and delivering a speech in which he claimed that “declining to open the FBI’s files to review” is a constitutional “duty.” Justice asked the White House to back its stonewall. And it even began spinning that daddy of all superspook arguments—that revealing any detail about this particular asset could result in “loss of human lives.” This is desperation, and it strongly suggests that whatever is in these files is going to prove very uncomfortable to the FBI.

The bureau already has some explaining to do. Thanks to the Washington Post’s unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes’s request deals with a “top secret intelligence source” of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S. citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe. When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency. Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign. This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting.

Read more …

“Trump has reshuffled the Grand Chessboard. Persians, though, happen to know a thing or two about chess.”

The Art of Breaking a Deal (Escobar)

To cut to the chase, the US decision to leave the JCPOA will not open the path to an Iranian nuclear weapon. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, who has the last word, repeatedly stressed these are un-Islamic. It will not open the path toward regime change. On the contrary, Iran hardliners, clerical and otherwise, are already capitalizing on their interpretation from the beginning – Washington cannot be trusted. And it will not open the path toward all-out war. It’s no secret every Pentagon war-gaming exercise against Iran turned out nightmarish. This included the fact that the Gulf Cooperation Council, or GCC, could be put out of the oil business within hours, with dire consequences for the global economy.

President Hassan Rouhani, in his cool, calm, collected response, emphasized Iran will remain committed to the JCPOA. Immediately before the announcement, he had already said: “It is possible that we will face some problems for two or three months, but we will pass through this.” Responding to Trump, Rouhani stressed: “From now on, this is an agreement between Iran and five countries … from now on the P5+1 has lost its 1… we have to wait and see how the others react. “If we come to the conclusion that with cooperation with the five countries we can keep what we wanted despite Israeli and American efforts, Barjam [the Iranian description of the JCPOA] can survive.”

Clearly, a titanic internal struggle is already underway, revolving around whether the Rouhani administration – which is actively working to diversify the economy – will be able to face the onslaught by the hard-liners. They have always characterized the JCPOA as a betrayal of Iran’s national interest. [..] So, Trump has reshuffled the Grand Chessboard. Persians, though, happen to know a thing or two about chess.

Read more …

China will not turn its back on Iran. Neither will Russia.

China Walks A Fine Line In Iran (Dorsey)

Chinese businessman Sheng Kuan Li didn’t worry about sanctions when he decided in 2010 to invest $200 million in a steel mill in Iran that started producing ingots and billet within months of the lifting of punitive measures against the Islamic republic as part of 2015 international nuclear agreement with Iran. With no operations in the United States, Mr. Li was not concerned about being targeted by the US Treasury. Mr. Li, moreover, circumvented financial restrictions on Iran by funding his investment through what he called a “private transfer,” a money swap that was based on trust and avoided regular banking channels. In doing so, Mr. Li was following standard Chinese practice of evading the sanctions regime by using alternative routes or establishing alternative institutions that were in effect immune.

To be able to continue to purchase Iranian oil while sanctions were in place, China, for example, established the Bank of Kunlun to handle Chinese payments. The Chinese experience in circumventing the earlier sanctions will come in handy with Beijing rejecting US President Donald J. Trump’s renewed effort to isolate Iran and force it to make further concessions on its nuclear and ballistic missiles programs as well as the Islamic republic’s regional role in the Middle East by walking away from the 2015 agreement and reintroducing punitive economic measures. Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said in response to Mr. Trump’s announcement that the People’s Republic was committed to the deal and would “maintain communication with all parties and continue to protect and execute the agreement fully.”

Read more …

How can you maintain individualism rules when you see how people interact with social media?

Capitalism Is Collectivist (CA)

One of the central tenets of late-20th century consumer capitalism is the sanctity of the individual. Margaret Thatcher declared that “There’s no such thing as society, there are individual men and women.” Ayn Rand’s philosophy glamorized anti-social übermenschen who stand against everyone else. Friedrich von Hayek thought mild social welfare policy could be compared to Nazi fascism because they are both “collectivist.” Libertarians promote “individual freedom” with a level of brand discipline that would make Apple proud.

It’s easy to swallow this idea at face value, agreeing that market fundamentalists really do value the inviolability of the individual, while the left believes instead in the collective and the community. After all, market zealots don’t merely try to dismantle policies that benefit the common good. They attack the idea that there can be a common good to begin with. Because leftists talk about social welfare, and supporters of markets put the Individual at the center of their framework, one can forgive those who are seduced by this rhetoric. But it is only rhetoric. In fact, today’s economy is a collectivist enterprise, insofar as collectivism elevates the good of the aggregate and the organization over that of individual human beings.

Get past the well-crafted agitprop, and we see that corporate capitalism is all about subsuming the particular will of an individual to that of the institution. The institutions vary: a monopolistic corporation, a nonprofit charity, an arm of government, the police. But in each, the individual is actually helpless and powerless, with the needs, wants, and will of the larger entity taking priority. Amazon workers work for Amazon: They don’t set the rules of their own workplace, that’s done from above. They don’t own the company, they don’t get to say what it does. And Amazon in particular is a pioneer in sacrificing the sanctity (and dignity) of the individual to the company. The employees serve the corporation, rather than the other way around.

Read more …

Steve on Marx’s crucial mistake.

Karl Marx Sacrificed Logic On The Altar Of His Desire For Revolution (Keen)

With both use-value and exchange-value quantitative, there will be a difference between these two “intrinsically incommensurable magnitudes” (Capital I. Ch. 19) that is the source of surplus. Marx’s best statement of this in relation to labor was in Capital I itself: “The daily cost of maintaining it [Labour], and its daily expenditure in work, are two totally different things. The former determines the exchange-value of the labour power, the latter is its use-value. The fact that half a [working] day’s labour is necessary to keep the labourer alive during 24 hours, does not in any way prevent him from working a whole day… The seller of labour power, like the seller of any other commodity, realises its exchange value, and parts with its use-value.”

He thus had a far more satisfying, positive proof as to why Labour was a source of surplus. But was it the only source? What about machinery as well? In the Grundrisse, when he was still enthralled by his new methodology, he applied it correctly to machinery: “It also has to be postulated (which was not done above) that the use-value of the machine [is] significantly greater than its value; i.e. that its devaluation in the service of production is not proportional to its increasing effect on production.” But Gadzooks! This means that machinery can be a source of surplus as well. And if so, then an increasing “organic composition of capital” has no implications for the levels of surplus and profit: they could go up just as well as go down when production became less labour-intensive.

The “Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall” disappears. Socialism is no longer inevitable. Marx’s reaction to this shock discovery was to employ verbal gymnastics until such a time that he could fool himself that he had reconciled the two approaches. He then set about fooling everyone else, and finally declared emphatically—and falsely—that: “However useful a given kind of raw material, or a machine, or other means of production may be, though it may cost £150… yet it cannot, under any circumstances, add to the value of the product more than £150”. With this false statement swallowed by Marx’s followers, the belief in the inevitability of socialism continued. Accidents of history led to his Russia’s Bolshevik followers attempting to impose socialism on feudal Russia, and the rest is a very unfortunate history.

Read more …

What despair looks like.

Theresa May Turns Brexit Into Role-Reversal Game (G.)

Theresa May has ordered Brexiters to study her “customs partnership” model, and remainers to go over the leavers’ “maximum facilitation” proposal, in a bid to thrash out a compromise between the two sides. Boris Johnson and Philip Hammond – apparently regarded as the “ultras” of leave and remain, respectively – have been sitting out of the cabinet working groups. May’s “customs partnership” will be examined by Brexiters Liam Fox and Michael Gove, teamed with remainer and Cabinet Office minister David Lidington. “Max-fac” will be workshopped by remainers Greg Clark, the business secretary, and Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, along with Brexit secretary David Davis, a leaver.

The ministers have until Tuesday to examine their options, but entrenched positions mean a breakthrough is not expected. One cabinet minister told the Guardian it is partly about May wanting to “kick any decisions down the road for as long as she can”. It certainly looks that way, after Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, announced government business for the next fortnight – minus the EU withdrawal bill, which needs to come back from the Lords but is peppered with amendments that have enraged Brexiters. Labour accused the government of “subverting democracy” with the delay.

Sir John Major, meanwhile, has hit out at Brexiters’ failure to grasp that leaving the customs union would mean a hard border in Ireland and damaging consequences for peace there. The Conservative former PM, speaking at the Irish embassy in London, said without a customs union, border checks would be required by law, especially for food, animals and animal feed. “If so, a physical border seems unavoidable,” he said.

Read more …

How bubbles implode. Slowly at first.

Third of British Homeowners Priced Out Of Their Own Property (Ind.)

More than one in three UK homeowners wouldn’t be able to afford their home if it were listed on the property market at today’s value says new research, as the latest data confirms prices stutter upwards. The Halifax House Price Index, a leading measure of the state of the property market, this week released figures showing prices in the last three months were 2.2% higher than in the same period last year, with the average property now coming in at £220,962. The figures support separate findings that suggest that a significant proportion of those who have owned their own home even for a few years would already be priced out of the market if they were to attempt the purchase again, despite historically low mortgage interest rates.

More than one in three of the 3,000 property owners surveyed by MyJobQuote said their home’s value had increased to the point that they would be unable to afford it at the current value – an average of £50,000 more than their original purchase price – or that changes to their financial circumstances would now make it impossible. However, the Halifax data suggests that a downward price trend that had been contained in geographical pockets until recently is becoming more widespread. While the annual figures still show a reasonable increase, month by month, prices are currently dropping nationally by an average of more than 3%. At a time when the property market traditionally enters a stronger summer buying season, the latest data, which follows a 1.6% increase in average prices in March, suggests a rocky state of affairs.

Read more …

Properties become unused and useless. There is no reason for this to happen. Scorched Earth.

Greece Sees Spike In Waivers Of Inheritance (K.)

The exhaustion of Greeks’ taxpaying capacity and the difficulties in meeting day-to-day expenses are leading to more and more citizens waiving inheritances, especially when they concern real estate assets. Legal sources say that the phenomenon no longer only concerns people waiving inheritances due to the debts of the deceased (which they would have to pay), but has spread to those wishing to avoid the payment of the inheritance tax and the Single Property Tax (ENFIA), as well as expenses related to property maintenance. According to the latest data available, in 2017 such waivers amounted to 130,000, while the definitive data will be issued soon, according to Justice Ministry sources.

That figure is quite impressive, given that it is almost three times the number of inheritance waivers in 2016 (54,422), and is up by 333 percent on the 2013 figure. This means that the state takes ownership of properties that cannot be utilized, as the fate of those assets remains unknown given that the state’s auction programs are fairly limited. For instance, in the first half of this month, the state will auction just three properties, after 15 assets went under the hammer over the previous fortnight but without any success. It also remains unknown how many assets have come under state ownership as a result of confiscations and property concessions.

What is certain is that all these properties are assets that will drop in value, which will make it even more difficult to find buyers for them in the future. Every beneficiary has the right to waive an inheritance, except for the state. The deadline for waiving an inheritance is four months after the day a will is published. If there is no will, the four-month period starts on the day the person dies. However, if the deceased lived abroad or the heir has their main residence in another country, then the deadline for waiving an inheritance extends to 12 months. The acceptance or waiver has to concern the entire inheritance, not parts of it.

Read more …

“..the universe is getting bigger quicker than it should be..”

The Answer To Life, The Universe And Everything Might Be 73. Or 67 (G.)

A crisis of cosmic proportions is brewing: the universe is expanding 9% faster than it ought to be and scientists are not sure why. The latest, most precise, estimate of the universe’s current rate of expansion – a value known as the Hubble constant – comes from , which is conducting the most detailed ever three-dimensional survey of the Milky Way. The data has allowed the rate of expansion to be pinned down to a supposed accuracy of a couple of percent. However, this newest estimate stands in stark contradiction with an independent measure of the Hubble constant based on observations of ancient light that was released shortly after the Big Bang. In short, the universe is getting bigger quicker than it should be.

The mismatch is significant and problematic because the Hubble constant is widely regarded as the most fundamental number in cosmology. “The fact the universe is expanding is really one of the most powerful ways we have to determine the composition of the universe, the age of the universe and the fate of the universe,” said Professor Adam Riess, at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, Maryland, who led the latest analysis. “The Hubble constant quantifies all that into one number.” In an expanding universe, the further away a star or galaxy is, the quicker it is receding. Hubble’s constant – proposed by Edwin Hubble in the 1920s – reveals by how much.

So one approach to measuring it is by observing the redshifts of bright supernovae, whose light is stretched as the very space it is travelling through expands. A challenge, though, is pinpointing the exact distance of these stars. [..] The new data puts the Hubble constant at 73, which translates to galaxies moving away from us 73km per second faster for each additional megaparsec of distance between us and them (a megaparsec is about 3.3m light-years). However, a separate estimate of Hubble comes from observations of the Cosmic Microwave Background, relic radiation that allows scientists to calculate how quickly the universe was expanding 300,000 years after the big bang.

“The cosmic microwave background is the light that is the furthest away from us that we can see,” said Riess. “It’s been travelling for 13.7bn years… and it’s telling us how fast the universe was expanding when the universe was a baby.” Scientists then use the cosmic equivalent of a child growth chart (a computational model that roughly describes the age and contents of the universe and the laws of physics) to predict how fast the universe should be expanding today. This gives a Hubble value of 67.

Read more …

Mass extinction and mass insanity.

Palm Oil Producers Are Wiping Out Orangutans (G.)

These extraordinary creatures are our closest relatives, sharing 97% of our DNA. Their similarity to us is astonishing. They are intelligent, inquisitive, smile and show empathy. They even laugh when tickled, like us, when most other animals have evolved to be ticklish only in an itchy, irritating sort of way as a protective reflex. Encountering orangutans in the wild is like nothing else I’ve experienced. They once thrived in Indonesia’s lush, green rainforests but over the last 50 years they have been forced from their home and killed. In the last 16 years alone, 100,000 Bornean orangutans have been lost. All three species – Bornean, Sumatran and the Tapanuli, a species discovered only last year – are now on the critically endangered list.

The reason? It started in the 1960s as forests were logged for timber, but now it’s palm oil. Global demand for palm oil has increased six-fold since 1990. It’s in half of all packaged products on supermarket shelves and to avoid it completely would be incredibly tricky. Although palm oil in food can no longer be described simply as vegetable oil and must be clearly labelled (thanks to an EU directive in 2014), there is no such law for products such as soap, shampoo and other cosmetics. The supermarket Iceland’s decision to ditch palm oil from all of its own-brand products was, it says, a response to the palm oil industry’s catastrophic failure to halt deforestation and deal with the problem.

Even the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) – the industry body charged with ensuring registered companies trade only in oil that has not come from deforestation – is failing spectacularly. Just over a week ago, Greenpeace exposed massive rainforest destruction in Papua allegedly caused by palm oil companies that are subsidiaries of a current RSPO member. Buying from them were big multinationals including Unilever, Nestlé, Pepsico and Mars. The companies concerned have responded by saying they are taking Greenpeace’s claims seriously and taking appropriate action. But if Greenpeace’s assertions are correct, no company can claim the palm oil it uses is 100% “sustainable”.

Read more …

May 102018
 
 May 10, 2018  Posted by at 6:38 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  6 Responses »


James McNeill Whistler Nocturne in Black and Gold, the Falling Rocket 1875

 

 

Dr. D again. And wait, that deal was never even -legally- signed?

 

 

Dr. D: I know the U.S. hasn’t followed the law in 100 years, but let’s review the Iran Deal. A “Deal” with a foreign nation is supposed to be, for 200 years has been, and legally must be, a “Treaty”. Treaties under U.S. law are unique, as they are NOT to be brokered by the Congress and are a point of contention if Congressmen get involved, as you can imagine special deals and/or information leaks could damage the negotiating position.

This is one of the few things Congress doesn’t do. However, the deal, brokered by the President, is presented to the Senate and only the Senate, which is supposed to be the older, more stable house, and once upon a time when Americans were adults and the Senate was chosen by the State governments, this was true. Even with a Democratic election of Senators representing the people and not the States, (which is what the House is supposed to be) it’s the best we have.

So when Obama arranged the Iran “Deal”, he knew and did so against 220 years of history exclusively BECAUSE he knew the Senate would never approve an honest-to-God, legal “Treaty.” Worse, it was part of the reason the “Deal” was effectively secret, not overseen by anyone, and even John Kerry when asked what was in it said, “I don’t know.” You don’t know??? You’re the Secretary of State presumably brokering the deal. Who’s above you in the food chain that you’re not allowed to know? That was an interesting disclosure that the media – of course – never followed up on.

He also said, as the deal was never signed, it was “not legally binding.” Okay, yes, if the Senate does not approve it, making it therefore a “Treaty”, then it’s just a gentleman’s handshake verbal agreement and not binding. So…Iran therefore did NOT agree to stop weapons development, and certainly as proven did not agree to continue to use the U.S. petrodollar.

On the other hand, Obama DID send pallets of cash on 3 jumbo jets, and the U.S. prisoners were not released until those planes touched down. So Iran can legally reverse their weapons development, while you’re not going to get that cash back. That sounds like a terrible, terrible deal, a no-deal deal no one read and no one signed. And they’re upset this is cancelled? Why? What’s in it? Can we finally know now? Nope.

My personal theory is that since General Wesley Clark’s reveal that they planned 7 MENA wars, and named them in order back in 2001 and were to culminate in attacking Iran by 2013, they were years behind schedule on this world-domination murder-death play. In order to keep Iran in a holding pattern, still lacking viable nuclear weapons, they had to pay them billions and billions. Iran for their part knew they would win Syria anyway, so they were happy to play along and get a few billion dollars. And a lot of those billions Obama “gave” to Iran were Iran’s money anyway.

What? Yes, the U.S. confiscated and “froze” (actually stole and used) Iran’s western assets in 1979, and by law Iran was almost certainly owed this money plus interest. Then if I’m any judge of world politics, the negotiating parties — U.S., France, Germany, Iran, took these pallets of unmarked bills and used them for slush fund payouts among the various power factions, and about $50 ended up with the people.

This proved to be true, as Iran immediately ignored the U.S., moved into Syria, dumped the dollar, traded in Euros, and arguably continued weapons (missile) development. …But like I said, the important part got through: free cash payoffs, untraceable, back to the “right” people: the “Deep States” of the U.S., Iran, France, etc. You can see this in Macron and Merkel’s top priority and panic to force this deal to continue. And why? Isn’t that money gone? A one-time thing? Hmmm.

Back to the present, the nation is all agog about “ending” the Iran deal. You mean the deal we didn’t have? The one that was neither signed nor (generally) followed? How can Trump end it? He can end it because it was never a deal, it was a side-agreement by a specific President, THAT’S WHY WE HAVE TREATIES. So that they are in law, hard to negate, and much more stable. In fact, the Senate told Iran this outright: “if you sign this, you know that as soon as Obama is out of office, we’ll just reverse it.”

That wasn’t exactly a threat, it was simply a fact. If you don’t enlist the Senate and 220 year-old legal processes, you effectively have nothing but a wink and a smile. Then, yes, it is easy to undo as the wind blows. Now why the Senate and Congress didn’t stop this wink, withhold funds, or impeach the President for subverting law and Congressional authority is another matter: the only thing here is that there was no legal agreement, widely reported by all parties in the public media, so what is Trump really cancelling? Something that never existed except in the news?

We have law for a reason and this is what happens when you don’t follow it, but after not following it for 100 or more years, everyone forgets. This ain’t rocket science, folks. You want an Iran deal? Pass one.

 

 

Feb 142015
 
 February 14, 2015  Posted by at 10:49 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  2 Responses »


William Henry Jackson Camp wagon on a Texas roundup 1901

Nuclear Specter Redux: ‘Threat of War Is Higher than in the Cold War’ (Spiegel)
Ukraine Right Sector Leader Rejects Peace Deal, Vows ‘To Continue War’ (RT)
Yes, Yellen Can Have It All as She Gets Ready to Raise Rates (Bloomberg)
One Hundred Years of Austerity (Bloomberg)
Greek Government Doesn’t Hold Out Much Hope For A Deal On Monday (Kathimerini)
Hopes Of Greek Debt Deal Rise (Guardian)
Dijsselbloem ‘Pessimistic’ About A Quick Deal With Greece (AFP)
GDP Growth Masks A Broken Eurozone (Guardian)
White House Warns Europe On Greek Showdown (AEP)
Don’t Make Us Do It: ECB Wants a Political Deal on Greece (Bloomberg)
Rising Deposit Outflows Behind Extra Greek Bank ELA Access (Reuters)
Most Of Greek Deposit Outflows To Return If A Deal Is Made (Kathimerini)
Band-Aids for Greece, Ukraine and Global Economy (El-Erian)
Inside The Germans’ Debt Psyche – What Makes Them Tick? (BBC)
Yanis Varoufakis: ‘If I Weren’t Scared, I’d Be Awfully Dangerous’ (Guardian)
Yanis Varoufakis, Greek Bailout Foe (BBC)
US Will Not Become Energy Independent: Total CEO (CNBC)
Russian Gas To Europe Can Be 35% Cheaper: Ministry (RT)
Falling Oil Prices Don’t Scare Russian Energy Firms (CNBC)
German Coal Imports From Russia Highest Since 2006 (RT)
Argentina President Fernandez Charged in Probe of Alleged Cover-Up (Bloomberg)
Farmland Values in Parts of Midwest Fall for First Time in Decades (WSJ)
The Super-Rich Don’t Care About Us. It Will Be Their Downfall (Guardian)

Trust has been eroded to the point of almost being destroyed,” said Nunn. “You got a war going on right in the middle of Europe.”

Nuclear Specter Redux: ‘Threat of War Is Higher than in the Cold War’ (Spiegel)

Deep mistrust has developed between the West and Russia, and it is having a massive effect on cooperation on security matters. In November 2014, the Russians announced that they would boycott the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit in the United States. In December, the US Congress voted, for the first time in 25 years, not to approve funding to safeguard nuclear materials in the Russian Federation. A few days later, the Russians terminated cooperation in almost all aspects of nuclear security. The two sides had cooperated successfully for almost two decades. But that is now a thing of the past. Instead, Russia and the United States are investing giant sums of money to modernize their nuclear arsenals, and NATO recently announced that it was rethinking its nuclear strategy.

At the same time, risky encounters between Eastern and Western troops, especially in the air, are becoming more and more common, a report by the European Leadership Network (ELN) recently concluded. “Civilian pilots don’t know how to deal with this,” explains ELN Chair Des Browne, a former British defense minister. “One of these incidents could easily escalate. We need to find a mechanism in which we can talk at the highest level.” Brown, together with Ivanov and former US Senator Sam Nunn, the grandfather of international disarmament policy, published an analysis last week. The trio recommends “that reliable communication channels exist in the event of serious incidents.” In other words, these channels currently do not exist.

Recently Philip Breedlove, the head of NATO Allied Command Operations in Europe, even called for a new “red telephone,” alluding to the direct teletype connection established in 1963 between the United States and the Soviet Union after the Cuban missile crisis. A direct line had been set up between NATO and the Russian military’s general staff in February 2013, but it was cut as a result of the Ukraine crisis. “Trust has been eroded to the point of almost being destroyed,” said Nunn. “You got a war going on right in the middle of Europe. You got a breakdown of the conventional forces treaty, you got the INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) treaty under great strain, you got tactical nuclear weapons all over Europe. It’s a very dangerous situation.”

Read more …

The narrative that will allow Kiev to keep fighting despote the ceasefire deal. And then claim innocence.

Ukraine Right Sector Leader Rejects Peace Deal, Vows ‘To Continue War’ (RT)

Ukraine’s Right Sector leader Dmitry Yarosh said his radical movement rejects the Minsk peace deal and that their paramilitary units in eastern Ukraine will continue “active fighting” according to their “own plans.” The notorious ultranationalist leader published a statement on his Facebook page Friday, saying that his radical Right Sector movement doesn’t recognize the peace deal, signed by the so-called ‘contact group’ on Thursday and agreed upon by Ukraine, France, Germany and Russia after epic 16-hour talks. Yarosh claimed that any agreement with the eastern militia, whom he calls “terrorists,” has no legal force. In his statement, Yarosh claimed that that the Minsk deal is contrary to Ukraine’s constitution, so Ukrainian citizens are not obliged to abide by it.

Thus if the army receives orders to cease military activity and withdraw heavy weaponry from the eastern regions, the Right Sector paramilitaries, who are also fighting there “reserve the right” to continue the war, he said. The Right Sector paramilitary organization continues to deploy its combat and reserve units, to train and logistically support personnel, while coordinating its activities with the military command of the Ukrainian army, paramilitary units of the Defense Ministry and the Interior Ministry, he said. The breakthrough Minsk agreement was reached on Thursday following marathon overnight negotiations between Ukraine, France, Germany and Russia, and offer hope the fighting in Eastern Ukraine may come to an end. The talks were part of a Franco-German initiative. President Hollande and Chancellor Merkel visited Kiev and Moscow before meeting the Russian and Ukrainian leaders at the negotiating table in Minsk.

Bluntly rejecting the German and French initiative, Yarosh said President Petro Poroshenko should have turned to the US or UK which “observe a consistent anti-Kremlin policy.” “This could be devastating for the whole agreement,” Lode Vanoost, a former OSCE security consultant, told RT. “It could destroy it before it even starts. Now the fact that they announced it already one day ahead could of course mean that they sort of tried to force some kind of provocation so that the other side would react giving them an excuse to go on. But nevertheless this is indeed a very dangerous situation, yes.” [..] In July last year Interpol put Right Sector leader Yarosh on its wanted list.

Read more …

Anyone still thinking she won’t do it?

Yes, Yellen Can Have It All as She Gets Ready to Raise Rates (Bloomberg)

As the job market gains steam, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen faces a massive challenge to adjust her monetary levers just right: She wants to keep the recovery going without stoking a bubble or spurring inflation. It’s a delicate balance that has bedeviled many central bank chiefs in the past. A dramatic drop in U.S. bond yields over the past year might be just what Yellen needs to strike that balance, according to two International Monetary Fund economists. “Having long-term rates at relatively low levels may actually give the Fed more degrees of freedom,” Nigel Chalk and Jarkko Turunen wrote in a blog post Thursday. That’s because low long-term government bond yields would act as a cushion to the Fed raising short-term rates (specifically, by supporting the housing sector). In other words, Yellen would be able to start tightening without having to worry as much about hobbling the economic recovery.

The IMF economists’ point runs counter to some of the prevailing wisdom. The depression of long-term yields was a well-known source of concern for former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, who called it a “conundrum” in testimony to Congress in 2005. Many say borrowing costs got too low in the mid-2000s, prompting people and businesses to take on too much debt. That all came crashing down in the form of the 2008 global financial meltdown. Credit is, once again, strikingly cheap. By the end of January, the yield on 10-year Treasury notes had fallen to the lowest since May 2013 (since the end of last month, the gauge has ticked slightly ticked back up). It’s strange because the U.S. economy has regained its status as the main engine of the world economy and analysts expect the Fed to soon start raising rates. The IMF economists note that the so-called term premium – the extra yield investors demand for holding long-term debt over short-term paper – has actually turned negative.

What’s driving this demand for long-term bonds? Chalk and Turunen offer several explanations. It’s possible that low inflation expectations are causing bondholders to require less compensation in the form of higher yields. With major risks ranging from instability in Ukraine to Greece and the Middle East, investors might be running to the safety of U.S. debt. Other reasons could include the recent strength of the U.S. dollar, according to the authors. The real risk is what happens when long-term yields head in the other direction – as occurred in 2013, when then-Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke mused about ending bond purchases sooner than investors expected. The resulting surge in mortgage rates and capital flight from emerging markets came to be known as the “taper tantrum.” “What we should be watching out for is the economic and financial stability fallout that could unfold if U.S. yields snap back upwards in a sudden and unexpected manner,” according to the IMF staff members.

Read more …

“”If every similar state saves at the same time by cutting spending, the result is the shrinkage of everyone’s economy since they are one another’s trading partners..”

One Hundred Years of Austerity (Bloomberg)

People have been preaching austerity for a very long time. Ancient Greek philosophers, Jesus’s disciples, Benjamin Franklin—they’re all part of a chorus of voices over the centuries who’ve warned us against the dangers of debt and profligate spending. Fiscal austerity, though, is a modern invention. It wasn’t until after World War I that governments started making serious efforts to address debt and other problems by cutting their spending. One reason is that, until the early 20th century, most countries had such small budgets that there wasn’t much to cut. (The U.S. federal budget on the eve of World War I equalled about 2.5% of the national economy; now, it’s around 20%, and that in turn is much lower than the figure in some other countries.)

Nowadays, fiscal austerity is often associated with the IMF, which has required budget cutting as a condition for bailouts in scores of troubled economies. In other cases, though, governments have embraced austerity for reasons of their own, such as fighting inflation or repaying foreign debt. Some of these efforts—such as Germany’s and Japan’s in the 1930s and Romania’s in the 1980s—were catastrophic failures. Elsewhere, the record has been less clear-cut. The British are still debating the impact of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s budget cuts in the early 1980s. Some countries have recovered fairly quickly after taking IMF-prescribed austerity medicine, while others suffered prolonged economic misery.

Muddying the picture still further, the IMF usually requires structural economic reforms, such as deregulating industries and labor markets, in addition to budget austerity. That, along with such other factors as interest-rate changes and currency devaluations, makes it harder to gauge the effect of austerity. The euro zone debt crisis adds a new wrinkle to the story. Countries pursuing austerity programs frequently have devalued their currencies, which can help spur growth as exports become more competitive. But Greece and other bailed-out European economies can’t devalue, because they’re part of a shared currency.

Mark Blyth, a Brown University professor who has written a book on the history of austerity, warns that it is a “dangerous idea.” The biggest danger, he writes, comes “when everyone tries it at once,” as happened when Japan and Germany cut spending during a global depression. Europe’s recent debt crisis is another example, Blyth contends. “If every similar state saves at the same time by cutting spending, the result is the shrinkage of everyone’s economy since they are one another’s trading partners and sources of income. Perversely, their debt goes up, not down, relative to their shrinking GDP.”

Read more …

“Some members, such as Energy Minister Panayiotis Lafazanis have been adamant that the government should stick to its pre-election pledges.”

Greek Government Doesn’t Hold Out Much Hope For A Deal On Monday (Kathimerini)

Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras chaired a meeting of his cabinet on Friday night to brief ministers on the state of talks with the eurozone but also to assess his own room for maneuver ahead of Monday’s Eurogroup. With the possibility of the government having to make a compromise with the eurozone over the way forward in the next few days, Tsipras was eager to assess the mood of his cabinet. Some members, such as Energy Minister Panayiotis Lafazanis have been adamant that the government should stick to its pre-election pledges. Overall, the government is not holding out much hope for a solution in Brussels on Monday.

“There have been some positive steps but there is a lot of ground that has to be covered,” said a government source. Sources also insisted that the Greek government would not be willing to back down from its position on certain issues such as labor regulations, privatizations and the lowering of the primary surplus target. Athens believes that the two sides can find common ground on issues like public administration reform, improving tax collection and tackling corruption.

Read more …

I don’t think so.

Hopes Of Greek Debt Deal Rise (Guardian)

Greek stock markets have rallied on growing confidence that Athens will reach a deal with its international creditors next week. In the runup to a meeting of eurozone finance ministers on Monday, the new Greek prime minister’s office vowed to do “whatever we can” to come to an agreement over a new support programme for the bailed-out country. Talks between eurozone ministers this week failed to make progress in resolving a standoff over the desire by Greece’s new leftist government to ditch the strict terms of its €240bn bailout programme and the insistence from other eurozone countries, most notably Germany, that the old framework should continue. But on Friday, the new prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, appeared to soften his stance. He agreed that Greek officials would meet representatives of the troika of lenders who supplied the bailout money and imposed and policed the terms that came with it.

Previously, Greece’s finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, said the new government would refuse to engage with representatives of troika, made up of the ECB, the EC and the IMF. A government spokesman said Greece was straining to get the pieces in place for a deal on Monday, but he also sought to play down fears time was running out to avert a fresh crisis in the eurozone that would see Greece defaulting on the bailout programme and being forced to leave the single currency. “We will do whatever we can so that a deal is found on Monday,” Gabriel Sakellaridis told Greece’s Skai TV. “If we don’t have an agreement on Monday, we believe that there is always time so that there won’t be a problem.”

Read more …

Dijsselbloem has been the worst factor in all this. Expect him to be ousted soon.

Dijsselbloem ‘Pessimistic’ About A Quick Deal With Greece (AFP)

Eurogroup president Jeroen Dijsselbloem said Friday he was pessimistic about making progress on resolving a bitter row over extending Greeces bailout at an upcoming meeting of eurozone finance ministers. “At this stage I’m very pessimistic about it,” Dijsselbloem told the NOS public broadcaster when asked whether he thought concrete steps will be taken on Monday at the talks between Greece and its fellow single currency countries in the Eurogroup. “The Greeks have sky-high ambitions. The possibilities, given the state of the Greek economy, are limited,” said Dijsselbloem, who is the Dutch finance minister, ahead of a cabinet meeting on Friday. “I don’t know if we’ll get there by Monday.” Dijsselbloem and Greek PM Alexis Tsipras agreed on Thursday to renew efforts to find a solution on extending Greeces current bailout after talks overnight Wednesday collapsed acrimoniously.

An agreement however was reached to ask “institutions to engage with Greek authorities to start work on a technical assessment of the common ground between the current programme and the Greek government’s plans,” Dijsselbloem tweeted after the meeting. The agreement was made to help discussions set to take place Monday, seen by many as the last chance to seal a deal before Greeces current bailout programme expires at the end of the month. Dijsselbloem however on Friday blasted Greece, saying Athens “for a number of months now has received no loans from Europe, because nothing’s happening.” “We only lend out money when theres real progress and when new reforms are being carried through. For months this has not been the case,” Dijsselbloem said.

“It really is up to the Greek government to take the firsts steps,” he said. Failure to reach a deal on an extension of the bailout or a credit line for Greece by the end of the month means Athens would quickly default and almost inevitably crash out of the eurozone. European sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity said Wednesday’s eurozone ministers’ meeting had descended into a “total mess”, making a reconciliation between Dijsselbloem and Tsipras necessary to prepare the talks for Monday. Dijsselbloem said: “The Greek government has made it clear that they don’t want to carry on with the programme as it currently stands.” “The Eurogroup has made it clear that there are only possibilities for change as long as the programme remains on the rails.”

Read more …

Too much difference between Gernamy and Greece: “Look beyond the figures and the chatter of ivory tower policymakers..”

GDP Growth Masks A Broken Eurozone (Guardian)

Frankfurt’s stock market has reached a new high, topping 11,000 for the first time. According to the latest eurozone GDP figures, Germany enjoyed strong GDP growth in the last three months of the year and helped push expansion across the currency bloc to 0.3% for the quarter and 0.9% for the year. In Portugal and Spain, the headline growth figures improved. Even Italy beat analysts’ expectations after it avoided a decline. So the recovery is real. In fact, say the eurozone’s top policymakers, it’s all going so well the new Greek government should open its eyes and see the warm, golden glow of sunshine appearing on the horizon. Jens Weidmann, the head of the German central bank, was in London on Thursday evening and joined the chorus of top officials bemoaning those who believe the eurozone is entering a long period of Japan-like stagnation.

He urged the Greeks to stop opposing the austerity measures imposed by Brussels and accept wage cuts that have already brought an increase in competitiveness. No doubt the 0.2% fall in Greek GDP in the fourth quarter will be cast as a temporary blip and a lesson that political uncertainty has unhelpful economic consequences. Investors also believe the upbeat story, hence the soaring Frankfurt stock market. The promise of a huge stimulus package from the ECB (which Weidmann believes is unnecessary, such is his confidence) and the fall in value of the euro it has precipitated, when combined with the vast European bailouts funds now available, have convinced global investment funds that Europe is a one-way bet. Look beyond the figures and the chatter of ivory tower policymakers and you will find the story is radically different. Yes, Spain is growing. But its GDP growth in 2014 has made up only around half of its losses in 2013.

It is still an economy in need of major investment to get back on its feet. Unemployment remains at disturbingly high levels and the state is held in contempt in many quarters. Why else would the radical anti-austerity Podemos party be polling ahead of all the established parties at the moment, and its leader be writing in praise of Tsipras (and the Catalonia independence movement still be in full swing)? Weidmann said the policies of austerity he supported would work slowly but staying the course was important. To him, a lost generation of young workers, who were denied skilled training and out of work for several years, is a matter for individual countries. He cannot see that sovereign states under the current arrangements are denied the funds to invest and improve productivity over the longer term. He cannot see that austerity, if only for this reason, is self-defeating.

Read more …

“They have asymmetric rules. They need to make it socially fairer..”

White House Warns Europe On Greek Showdown (AEP)

Washington blames Europe for the lack of global recovery and is losing its patience with EMU creditor states that fail to pull their weight The Obama administration has leapt to the defence of Greece, warning Germany and Europe’s creditor powers that they must meet Athens half-way to avert a potentially dangerous rupture and a euro break-up. Caroline Atkinson, the US deputy-national security adviser, said the eurozone authorities had imposed the main burden of adjustment on the weaker deficit states and should do more to accept their share of responsibility for the euro crisis. “They have asymmetric rules. They need to make it socially fairer,” she said. “It is important for creditors to take into account that Greece has had a very sharp drop in incomes, real wages, and output as well as a big rise in unemployment,” she told a gathering at Chatham House in London.

“Greece has moved into primary surplus. How much more fiscal consolidation is necessary?” she said. The comment will be music to the ears of Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, who wants a cut in the EU-IMF Troika target for the primary surplus to 1.5pc of GDP from 3pc this year and 4.5pc next year. Mrs Atkinson said the White House is relieved that “both sides” are starting to pull back from the brink, a clear warning that Washington is just as exasperated with the high-handed approach of eurozone creditors as it is with the leftist Syriza government in Athens. “We believe it is strongly in the interests of the Greek people and Europe more generally that Greece and its creditors work out a compromise for Greece to stay in the euro and thrive in the euro,” she said.

The two sides have toned down the rhetoric slightly and agreed to start technical talks but each is in a different cognitive universe on the core dispute over austerity and debt relief. The US administration does not share the widespread view in Europe that there is little risk of contagion if the European Central Bank cuts off liquidity support for the Greek banking system and forces the country out of the euro. President Barack Obama has seized on the Greek crisis to push for a broader reflation strategy in Europe. “You cannot keep on squeezing countries that are in the midst of depression. At some point there has to be a growth strategy in order for them to pay off their debts,” he said earlier this month.

Read more …

Draghi doesn’t like being accused of taking political decisions. Even though he’s taken many already.

Don’t Make Us Do It: ECB Wants a Political Deal on Greece (Bloomberg)

The European Central Bank is sending a message to the euro-area’s leaders: don’t make us pull the trigger on Greece’s banks. After the Frankfurt-based ECB blessed the expansion of so-called Emergency Liquidity Assistance to the debt-stricken country’s lenders by about €5 billion euros on Thursday, officials are insisting that continued support is contingent on political talks over Greece’s bailout. Greek stocks and bonds rallied Friday, after PM Alexis Tsipras hinted at progress. The ECB does not want to be pushed into a position where it is making decisions on the future of the Greek banking system – and the country’s membership of the euro – without political cover from European capitals.

If talks on a “bridge” financing deal for Greece break down again, ECB President Mario Draghi will have to weigh whether to ration funds further or threaten a veto, just as he did in Cyprus two years ago. “Ending ELA would be a very last-resort type of intervention, paramount to a nuclear option,” said Henrik Enderlein at the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin. “The ECB would never really want to use it, as it is basically the same as pushing Greece out of the euro area.” ELA is funding provided by national central banks at their own risk, and is extended against lower-quality collateral than the ECB itself will accept.

Greece’s lenders now have access to about €65 billion in such funds, according to a euro-area central bank official. The expansion from €60 billion euros was reported Thursday by German newspaper FAZ. Tsipras said yesterday that his government aims to reach a six-month bridge agreement leading to a “new contract” with international creditors. In 2012, as Greece stumbled toward its second international rescue and a debt-writedown, banks ran up a tab of as much as €158 billion euros in local central bank and ECB funding. That suggests the ECB will allow a much greater extension of the emergency line, as long as politicians are seen as being on the path to agreement.

Read more …

More political decisions by an allegedly ‘neutral’ central bank. First cut them off, then feed them bite-sized carrots.

Rising Deposit Outflows Behind Extra Greek Bank ELA Access (Reuters)

The ECB allowed Greek banks access to extra emergency financing from the Bank of Greece because deposit outflows have picked up and to make sure they have liquidity while tense talks take place in Brussels next week, Greek banking sources said on Friday. The ECB on Thursday raised the cap on what Greek banks can get from the Bank of Greece through the Emergency Liquidity Assistance (ELA) window by about €5 billion to €65 billion. The extension will run until Feb. 18 when the ECB Governing Council will reappraise the situation. One banking source said that there was a mix of reasons for the action. “Some banks likely needed to tap more ELA,” said the senior banker at one of the country’s four top banks. “(But) I believe the ECB wanted to allow some headroom, liquidity comfort until Feb. 18.”

He said recent daily outflows were in the region of €300 million to €500 million on average. Another executive at a big bank cited a similar figure. “Outflows continued this week, the situation showed a deterioration in the last days,” he said. “When you see €400-500 million of outflows a day, this shows a developing trend.” He added that outflows may have gone as high €1 billion on some days. Euro zone finance ministers will meet in Brussels on Monday in an attempt to forge a deal which will allow for Greek funding over a period in which Greece’s large debt will be renegotiated. Failure to reach a deal before the end of February, when Greece’s current bailout ends, could lead to Greece being ejected from the euro zone – hence the nervousness of Greek banks and depositors.

Read more …

The outflow problem isn’t all that bad.

Most Of Greek Deposit Outflows To Return If A Deal Is Made (Kathimerini)

The bulk of deposits withdrawn from Greek bank accounts in the last two-and-a-half months due to political and financial uncertainty has stayed inside the country, stashed away in safe deposit boxes, mattresses and investment products. Banks estimate that only a small part, about 20%, of the funds that came out of depositors’ accounts has been sent to banks abroad. As banks sources have stressed, if the government agrees terms with its creditors next week, confirming the European course of the country and putting an end to uncertainty, most of the €20 billion that has left local banks since end-November could return, and quickly.

Bankers believe that some 50% of the deposit outflows, i.e. some €10 billion, has stayed in the country in the form of disposable cash and can be found in safe deposit boxes, mattresses etc, as many households have chosen to keep their cash at hand due to the ongoing uncertainty. Another 30%, or €6 billion, has been deposited in investment products. The 20% of deposit outflows that has gone abroad, amounting to some €4 billion, mostly concerns corporate funds and some of it has gone to subsidiaries of Greek banks in other countries, such as in Cyprus, Great Britain, Luxembourg, Malta, etc.

Read more …

The purpose behind all this is more centralization, and that will cause ever stronger reactions.

Band-Aids for Greece, Ukraine and Global Economy (El-Erian)

This week, three sets of meetings sought to defuse three distinct threats to the global economy. All of the gatherings featured suspenseful atmospheres, dramatic posturing and some public tantrums. And their outcomes were similar, too: The participants ended up just buying time, without doing much, if anything, to begin to address the underlying causes of the unfolding crises. In the first instance, President Francois Hollande of France and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany traveled to Minsk on Wednesday to compel the Russian and Ukrainian presidents to stem the escalating violence in eastern Ukraine that has claimed about 5,000 lives. After a tough all-night negotiation session, they agreed Thursday to a cease-fire to take effect this weekend.

Earlier Wednesday, the finance ministers of the euro zone countries gathered in Brussels to try to find common ground on Greece. After seven hours of discussions, they weren’t even able to settle on a road map for future negotiations. But with both their finance ministers playing tough and signaling seemingly unbridgeable negotiating positions, Merkel and the newly elected prime minister of Greece, Alexis Tsipras, were subsequently able to show leadership and be “presidential.” On Thursday, both declared themselves willing to compromise, providing much needed political cover for the finance ministers’ negotiations that are set to resume Monday (preceded by technical preparations starting today).

Earlier in the week, some of those ministers had joined their central bank colleagues in Istanbul for a meeting of the Group of 20. The agenda included policy actions to strengthen a global economy that, with the exception of the U.S., has been losing steam. In their communiques, they reaffirmed prior commitments and renewed their encouragement of central banks to continue pursuing unconventional monetary policies. Yes, some progress was made in all three meetings, but they mainly just kicked the can down the road. At best, they were holding operations that risk resulting in failure if they aren’t quickly supplemented by more comprehensive agreements.

Read more …

It’s not the 1920’s.

Inside The Germans’ Debt Psyche – What Makes Them Tick? (BBC)

Germany is the world’s fourth largest economy, the beating heart of the eurozone and guardian of financial discipline. So when it comes to money – and especially debt – what makes Germans tick? The election of Greece’s left-wing government on a promise to reduce the country’s mountain of debt has created a standoff with Europe’s economic powerhouse. And it has thrown Germany’s ultra-conservative attitude to debt into sharp focus. Germany’s extreme debt aversion is even rooted in the German language itself, says Prof Marcel Fratzscher, head of Germany’s leading Economic Research Institute. “The German word for debt – ‘schuld’ – is the same as the German word for ‘guilt’,” he explains. “To get into debt you have done something bad and that describes the German people’s attitude quite well.”

The German way is to “save now, have later” rather than “have now, pay later” – and that is not just the older generation talking. On the streets of Berlin young Germans told us what they would do if they won a million euros. A new car, a holiday, a new outfit? “I would save it for when I need it,” came a typical reply. That habit of saving money is the key to understanding another characteristic of Germans – fear of inflation. Popular wisdom says that this is due to the scars left by hyperinflation in the 1920s, when the exchange rate escalated out of control. One US dollar went from being worth four Deutschmarks to four trillion. There may be some residual echoes of that period but it is nearly 90 years ago now and Germans have moved on. The real reason is to be found in the German love of saving.

Inflation is the enemy of savers. So for a nation full of them, the idea of lowering interest rates and printing money holds a double threat – it reduces the rate you get on your savings, while any potential future inflation would mean that those same savings allow you to buy less. The good news for Germany is that inflation hasn’t arrived and, although interest rates are low, the related weakness of the euro has kept German exports like cars and machinery competitively priced. Indeed education, engineering and exporting success is the source of considerable German pride. Economists credit the post-war economic miracle – or “Wirtschaftswunder” – to a set of crucial, interlocking principles[..]

Read more …

“We constantly hear, ‘if you don’t sign on the dotted line there is going to be Armageddon’. My answer is ‘let it happen!’

Yanis Varoufakis: ‘If I Weren’t Scared, I’d Be Awfully Dangerous’ (Guardian)

In the space of three short weeks, he’s been christened Europe’s man of the moment, compared to heroes great and small, likened to a rock star, hailed as a sex icon, feted by fashionistas, and in Germany, no less, portrayed as the greatest action man to bestride planet earth since Bruce Willis set Hollywood alight in Die Hard 6. Few have had their demeanour and dress code so dissected; when he posed with George Osborne in Downing Street, his tieless, leather-jacketed look standing in stark contrast to the Chancellor’s, the press was as breathless as if a supermodel had blown in. “Britain,” declared no less venerable an authority than the Daily Telegraph, “is crying out for a politician who looks like Yanis Varoufakis. It’s quite a change in lifestyle. Has it gone to his head? The response is immediate. “I can assure you, Helena, I did not engineer it in any way. I am not promoting it. They go on about me riding a bike, but I have been riding a bike since I was 15. I just am who I am.” [..]

Even by the standards of those who have occupied the sixth floor of the finance ministry before, Varoufakis’ tenure comes at an unusually onerous time. With the country’s €240bn bailout – the biggest in global history – set to expire at the end of February, and the Greek electorate having overwhelmingly rejected austerity, Greece is at a crossroads. In a climate of high-octane pressure – though her language was more emollient, the German chancellor Angela Merkel showed little sign this week of giving in anytime soon – the possibility of political blunder, or accident, grows with each day. Athens owes some €25bn in repayments, this year alone, and what is certain is that it does not have that kind of money. When I ask Varoufakis if he has a plan B, for all negotiators surely have a credible alternative, he looks at me wide-eyed. “We constantly hear, ‘if you don’t sign on the dotted line there is going to be Armageddon’. My answer is ‘let it happen!’ There is no fall-back plan. That is my plan B. ”

What if it does happen, I ask, as images of the chaos bankruptcy would surely entail flicker across my mind. “Well, that is like asking me what happens if a comet strikes planet Earth. I have no idea. None!” he shoots back. Varoufakis is the first to say that no one should grow too fond of power. He has no desire to be on the sixth floor of the finance ministry longer than necessary. He has dispensed with the policemen assigned to protect him, the army of advisers that come with the job (let go to make way for the rehiring of the ministry’s sacked women cleaners), and each of the three cars deployed to him. If he lost the job, he says, he wouldn’t mind. “When interlocutors threaten me with the fall of this government, because they do, I say: ‘Make my day,’” he smiles. “I mean, I really don’t want to be in this office … I will go back to my book about Europe, which is half-finished. It’s very difficult to find an ending when I am still in this job.”

Read more …

“Simple logic dictates that if you cannot even conceive the possibility of leaving a negotiation, then it is preferable never to enter one..”

Yanis Varoufakis, Greek Bailout Foe (BBC)

Greece’s left-wing Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis is leading the offensive to persuade the nation’s creditors to end austerity and forgive part of its debt. Mr Varoufakis, 53, is not only a well-respected political economist, but a charismatic man and natural charmer. A few weeks after his appointment, he has become something of a global celebrity. That is hardly surprising for Greeks – after all, Mr Varoufakis got more votes than any other candidate in the 25 January general election that swept the leftist Syriza party into power. In the wake of victory he immediately embarked on a European tour that took him to London, Paris, Rome and Berlin. The sight of a shaven-headed, athletic minister refusing to tuck his shirt into his trousers or wear a tie – even while visiting 11 Downing Street – fascinated business reporters, fashion editors and gossip columnists.

Even the German media – among Greece’s sternest critics – seemed impressed. ZDF television anchor Marietta Slomka said “he is someone you could imagine starring in a film like Die Hard 6”, and conservative daily Die Welt ran the headline “What makes Yanis Varoufakis a sex icon”. In his home country, a new word was coined – “Varoufitses” – to describe women who idolise Mr Varoufakis. At the time of writing, Mr Varoufakis had 128,000 Twitter followers, a number of devoted fan pages on Facebook, and he has inspired a video game “Syrizaman Vs Troika”. His eurozone colleagues may not find him quite so charming. In his first meeting with them on 11 February he refused to approve a common statement by the Eurogroup that implied Athens would seek an extension of its bailout. “Simple logic dictates that if you cannot even conceive the possibility of leaving a negotiation, then it is preferable never to enter one,” he wrote in a blog entry back in May 2010.

Mr Varoufakis showed signs of defiance and non-conformism from a very early age. That includes deliberately misspelling his name Yanis, writing it with only one “n” since elementary school. “I had an aesthetic problem with the double “n”,” he said. “So I decided to write my name with one. My teacher gave me a bad grade, which made me very angry and I’ve kept writing my name with one “n” ever since.” Mr Varoufakis was born on 24 March 1961 in Athens. He is a graduate of the Moraitis private school, which has nurtured many members of Greece’s political and economic elite. His father, 89-year-old Giorgos Varoufakis, is chairman of Halyvourgiki, a Greek industrial giant. This background of relative privilege did not prevent Mr Varoufakis from becoming a libertarian Marxist, who has said that “Karl Marx was responsible for framing my perspective of the world we live in, from my childhood to this day”.

Read more …

So let’s put that myth to rest.

US Will Not Become Energy Independent: Total CEO (CNBC)

Despite the so-called U.S. shale revolution and American aspirations for energy independence, the CEO of major oil giant Total told CNBC he was not convinced it would happen any time soon. “The U.S. is still relying on oil from the Middle East. It is not true the U.S. will be independent in oil – they continue to import,” Patrick Pouyanne, the new chief executive of French oil giant Total, told CNBC this week. He stressed that the U.S. “will not get” energy independence because it still consumes far more oil than it produces. “For me, the world today is interdependent. This idea that you could be (energy) independent – especially when you are the U.S., where you have many world companies; a country that is probably benefiting the most from the globalization of the world – is just something that is strange to me, I don’t believe in that,” Pouyanne added.

Oil prices have fallen dramatically in recent months – and at one point were down around 60% from highs in June 2014, on the back of a glut in supply and lack of global demand. Brent crude is currently trading around $59 a barrel and U.S. crude is at $51. OPEC has been blamed for the volatility in prices after it refused to cut production to support the cost of oil. Many saw its inaction as a bid to retain market share in the face of increased competition from U.S. shale oil producers. American oil production has grown steadily from 5 million barrels per day in 2005 to 8.6 million last year, according to the U.S. Energy information Administration.

If OPEC was hoping a low oil price would put the brakes on U.S. oil production, it might have worked. Some 87 rigs were deactivated in the week ending February 6, according to oilfield services company Baker Hughes, after a drop of 90 rigs over the previous seven days. It marks the largest absolute reduction in a single week since Baker Hughes started keeping records in 1987. But Pouyanne said that, despite anger from some at OPEC’s “game of chicken,” the U.S. was still a major oil importer and its economy was benefitting from a lower oil price.

Read more …

“The average price of Russian gas supplied abroad will be $222 per 1,000 cubic meters in 2015. It could mean a 35% price cut for Gazprom supplied gas to Europe..”

Russian Gas To Europe Can Be 35% Cheaper: Ministry (RT)

The average price of Russian gas supplied abroad will be $222 per 1,000 cubic meters in 2015. It could mean a 35% price cut for Gazprom supplied gas to Europe, the Russian Ministry of Economic Development has forecast. The price for Russian gas started to decline last year, as the contract price for Gazprom supplies are directly linked to falling oil prices, according to Vedomosti. Gas prices respond to the dynamics of oil prices with a lag of 6-9 months. In summer 2014 the company expected $350 per 1,000 cubic meters, in the end the average turned out to be $341, while the price of Brent in the second half of 2014 lost more than 50%. Next week, the management of Gazprom plans to present to the board of directors stress tests of a financial plan with an oil price of $40 and $50 per barrel based on the Ministry’s forecast.

Gazprom is expected to increase supplies to Europe to 160 billion cubic meters compared to 146.6 billion in 2015. At the same time revenue will decrease by $14.3 billion to $35.5 billion if the ministry’s prediction comes true. However, the figures may change in a planned outlook revision in April and September; Vedomosti say citing the ministry. Gazprom’s sales to Europe accounted for almost 70% of company revenues in 2014. In recent years, the average price in the EU, according to calculations by Vedomosti, was 5 to 14% higher than the overall average sales price. However, $222 per 1,000 cubic meters may be unprofitable for Gazprom in view of growing production costs, said Michael Krutikhin a partner at RusEnergy, as quoted by Vedomosti.

Read more …

“..at $110 oil and 33 rubles to the U.S. dollar, Russian upstream free cash flow for the companies his group covered was roughly the same as now, with oil near $60 and 60 rubles per U.S. dollar.”

Falling Oil Prices Don’t Scare Russian Energy Firms (CNBC)

Low oil prices are hurting the Russian state as tax revenue tumbles along with crude. But Russia’s energy firms aren’t feeling the same pain, and they may in fact weather the cheap oil storm better than their international peers. Experts point to two major factors helping the companies in a low-price environment: Moscow’s tax rate on producers shifts lower as the price of oil falls (meaning the cost is mostly borne by the state), and most of the oil companies’ expenses are denominated in rubles. Together, those factors largely offset any negative impact from oil prices, Goldman Sachs energy analyst Geydar Mamedov wrote in a recent note.

The currency point is key: Russian energy companies’ expenditures are largely conducted in rubles because there is a strong local oilfield services sector, and their revenues are dollar-denominated. So as the Russian currency has fallen against the dollar, the firms have been nearly totally insulated from oil’s price decline. “In the short term, there is definitely a natural buffer built into the system through the ruble,” Ildar Davletshin, Renaissance Capital oil and gas analyst, told CNBC. “The ruble has halved over the past 12 months; that’s a natural hedge against weak oil prices.” Mamedov noted that at $110 oil and 33 rubles to the U.S. dollar, Russian upstream free cash flow for the companies his group covered was roughly the same as now, with oil near $60 and 60 rubles per U.S. dollar.

Meanwhile, while many international oil companies outside Russia are cutting back on production, Mamedov wrote that he does not expect to see a slowdown in Russian upstream activity. (Russian refiners, on the other hand, could take a hit because of how the tax scheme works). In fact, Goldman predicts that Russian production will increase to 532 million tonnes in 2015 from 527 million tonnes in 2014. Despite those short-term positives, Davletshin said he “wouldn’t be too optimistic” in the medium or long term. Local costs may catch up with the currency differentials as inflation accelerates, and sanctions are hurting the companies by depriving them of international technology-sharing opportunities, he explained. “I’m not saying Russia cannot move on its own, but it will take longer,” he said.

Read more …

Germany only plays green.

German Coal Imports From Russia Highest Since 2006 (RT)

Germany imported more than 12 million tons of coal from Russia in 2014 – the biggest volume in 9 years, despite calls for energy independence and a switch to renewables. Coal imports from Russia increased 6.6% in 2014, at 12.6 million metric tons, Germany’s Federal Statistics Office reported Friday. This is about a third of the country s total coal imports. At a time when geopolitical relations between the two countries are strained, Germany continues to pump money into a country that the US and other European countries are bent on economically isolating. Poland, also a Moscow naysayer, is Russia’s second biggest coal importer in the EU. Another country that had sworn off Russian coal, but ended up buying the cheap energy to heat homes and factories, was Ukraine. Kiev bought some 50,000 metric tons in December.

Russian coal has become even more attractive to Europeans since the ruble depreciated more than 50%, which means importers spend less dollars and euro. The devaluation of the ruble and the decline in oil prices has placed Russian thermal coal exporters among the most competitive suppliers to both the Atlantic and Pacific markets, says Diana Bacila, a coal analyst at Oslo-based Nena, an independent energy analysis firm. About 50% of German electricity comes from coal, with the rest coming from natural gas and nuclear energy. Germany is also Russia’s biggest gas client, importing over 25 billion cubic meters per year. The recently completed Nord Stream pipeline, which feeds directly from Russia to Germany, has a capacity to deliver 55 billion cubic meters of natural gas.

Read more …

This is serious.

Argentina President Fernandez Charged in Probe of Alleged Cover-Up (Bloomberg)

Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner was formally accused by a prosecutor of trying to cover up the alleged involvement of Iranian officials in the bombing of a Jewish center that killed 85 people. In a document filed to a federal court, Prosecutor Gerardo Pollicita said Fernandez, Foreign Minister Hector Timerman, lawmaker Andres Larroque and other government supporters tried to remove Iranian officials from Interpol lists in exchange for trade preferences with the Islamic republic. Pollicita’s 62-page statement was posted on the prosecutor general’s website. The charges will overshadow Fernandez’s last 10 months in office as she struggles to revive growth in South America’s second-biggest economy and repair relations with investors after last year’s default.

The accusations come one month after former prosecutor in the case, Alberto Nisman, was found dead in his apartment with a bullet to the head. Investigators have yet to determine if it was suicide or murder. “This could be a seismic change for Argentina’s political environment,” said Carl Meacham, Americas program director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “You have an economic crisis on the horizon and you marry that with a political crisis, it could be a disaster for Argentina.” Fernandez, 61, has denied the accusations against her and said last month that Nisman may have been murdered in order to sully the image of her government.

Judge Daniel Rafecas must now decide whether the evidence of a cover-up is admissible and whether to pursue the case, said Hernan Munilla Lacasa, a professor in criminal law at the Universidad Catolica Argentina in Buenos Aires. Fernandez can be called on to testify, though as president she has the right to do so in writing and not in person. Cabinet Chief Jorge Capitanich early Friday said the accusations and a march planned for Feb. 18 to commemorate Nisman’s death were part of a “judicial coup” against the president. “The Argentine people should know that we’re talking about a vulgar lie, of an enormous media operation, of a strategy of political destabilization and the biggest judicial coup d’etat in the history of Argentina to cover up for the real perpetrators of the crime,” Capitanich said at his daily press conference.

Read more …

Asset prices cannot hold.

Farmland Values in Parts of Midwest Fall for First Time in Decades (WSJ)

Farmland values declined in parts of the Midwest for the first time in decades last year, reflecting a cooling in the market driven by two years of bumper crops and sharply lower grain prices, according to Federal Reserve reports on Thursday. The average price of farmland in the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago’s district, which includes Illinois, Iowa and other big farm states, fell 3% in 2014, marking the first annual decline since 1986, the Chicago Fed said. Prices for cropland during the fourth quarter remained steady compared with the previous quarter, according to the bank’s survey of agricultural lenders, though half of all respondents said they expect farmland values to decline further in the current quarter.

In the St. Louis Fed’s district, which includes parts of Illinois, Kentucky and Arkansas, prices for “quality” farmland gained 0.8% in the fourth quarter compared with year-ago levels, despite lower crop prices and farm incomes in the region. A majority of lenders in the district expect values to cool in the current quarter compared with the first quarter of last year, reflecting reduced demand for land amid tighter profit margins for farmers. The reports spotlight an overall slowdown in the U.S. farm economy and in the appreciation of farmland prices. Crop prices had soared for much of the past decade, fueled by drought and rising demand for corn from ethanol processors and foreign importers. The gains pushed agricultural land values so high that some analysts warned of a bubble.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture projected net U.S. farm income this year would fall to $73.6 billion, the lowest since 2009, from $108 billion in 2014. Prices for corn, the biggest U.S. crop by value, have tumbled more than 50% since the summer of 2012, when they soared to record highs amid a severe U.S. drought. Growers produced the nation’s largest corn and soybeans harvests ever last autumn, helped by nearly flawless weather over much of the growing season. In the Chicago Fed district, farmland values in the latest quarter dropped in major corn-producing states like Illinois, Iowa and Indiana compared with year-ago levels, while land values in Wisconsin increased slightly and were unchanged in Michigan.

Read more …

Marie Antoinette all over again.

The Super-Rich Don’t Care About Us. It Will Be Their Downfall (Guardian)

The news this week that a bank helped wealthy customers to dodge taxes should not come as a surprise to many. The super-rich have long held some profoundly distorted ideas about the world. They are more than averagely likely to believe their achievements are the product of their superior brains and hard work. They may believe the Selfish Gene rhetoric that those with the best genes rise to the top of the pond, and at the bottom is genetic sludge. They are oblivious to any evidence to the contrary. They have no idea that had they been born on a sink estate they too would have sunk. This is partly because the super-rich are no longer exposed to data and experiences that contradict their worldview. Flitting between their various homes around the world, they know nothing of our lives.

They have never, ever had to sit on the phone waiting for the next available customer support agent – “your call really matters to us” – to not fix their phone/internet/energy bill issue. Of particular concern is that they only consume media that support their worldview. Recently, an Oxbridge-educated CEO in all seriousness told me that there has been no increase in inequality in this country. My jaw was slack with amazement when another told me that “inner London secondary pupils have the best exam results of any in the world”. They are living in the la-la land that Polly Toynbee and David Walker painstakingly exposed in their book Unjust Rewards. Consider your response to the following information. About 15,700 under-two-year-olds live in a family that is classed as homeless, according to a new report.

Homelessness adversely affects parental responsiveness, and early responsiveness has been proved to affect the capacity of the brain to process positive experiences. My response to this would be: “Since early care profoundly affects the size and content of our brains and subsequent mental health, government should act to eradicate involuntary homelessness. If Thatcher had not sold off the council housing stock this problem would be far less. A Labour government should reverse that policy.” When I put that to a super-rich man whom I know, he said: “It’s a shame there are so many babies with homeless parents but it is not the role of the state to house them. My charity does not directly address this issue but I am sure there are others that do. The role of government is to leave people like me free to create jobs which will enable those parents to earn enough to pay rent and live in decent accommodation.”

Read more …