Many People Don’t Want The World

From the point of view of a London Metrosexual like myself it’s probably not a viewpoint we even see. However many people are not interested in what happens beyond their parish. They don’t see the need for Globalised supply chains and EU or IMF. In many ways they’re not even tribal.

Continue reading “Many People Don’t Want The World”

Advertisements
Many People Don’t Want The World

Globalisation The Rant

OK what is Globalisation? I say it’s subsidy and a transfer of wealth from workers in the West to offshore tax havens. Whilst I cannot deny that workers in the 3rd world have benefited at least in terms of income and other measures they are as likely the beneficiaries of changes in policy in such places as China and India and a great deal of debt much borne by Western States and Western, Chinese and Japanese Banks but more significantly workers and corporates all over the world.

Apple’s products developed with and by the State. Yet they leave Bns offshore to avoid tax. Indeed even on shore countries like Uk and Ireland compete to flatter Corporates with absurdly low levels of Corporate taxation. You will also note how the IMF insists on privitisation a great method for offshoring companies if UK example is any guide. Debt onshored and profit offshored meaning only Govt guarantees prop up companies they sold to friends! You can argue whether tax avoidance is a subsidy but that is semantics and deliberate obfuscation of the point here.

Exports from every country are subject to subsidy whether it’s no tax on shipping and aviation fuel or Export Credit Guarantees. Zac Goldsmith pointed out how Apples in Europe were shipped to South Africa for waxing and back here to be eaten.

The scale of Non Performing Loans in China is another subsidy as the state there essentially buys up losses and keeps producing with consequent damage to the environment and Western businesses. Western Banks that lend the money to buy the constant flow of tat are subsidised and bailed out. In short the world is living beyond its means economically and environmentally. Guaranteed loans by Govt for the polluters like INEOS as the neo Liberals saved Grangemouth is more subsidy. The end result is that large corporates get free money and the state assumes the risk and quite how much capitalism goes on is a question.

Dan Hannan Tory MEP may be statistically challenged but he made a point the EU loves regulation as it is a barrier to entry and the burden falls disproportionately on smaller companies. The response to TBTF (Too Big To Fail) Banks has been to make them bigger and strap even more regulation on the smaller banks. Yet the only way economies can grow is to add even more debt £9 of debt for £1 of growth according to the unreliable Max Keiser – £6 to £1 of GDP (whatever that is) from more reliable sources about China.

In the UK this is especially dangerous as much of the private debt is secured against or borrowed on the back of property wealth. Essentially we have bid up the prices of existing housing stock and debt, and called it growth, GDP even. This has caused the extraction of rent from younger generations and what has this paid for? Further increases in debt.

I really don’t think a PhD in economics is needed to know this is not going to work for the majority of us. Indeed the only way to think it is might work is to have a PhD in neo-classical economics. Experts in a strait jacket of ideology are wrong and obviously so to even us.

Globalisation The Rant

The Chasm

There is a yawning chasm in society even ignoring the greedy Boomers. Between more highly educated who pretend that all this QE and financialisation and min wage jobs and shit pensions to come is somehow OK. That believe somehow the likes of Labour/Democratic Party are in any way progressive.  And those who know they are not and have no established representation and hence back demagogues with easy answers.

The educated fall back on a economics profession who claim Ireland’s GDP rose 26% last year and unemployment is low cos… measures. They then mock those who distrust the economics profession! A profession which peddles efficient market theory, rational expectations, equilibrium, paying myself rent for my own house as GDP etc etc. Bare in mind even then politicians ignore the more rational economists for ones who pander to their wishes.

If you want to keep voting for regressive progressive parties fine but if they keep lying on basic things such as economics with no purpose but debt for the poor and raised land prices for the wealthy don’t look down on them. They are no more wrong than Labourites Clintonites et al and from their perspective probably less so.

All the happy clappy celebrating our differences is bunk and will die overnight without a progressive economy.

The Chasm

Hodgson’s Rock Scissors Issues

Whilst France showed England how to break down Iceland with even a shit centre forward England probably would not pick competing aerially the Euros did provide another example of why knock out kick ball ain’t all that. Basically 14 teams played Rock by default and 2 played scissors. How’d that work out for England and Belgium?

England were probably the worst set up with 5 small forwards many not of the ability to trap a ball quickly (yes you Daniel) nor with the aerial combativity required nor the pace to kill. Quite how England hoped to break teams down is a mystery. In qualifying despite qualms they managed 79 shots in 3 games but against the Rock of Iceland ran out of ideas by 55 minutes. Although had they even had a replacement level keeper they might have gone through. Hart managed to concede 4 goals on 6 or 7 shots? It will be interesting if the only person in football who apparently does not know Hart cannot dive left is Roy Hodgson? Statistically England had enough on expected goals to win that game too.

In fairness to judge the state of English football off 4 games or so every 2 years is preposterous. Do we want to win like Portugal? They won one game all tournament. In the end Hodgson’s ignoring of Hart, Wilshere & Sterling’s recent form probably more than tactics bit him. Bringing Milner not Vardy on at 1-0 v Russia oddly Italian thinking. Overall Hodgson’s reign has been a positive but in the end I think he over estimated his players and was blind to their weaknesses. You don’t need super players and the bar for having 1 super player never mind deploying 4 as though they were is higher. None of his squad is World 23 or even 46, 69 or 92 even?

What the continued pimping of Wilshere, Sterling and Hart, not to mention the bizarre promotion of Rashford, did show is that like the rest of the world coming up from the right schools and flowering early is valued over being a ranker like a Vardy or Deeney. They might be more functional players but hey Robson Kanu did a Cruyff! Bare in mind none of Hodgson’s 7 forwards would have had the strength to hold the defender off get the ball under control before the Cruyff. Darwinism, a narrow range of strengths in a team is a weakness in terms of progressing.

England went out after leading again! Hodgson is a good man if nothing else and since I came to hate each England manager since Ramsey (who I was too young to have an opinion of) that is a compliment of sorts. Yes even Bobby and Terry. In fact especially Terry and Bobby.

Hodgson’s Rock Scissors Issues

Ignoring Experts

In 2010 and certainly 2015 against the advice of mainstream economists 90% of people voted for austerity parties yet when the poor voted BrExit they get odium. Adding to this the Govt has effectively given up on Austerity and will as a back stop use the Govt’s pet BoE to essentially buy up the deficit with free money. Or just take advantage of a 10 year gilt yielding 1%.

The septics have an expression ‘Check your privilege’ it seems appropriate here. Thus the Remain types (and the Boomers) have voted to kick the poor against economic advice and now rain blows on the poor for voting against less estimated damage. Indeed if the Land bubble bursts then the costs of Austerity will be higher and the gain less than nil. The poor might not like the EU but the justification for kicking the poor for the sake of it is? Or Occam’s Razor Labour and Conservative voters just hate the poor right back?

My non expert opinion [guess] on BrExit is now having undergone the turmoil and bluster of the last few days and the downside risks to delay now is just to put the economy in stasis for years and may not even allow people to keep the EU. Sadly fudge is the only thing this generation of venal sinecure desiring politicos believe in. Expect an extremely damaging time and even a 2nd referendum. After all the economy is just a tool for rhetoric not something Tories and Labour care about and today they openly admit it.

Ignoring Experts