Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Lars P. Syll — Mainstream economics — a pointless waste of time

Be sure to read the comment by Asad Zaman also. Zaman argues that conventional economics is not merely a pointless waste of time but designed for a purpose and to make very explicit points about it. This is not ignorance but deception and part of class warfare.
My view is that economics does perfectly what it is designed to do. It is a MISTAKE to think that conventional economic theory is WRONG. In order to make progress, it is essential to understand the function of economic theories.
1. Every economic policy hurts some groups and helps others
2. No group has sufficient POWER to ENFORCE policies favorable to them.
3. Groups with power MUST somehow create consent among a majority to enact policies favorable to them. If they do not do so, then policies against their interests will be enacted in a democracy.
4. People judge policies according to their THEORETICAL IMPACT, since no one can actually foresee the future. This means that policies are not evaluated as good or bad according to reality, but according to how widely accepted theories predict their impact (for a vivid example, consider BREXIT)
5. Thus the elite, the top 1%, are faced with the necessity of creating theories which show that policies which favor their interests are actually benefical for all, or for a majority.
 [6.?] Let us a label a theory to be ET1% — an Economic Theory of the top 1% — if it shows a policy to be favorable for the majority, when in fact the policy actually favors the top 1%.
7. Now if we consider conventional economic theory, it is easy to show that nearly all of it is ET1% — it is DESIGNED to prove that policies which favor the top 1% are beneficial for all. 
NOW LET US consider dominant economic theories and models in the light of this analysis.…
Real-World Economics Review Blog
Mainstream economics — a pointless waste of time
Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University

Pat Lang — The MSM in the US are actually an arm of the Clinton campaign.

Globalists versus nationalists. Media on side of globalists. Didn't help the Remain folks though.

Sic Semper Tyrannis
The MSM in the US are actually an arm of the Clinton campaign.
Col. W. Patrick Lang, US Army (ret.), former military intelligence officer at the US Defense Intelligence Agency

Matt Stoller — How the US Saw Multinationals as a Means to Prevent War

Must-see if you haven't already.
Yves — This Twitterstorm helps explain why US policy has been so keen to promote “free trade” and make the world safe for multinationals.
I would add liberal internationalism, liberal interventionism, and neoconservatism along with neoliberalism (liberalization, deregulation, privatization), neo-imperialism, and neocolonialism, as the basis of liberal globalization.

This is a strategy based on a policy, which is grounded in an ideology including a values system and social, political and economic interests.

It is a mixture of idealism — "bearing the white man's burden" — and realism — there is huge amount of status, power and wealth on the table. The West is here to help — at a cost. That cost is transnational corporatism and the elimination of national sovereignty as the basis of nationalism, and democracy to the degree that it enables "the rule of the rabble." After all, elites know best what is good for all, and that is summarized as "a rising tide lifts all boats."

Russian UN Rep — Ukrainian Advance in Donbass May Be Considered an Offensive

Ominous sign. Ukraine is heating up again.

For Russ
Russian UN Rep: Ukrainian Advance in Donbass May Be Considered an Offensive
Russian RT
Translated from Russian by Kristina Kharlova



Some time ago after it appeared that the UAF was beefing up in the eastern region and the Right Sector volunteers were becoming more active, the insurgent leader warned Poroshenko that this time it would be different. The insurgents would not only kick ass again but come after him and the whole of them.  

Luigi Zingales — The Real Lesson From Brexit

One of the most important–and least discussed–aspects of the vote for Brexit has been the failure of most pollsters and newspapers to predict and understand the reasons for Brexit. Even the betting market, generally much more reliable, got it wrong. This phenomenon is not unique to Brexit. Most pundits and pollsters missed the importance of Trump. Why?

What we have observed in Britain and what we are observing in the U.S. with Trump is a growing mistrust of voters toward experts. In the Brexit debate it was hard to find any economist justifying a departure from the European Union. In fact, many were willing to make forecasts so pessimistic as to be accused of scaremongering. Not only did these forecasts fail to rally the vote for Remain, they probably contributed to the victory of Leave.

In the Financial Times Chris Giles lamented this phenomenon as an example of voters’ irrationality. I fear this has nothing to do with irrationality, but has everything to do with mistrust; a mistrust that, while exaggerated, has a very rational basis: the disconnect between the intellectual elite and the population at large–the very disconnect that caused pollsters, betters, and journalists to miss the mounting Brexit wave.…

ProMarket — The blog of the Stigler Center at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business
The Real Lesson From Brexit
Luigi Zingales | Robert C. McCormack Professor of Entrepreneurship and Finance at University of Chicago Booth School of Business
ht Mark Thoma at Economist's View

WTF??? Osborne says tax hikes and spending cuts needed to "offset the shock" of Brexit! !@#$%^&

I'm not even going to say, "Can you believe this?" because, how many times have we seen these morons fuck themselves? Over and over and over.

Tax rises and spending cuts will be needed to deal with the "shock" to the UK economy caused by leaving the EU, Chancellor George Osborne has said. Read more.

There you go. Complete moron.

The only hope is, that the next Prime Minister won't listen to him, but that's a low probability because it'll likely be one of the conservatives and they're all over the "fiscal responsibility" bullshit.

The whole Brexit thing for them was about immigration.

Geoffrey Hodgson — Why We Need Adam Smith and Charles Darwin to Fix the Global Economy

Adam Smith is said to be the founder of modern economics.[1] Yet, contrary to a widespread view, Smith regarded individuals as driven by moral motives as well as self-interest. This is most clear in his Theory of Moral Sentiments, but ideas of justice and morality also pervade his Wealth of Nations.[2]
It took economics a while to get rid of this argument. In two classic works published in 1871, William Stanley Jevons and Carl Menger placed individual self-interest at the foundation of economics. Three years later, Léon Walras built neoclassical general equilibrium analysis upon a similar assumption. For the next 100 years or more, self-interested, utility-maximizing, “economic man” was the centerpiece of mainstream economic theory.
But also in 1871, Darwin published his Descent of Man, with its evolutionary explanation of cooperative solidarity and morality, which took over one hundred years to be confirmed broadly by theoretical and empirical research. In that same year, Darwin had provided an evolutionary vindication of Smith’s view of human motivation. But it was ignored by most economists.
It is one of the great ironies of history that portraits of Smith and Darwin appear respectively on £10 and £20 banknotes in the UK. I do not think that these designs were intended to remind us that moral and evolutionary considerations are central to our understanding of a money-driven economy. But they are.…
When morality is ignored as not being substantive, then the result is that morality is equated with legality, so that if it is legal it is moral. Powerful elites then use their power and influence to shape the law so that what society regards as being immoral or unethical is made legal and there is not penalty involved in acting immorally or illegally. Elites are famously shameless, so that reputational stricture does not apply to them or restrain their behavior.

Why We Need Adam Smith and Charles Darwin to Fix the Global Economy
Geoffrey Hodgson | research professor at Hertfordshire Business School, University of Hertfordshire, England

Deirdre Fulton — Trump Just Drove a Truck Through Hole DNC Platform Panel Left in Clinton's TPP Promise

Laying bare how dangerous it could be for Democrats to ignore populist opposition to corporate-friendly "free trade" deals, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on Tuesday attacked Hillary Clinton for her stance on trade in general and the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) in particular.
Speaking in Monessen, Pennsylvania, Trump said the "TPP would be the death blow for American manufacturing" and vowed to "withdraw" the U.S. from the agreement.
He said Clinton took "a leading part" in drafting the 12-nation deal, noting that the former secretary of state "praised or pushed the TPP on 45 separate occasions, and even called it the 'gold standard,'" according to prepared remarks.

"Hillary Clinton was totally for the TPP just a short while ago, but when she saw my stance, which is totally against, she was shamed into saying she would be against it too," he said. "But have no doubt, she will immediately approve it if it is put before her, guaranteed. She will do this just as she has betrayed American workers for Wall Street throughout her career."
With this claim, MSNBC reporter Alex Seitz-Wald wrote on Twitter, Trump appeared to be "speaking directly to [Bernie] Sanders supporters." Sanders has made opposition to the TPP and other rights-trampling deals a cornerstone of his campaign.

Trump also said he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—and placed partial blame for that deal also at Clinton's feet. "It was Bill Clinton who signed NAFTA in 1993, and Hillary Clinton who supported it," he said.
Common Dreams
Trump Just Drove a Truck Through Hole DNC Platform Panel Left in Clinton's TPP Promise
Deirdre Fulton, staff writer
ht Don Quijones at Raging Bull-Shit

Barkley Rosser — Details-Schmetails!: Brexit And Uncertainty

An FB friend of mine skeptical that Brexit will have much of a negative economic impact has put up a post entitled "Brexit-Schmexit!" To this I say, "Details-Schmetails!" because the widely varying possible impacts of details of that exit have induced a massive increase in uncertainty over the future around much of the world that itself can cause considerable economic harm. Just for the US alone, Jim Hamilton atEconbrowser documents the sharpest increase in measured policy uncertainty since the debt ceiling crisis of 2013 (also linked to by Mark Thoma at Economists View), and this is the leading complaint by most EU leaders against the plan by David Cameron (and Boris Johnson too apparently, as well as many in the UK hoping for an eventual Remain outcome) to delay invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty that would trigger the two year divorce negotiations, even as I sympathize with those in the UK hoping such a delay might lead to no Brexit at all in the end. The Europeans want the negotiations to start sooner so as to end the uncertainty sooner, which they see as hanging over the heads of their economies and damaging them, which seems a fair point.…
In any case, whether declining foreign direct investment tanking the UK economy has a greater impact than some gain in import competition and exports due to a devaluing pound, it looks from most in the EU that the greatest damage to their economies and the British one, as well as others around the world, will arise from the uncertainty associated with how all this will work itself out and how long it will take. In this regard I agree with the Europeans: whether or not the Brexit vote by the British was wise or not, they must minimize the damage of it to the rest of the world and get out ASAP to reduce all this world economy wrecking uncertainty.
Business and finance hate "uncertainty," by which they mean risk that cannot be measured. This is an issue with policy uncertainty.

Details-Schmetails!: Brexit And Uncertainty
J. Barkley Rosser | Professor of Economics and Business Administration James Madison University

See also

Policy Uncertainty (in America) in the Wake of Brexit
Menzie Chinn

Jim Rogers is the gift that keeps on giving.

MMT Trader: far outperforming market. Futures trades, up $20k in 19 weeks trading 1-lots. Forex, all profits, zero losses.

Applied MMT. That's what my report, MMT Trader is all about. There are many MMT "academics" out there, but I am the only one who not only teaches you how to apply it to make money in the markets, I GIVE YOU recommendations that have done nothing, but make money.

Fact: The MMT Trader stock portfolio stayed positive during the recent Brexit selloff and is far, far, outperforming the  market averages.

Fact: The MMT Trader futures portfolio has booked over $20,000 in profits in 19 weeks trading one-lots.

Fact: The MMT Forex portfolio has had ZERO losses and recently bought GBPUSD @ 1.3195. It's over 1.34 now.

MMT not only explains how the economy and markets function, it gives you 100% accurate forecasting power.

No one else does this.

See for yourself. Sign up for a 30-day free trial.

-Mike Norman

 MMT Trader 30-day free trial


Illustration of a causation not a correlation below:

They simply are not qualified.

Goldman is not a trader. It's a scammer. If they can't scam, they lose.

Goldman Sachs

Everyone knows about the Abacus trade back in 2007-2008, where Goldman scammed some German banks so that John Paulson could make a fortune shorting the subprime market.

Saying this is not conjecture or libel on my part. Goldman ADMITTED to fraud and paid a fine. One of many.

So now it comes to light in a new court case in the U.K. that Goldman scammed the Libyan sovereign wealth fund by putting it into questionable investments. Goldman of course made a fortune in fees on these deals. Check it out:

In a trial at London's High Court, the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) is trying to claw back $1.2 billion from Goldman Sachs related to nine disputed trades carried out in 2008.
The LIA argues Goldman took advantage of its financial naivety by first gaining its trust, then encouraging it to make risky and ultimately worthless investments. Read more.

This is how Wall Street operates. Their business model is fraud. They can't trade. They are losers if they are not able to scam clients.

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

'Can't barrage the Farage'

A riff on Brexit from the "Can't stump the Trump" guy below:

vox.ue — Fighting ‘currency wars’ with blanks: The limited role of exchange rates in export competitiveness

In the ‘currency wars’ discussion, it is almost taken for granted that exchange rate depreciations will result in non-trivial export gains. Using evidence from countries in Europe and Asia, this column argues instead that factors unrelated to prices/exchange rates often play a predominant role in shaping trade developments. Moreover, these factors affect export outcomes in a very diversified manner across countries, in part because of the interplay of global value chains.
So much for that theory.

Fighting ‘currency wars’ with blanks: The limited role of exchange rates in export competitiveness
Filippo di Mauro, Konstantins Benkovskis, Sante De Pinto, Marco Grazioli

Brian Romanchuk — Another Example Why Bond Investors Ignore Developed Sovereign Credit Ratings

Fitch and Standard & Poor's both downgraded the U.K. to AA (from AAA) this week in response to the Brexit vote ( article). As experienced market watchers would expect, U.K. gilts have been rallying (yields falling), which is not the usual narrative that one hears about ratings actions. This article explains why bond investors treat credit ratings for free-floating developed sovereign governments as sources of entertainment, and not investment guidance.
As I discuss at length in Understanding Government Finance (paperback edition will be published shortly), developed sovereigns with a free-floating government are not at risk of involuntary default; rather the risk is of voluntary repudiation of debt. Although some investors have been slow learners about this reality -- take the parade of JGB shorts -- most government bond investors have accepted this reality.
Although credit ratings are unfortunately worked into bond indices, bank regulations treat the sovereign issuer as special, with a 0% risk weighting, Furthermore, everyone knows that the government cannot be forced to default. This knowledge either comes from something resembling Modern Monetary Theory's analysis of governmental finance operations, or the more primitive "they can just print the money."…
Bond Economics
Another Example Why Bond Investors Ignore Developed Sovereign Credit Ratings
Brian Romanchuk

Peter Lavelle — 5 Questions for Peter Lavelle on Brexit

The Brexit questions and answers that main stream media will never tackle.
Peter Lavelle provides an alternate view.

The Duran
5 Questions for Peter Lavelle on Brexit
Peter Lavelle
Lavelle received a B.A. in International Economic Relations, an M.A. in European history, and completed Ph.D. courses in Studies in European Economic History from the University of California, Davis. He was a Fulbright Research Fellow at the Institute of Political Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw, Poland.[7] He has been living in Eastern Europe and Russia for over 25 years while working as a lecturer at the University of Warsaw, a market researcher for Colgate-Palmolive, and an investment analyst for brokerage firms, including Russia's Alfa-Bank. Wikipedia

The Saker — Brexit: how the British people have forfeited the confidence of their government (a quick commentary)

To say that the Brexit was a historical event is an understatement, not because of the political or economic consequences of this vote, but because first and foremost it is a loud, painful and most humiliated smack in the collective face of the ruling “elites”which run the AngloZionist Empire. All of them, not just Cameron, Merkel and Obama, but also and most importantly, their puppeteers: the AngloZionist comprador class which administers the EU colony on behalf of the USA. That is not to say that those who voted to leave the EU did that with the intention to make a political statement against the “elites”s, though some undoubtedly did, but because this is how the 1% class of plutocrats which run the Empire will perceive it. For them, this is something like a peasant insurrection, a Jacquerie if you want, and the normal reaction of feudal overlords threatened by their serfs it to put it down, not to negotiate with the serfs or, even less so, “reform” any of their ways.
Over and over again, we have seen that each time the referendums in Europe did not go the Empire’s way, or when the Empire was defeated in its policies (as in Syria, for ex.), the reaction was not to change course or engage in a lessons learned exercise, but to double-down and engage in what the French call “une fuite en avant” (to flee forward). 
And that is what they will do next.…
A military and intelligence analyst looks at Brexit.

The Vineyard of the Saker
Brexit: how the British people have forfeited the confidence of their government (a quick commentary)
The Saker

Bill Black — The Terrible Cost to Democrats and Our Nation of Ignoring Tom Frank’s Warnings

Thomas Frank is a historian and writer. He is also the man who tried to save the Democratic Party and our Nation from great harm. He is the great chronicler of one of the most grievous, self-inflicted wounds in modern American history. Twelve years ago, in What’s the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America, Frank tried to warn the Democratic Party’s dominant elites’ that their policies and contempt for workers were pushing a large part of its base out of the Party. Many of the workers that were the Democratic Party’s traditional base were leaving the Party and failing to participate in elections, but some were supporting the far-right wing of the Republican Party. At the national level, the New Democrats’ candidates remained highly competitive, but the Republican Party was able to attain complete political domination of most states.
This year, Frank renewed his warnings in Listen, Liberal, which explains with characteristic verve, facts, and candor how the “New Democrats” made the New Deal, labor, and the working class their targets for attack and ridicule. The book explains why the New Democrats’ policies, which adopted traditional Republican policies, proved so destructive to labor and the working class.
The New Democrats cannot claim to be shocked that many members of the working class and labor eventually responded to the New Democrats’ contempt and policy betrayals and the terrible harms those policies inflicted upon the working class by increasingly refusing to support such Democratic candidates. Frank’s books show that the contempt of the New Democrats for the New Deal, labor, and the working class was and is palpable.…
New Economic Perspectives
The Terrible Cost to Democrats and Our Nation of Ignoring Tom Frank’s Warnings
William K. Black | Associate Professor of Economics and Law, UMKC

Winterspeak — Brexit and markets

Note that all of this [market madness] has no connection to the UK and EU. Individual countries, particularly those as large as the UK, can survive perfectly well whether they are part of a broader agreement or not. Canada and the US trade is a good model for the UK and the EU.
The economic prospects for the UK depends on how well it can stimulate it's economy, through deficit spending, and return to something closer to full employment. That will probably help make the national mood there more generous as well.
Brexit and markets

Lord Keynes — Demographics of Brexit

Interesting. A value of a referendum is that it displays the demographics on a single issue, which voting for a party in a general election does not. But it is also telling about the parties.

Social Democracy For The 21St Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective
Demographics of Brexit
Lord Keynes

Safe Arnoldsi — What Putin Says and What Putin Does

Putin the IR (international relations) realist. Short and informative.

Fort Russ
What Putin Says and What Putin Does
Jafe Arnoldsi

Jason Furman — Productivity, Inequality, and Economic Rents

Productivity growth—a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for rising incomes in the long run—has slowed since 1973, growing at a 1.8 percent annual rate, as compared to a 2.8 percent annual rate in the 25 years prior to 1973. At the same time, inequality in the United States is higher and, in recent decades, has risen faster than in other major advanced economies. In 2014, the top 1 percent captured 18 percent of income, up from 8 percent in 1973. These two major trends have been the major causes of the slowdown in income growth for the median household.
These dual trends—that is, the slowdown in productivity growth and the increase in inequality in recent decades—have many distinct sources, but insofar as they have some causes in common, there is the potential to address these causes in ways that simultaneously improve efficiency and equity. To this end, the evidence that a rise in rents is contributing to both phenomena is important.… 
Trumpet fanfare.

This is a no brainer. Productivity is broadly a function of investment, and rent extraction is broadly a function of asymmetric market power. Economic rent extracts surplus from the circular flow that would otherwise be directed to consumption or investment, but instead gets saved (hoarded) by those with the power to do so. This results in amplifying social, political and economic asymmetries that distort the functioning of the economy and the society.
The good news is that to the degree that the “rents” interpretation is correct, it suggests that it is possible to reduce inequality and promote productivity growth without hurting efficiency by changing how rents are divided—or even that it is possible to do both while increasingefficiency by acting to reduce rents in the economy. Policies that raise the minimum wage and provide greater support for collective bargaining can help level the playing field for workers in negotiations with employers, in turn changing the way that rents are divided. Measures that would rationalize licensing requirements for employment, reduce zoning and other land-use restrictions, appropriately balance intellectual property regimes, and change the incentives that have led to the expansion of the financial sector as a share of the economy would all help curb excessive rents.

Additional measures that would reduce the scope and unequal distribution of economic rents include the promotion of competition through rulemaking and regulations, as well as the elimination of regulatory barriers to competition. A recent Executive Order signed by the President aims to do just that, by instructing departments and agencies of the federal government to identify specific actions that they can take to foster greater competition in the marketplace, with the actions grounded not in traditional antitrust enforcement (which is a law enforcement issue) but in a broader space that includes policies like freeing up set-top cable boxes from being tied to cable providers and freeing up more airline slots at airports.

The bad news, however, is that rents have beneficiaries and these beneficiaries fight hard to keep and expand their rents. As a result, political reforms and other steps aimed at curbing the influence of regulatory lobbying are important for reducing the ability of people and corporations to seek rents successfully. Such actions would help ensure that economic growth in the decades ahead is robust, sustainable, and widely shared.
Good that the chief economists knows this but the response is not overwhelming, not that this is his fault. As he notes, its complicated, and many of the issues are political hot potatoes. But at least he has laid the issues squarely on the table.

Pro Market
Productivity, Inequality, and Economic Rents
Jason Furman | 28th Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, a role in which he serves as President Obama’s Chief Economist and as a Member of the President’s Cabinet. This post originally appeared in RegBlog, an online source of regulatory news, analysis, and opinion affiliated with the Penn Program on Regulation.
ht Mark Thoma at Economist's View

Lars P. Syll — People who have their heads fuddled with nonsense

The Conservative belief that there is some law of nature which prevents men from being employed, that it is “rash” to employ men, and that it is financially ‘sound’ to maintain a tenth of the population in idleness for an indefinite period, is crazily improbable – the sort of thing which no man could believe who had not had his head fuddled with nonsense for years and years … Our main task, therefore, will be to confirm the reader’s instinct that what seems sensible is sensible, and what seems nonsense is nonsense.
The is the key principle of genuine Keynesian approaches to economic and political economy, including MMT.

Lars P. Syll’s Blog
People who have their heads fuddled with nonsense
Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University

Bill Mitchell — When journalists allow dangerous economic myths to pervade

In this post Bill summarizes the MMT position that  there is no financial crisis so deep that cannot be dealt with by public spending.
As I explained in this blog – There is no financial crisis so deep that cannot be dealt with by public spending – still! – the statement that – “There is no financial crisis so deep that cannot be dealt with by public spending” – does not mean that fiscal policy can bail an economy out of any problem.
As an aside, the title of that blog was the title of a paper I published in 2009 – you can read the Working Paper version for free (fairly close to the final publication). It reflects a basic insight that is derived from MMT once you fully understand that school of thought – its scope and its limitations.
When I say (and the other leading MMT writers say) – “There is no financial crisis so deep that cannot be dealt with by public spending” I do not mean the following:
  • That fiscal policy can overcome the real losses to a nation’s standard of living that are associated with a major fall in its currency when there is a significant dependency on real imported goods and services.
  • That fiscal policy can ensure that debts denominated in foreign-currency (public or private) can be honoured at all times.
What the statement means is that a situation can always be improved from where it is as a result of the operations of a crisis in the private financial markets.
It doesn’t mean the state reached after the fiscal intervention will be perfect. It means things can always be made better.
A nation has to ultimately confront its real resource constraints. Fiscal policy in the short-term cannot ease those constraints although it can ensure that the real resources available are utilised more fully.
A nation with heavy import dependencies (that is, real resource shortages) is also likely to suffer if its exchange rate collapses or world export markets for its goods and services slow appreciably. Fiscal policy can help to attenuate the losses but cannot ‘create food out of thin air’ like it can public spending capacity (money).
So in appraising what the statement means we should avoid setting up red-herrings or straw persons.
The bottom line is that a sovereign government like Australia can never run out of money and never needs to issue public debt as a matter of necessity. The public debt issuance is entirely voluntary and such voluntary actions have a habit of being quickly changed if they present too many ‘political’ problems.…
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
When journalists allow dangerous economic myths to pervadeBill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

There they go again. Jerks at S&P and Fitch downgrade Britain's credit rating.

S&P, Fitch

Haven't we seen this movie before?

Remember when the idiots at S&P downgraded the U.S. credit rating in 2011? I was on TV that morning and was pounding the table telling people to buy Treasuries.

Now you have the same idiot, S&P, plus a new idiot, Fitch, downgrading Britain's credit rating because of Brexit.

Hey you morons at the credit rating agencies...a sovereign nation that spends in its own currency and where all its obligations are denominated in that currency cannot become insolvent. There can never be an inability to pay its debts.

What idiots.

Buy gilts.

Monday, June 27, 2016

Zero Hedge — President Of The European Parliament: "It Is Not The EU Philosophy That The Crowd Can Decide Its Fate" [satire]

If anyone needs another confirmation that the European Union is fundamentally the most anti-democratic entity currently in existence, then the following statement by European Parliament Martin Schultz should put all confusion to rest.

Schulz: "The British have violated the rules. It is not the EU philosophy that the crowd can decide its fate".
It appears this is satire.

From the same post:

Deutsche Bank —
So there's no escaping the fact that this is a class war. Whether its globalisation, immigration, inequality, poor economic growth or a combination of all of them it's quite clear from this and other anti-establishment movements that the status quo can't last in a democracy. Eventually you'll have a reaction

Zero Hedge
President Of The European Parliament: "It Is Not The EU Philosophy That The Crowd Can Decide Its Fate"
Tyler Durden

Zero Hedge — Greenspan Warns A Crisis Is Imminent, Urges A Return To The Gold Standard

This is not a joke. He really means it.

If the world listened to his advice, it would result in a Great Great Depression. aka the grandmother of all depressions.

David Cameron Exposed and More Taxes On the Mega Rich

In this clip David Cameron is exposed as that the fraud he is. His adviser Jess Armstrong describes how Cameron can barely despise his contempt for working class people.

Well, I'm South London and working class but I might have a hard time too, with some them anyway, as I'm not right wing and and don't share their disdain for people on benefits or their xenophobia. I worked with working class people and most voted Labour, but some were very vocal about politics and were working class Tories who hated the welfare state, at least the way that some unfortunate people needed to use it, (but you will always get some scallywags abusing the system, but it's peanuts compared to the £gazillions the aristocracy steal from the state every year). And these working class Tories were very anti union too, despite how unions had given them good pensions, good sick pay, and five weeks holiday a year. But sadly, not many of my colleagues would ever argue with them, which made me feel isolated as it seemed that I was the only real Leftie left, because everyone else had had their minds taken over by the neoliberals.  It's The Matrix, The Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

I also found it maddening how most people seemed to have very little idea about politics because they mainly just read the tabloid press, which would go on and on about taxes like a old stuck gramophone record, and would go on constantly about welfare benefit cheats, and the cost of public services. But in fact with MMT, Labour should become the low tax party while the Conservatives would have become high tax, but low public spending austerity party. What sort of deal is that?

But these high taxes stops capitalism from working properly because most people have far less money to spend than they should, so perhaps the very rich should pay most of the taxes instead? Milton Friedman and his Chicago School economics doesn't work, so maybe it's time to try something else. New Labour and Bill Clinton went on and on about the Third Way and said whatever works? So come on, let's give it a go, let's push it through Parliament and Congress that only the mega rich pay taxes. I bet it works!

Anyway, here's that scallywag, David Cameron.

George Monbiot — We’re Not as Selfish as Economists Think We Are. Here’s the Proof.

In complex adaptive systems, optimization involves adaptation through feedback and learning, as well as taking into account return on coordination. This happens naturally and spontaneously not only cognitively but also affectively since it a positive evolutionary trait. Evolutionary success involves a combination of competition and cooperation through coordination, as in teamwork. Homo socialis is the reality rather than homo economicus.

We’re Not as Selfish as Economists Think We Are. Here’s the Proof.
George Monbiot