LILA RAJIVA: The Mind-Body Politic
Individuals Not Ideologies
-
Archive of "Globalization" Category
Illegal Immigrant Workers
David Kramer, at Lew Rockwell blog:
“You know what an “illegal” immigrant worker is, don’t you? It’s someone who voluntary decides to move from one piece of land on the planet Earth to another piece of piece of land on the planet Earth because he or she knows of a person at that second piece of land on the planet Earth who wants to voluntarily exchange with him or her a medium of exchange for his or her labor services—but wasn’t given permission to by a third party with a gun (i.e., the government).”
Portugal and Spain In Trouble Too…
Will Frankfurt (the European Central Bank) come to the rescue of Greece, or Spain, or Portugal? Maybe in the end, but not now, reports Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in The Telegraph:
“Mr Callow of Barclays said EU leaders will come to the rescue in the end, but Germany has yet to blink in this game of “brinkmanship”. The core issue is that EMU’s credit bubble has left southern Europe with huge foreign liabilities: Spain at 91pc of GDP (€950bn); Portugal 108pc (€177bn). This compares with 87pc for Greece (€208bn). By this gauge, Iberian imbalances are worse than those of Greece, and the sums are far greater. The danger is that foreign creditors will cut off funding, setting off an internal EMU version of the Asian financial crisis in 1998.
Jean-Claude Trichet, head of the European Central Bank, gave no hint yesterday that Frankfurt will bend to help these countries, either through loans or a more subtle form of bail-out through looser monetary policy or lax rules on collateral. The ultra-hawkish ECB has instead let the M3 money supply contract over recent months.”
Mr Trichet said euro members drew down their benefits in advance — “ex ante” — when they joined EMU and enjoyed “very easy financing” for their current account deficits. They cannot expect “ex post” help if they get into trouble later. These are the rules of the club.”
What China Wants
The Financial Times points out the quirks in the Chinese market that have Western companies racking their brains to stay on top of sales:
“The big spender in China, in years past and even more so today, is the state: private consumption as a percentage of gross domestic product has fallen from 60 per cent in 1968 to 36 per cent last year and could be as low as one-fifth in 2009 as the government ramps up capital investment.
In fact, the Chinese, who already have a world-beating savings rate of nearly 40 per cent of their income, tend to become more frugal when times are tough. As bank deposit rates decline, most of us spend more. The Chinese tend to stash away even greater sums to make up for the lost interest. The reason for this conservatism is the lack of a social safety net in China – citizens have to provide for their own medical care, old age and possible unemployment.
This makes them “penny pinching, ruthless, suspicious shoppers”, says Tom Doctoroff, north Asia director of advertising agency JWT and a writer on Chinese consumer trends. In a recession this behaviour only grows worse. “The downturn has made people keener on finding the cheapest deal,” says Yuval Atsmon, an associate principal in McKinsey’s Shanghai office. Even when they can easily afford it, buying a PC typically involves six visits to a store, and more often than not, customers will wait six months before making their decision after consulting blogs, online comparison sites and – the most important source of information in China – friends and family. Sales of copycat mobile phones, with all the functions of top models but a lower price, have soared from 17 million units in 2006 to 62 million units last year.
Brand consciousness is high, at least in the big cities, but brand loyalty is much lower than in the west. A price cut or good in-store promotion can often sway shoppers. And for cultural reasons, appealing to an individual’s taste or personal comfort typically doesn’t work, Doctoroff points out. A purchase either has to publicly signal status or wealth, like a flashy car does. Or provide a practical benefit: the latest craze in China is chocolate with added calcium, eaten not for pleasure but for the health benefits. The growing appeal of diamonds to women is not based on romance, but as a financial signal of a man’s commitment. Trust is another key issue in a country where so many consumer products are faked. Chinese mothers, for example, will pay 30 per cent more for safe baby milk – and this should favour foreign brands.
But foreign retailers and manufacturers have to cope with vast regional differences in demographics, language and culture that make it hard to plan a single marketing strategy – indeed treating China like a single country is usually a mistake. Natives of Zhejiang on the east coast like “toilet roll as rough as sandpaper”, the former head of Wal-Mart China liked to observe, a penchant thankfully absent elsewhere. Atsmon points out that cities even an hour apart can be entirely different: in southern Shenzhen, more than four-fifths of the population consists of migrant workers, mostly under the age of 35, who speak Mandarin and drink in bars. In nearby Guangzhou, migrants number just over a quarter, more people are older, enjoy watching Cantonese TV and go out to restaurants to drink with family members. Adequately addressing such niches requires an army of local suppliers, costly infrastructure and several layers of wholesalers and intermediaries. Even then, success may remain as elusive as it always has been: “No matter what you may be selling, your business in China should be enormous, if the Chinese who should buy your goods would only do so,” lamented Carl Crow, an advertising executive in Shanghai and author of the original book on how to sell to the Chinese … more than 70 years ago.”
Did Bethany McLean Even Break The Enron Story?
n “Enronathon,” Seth Mnookin of The Wall Street Journal suggests Bethany McLean wasn’t quite the first person to break the story of Enron…and that she had a good bit of unacknowledged help:
“If journalism were in the Olympics, the Enron story might well be pairs figure skating. Bethany McLean, the young Fortune writer who first wrote about Enron’s shady finances a year ago, has, of course, already been awarded the gold.
And with that have come the requisite endorsements: In the past two months, she was hired as a consultant by NBC News and shared in a $1.4 million deal to co-author a book on the scandal. But another team is also vying for top honors — amid complaints about shoddy judging.
Reporters and editors at the Wall Street Journal believe their work has been unjustly ignored, with some wondering whether Pulitzer rivals like the Washington Post and the New York Times have gone out of their way to praise McLean.
Enron did not collapse under its own weight,” says Jonathan Friedland, the Journal editor who’s been in charge of much of the paper’s Enron coverage. “Without our reporting, I don’t think any of this would have happened.”
In response, McLean’s former editor at Fortune and current Time Inc. editorial director John Huey says, “Bethany was the first journalist in a widely respected national publication to suggest that the emperor at Enron had no clothes.” (Not that her own publication took much note: Fortune had to airbrush out Kenneth Lay from a November SMARTEST PEOPLE WE KNOW cover photo.) Let’s recap: In September 2000, Jonathan Weil wrote a long story for the now-defunct Texas edition of the Journal about odd accounting at various Texas-based energy traders; it included four paragraphs on Enron.
James Chanos, a well-known short-seller who was one of the first to start unloading Enron stock, says he got interested in the company after reading Weil’s piece.
Almost six months later, in March 2001, the then 30-year-old McLean (who Times columnist Maureen Dowd has suggested will be played by Alicia Silverstone in the inevitable movie) wrote her little-noticed 2,400-word story, “Is Enron Overpriced?”
Then, in October, the Journal ran a three-day series by Rebecca Smith and John Emshwiller detailing Enron’s unorthodox partnerships. Their articles are seen by many on Wall Street as ultimately sinking the company. Weil’s partisans think he should get credit for crossing the finish line first (an item, “Credit Due,” ran in “Page Six” recently).
But even Chanos says that “Bethany’s piece was the first one to raise really specific questions.”
Most of the Journal’s brain trust, though, are plugging Smith and Emshwiller, who, of course, wrote their stories in 2001 and are thus eligible for this year’s Pulitzers. “The Fortune story basically said this is a company that nobody understands,” says Journal deputy managing editor Daniel Hertzberg. “It didn’t show what was wrong with the company. It took Becky and John to do that.” That’s the competition.
Now for the judging. In January, Howard Kurtz, the Washington Post’s media writer, highlighted McLean as the first journalist to ask questions about Enron. Ten days later, the Times‘ Felicity Barringer wrote her profile of “the financial reporter everyone loves to lionize.” While McLean was being anointed as a journalistic sex symbol in a story hitherto dominated by a balding Kenneth Lay, folks at the Journal felt they were being robbed:
“People are trying to queer the Pulitzer pitch for the Journal,” says one editor there. That’s sour grapes, counters Kurtz: “In this case, a 31-year-old reporter beat them and the rest of the world by a considerable margin.”
In a bit of circular logic endemic to media reporters, Kurtz adds, “I must have been onto something, since after my piece appeared, she was profiled in the Times, given a contract by NBC, and offered a book deal.” As for McLean, she seems slightly embarrassed by all the attention. “I’ve told people I’ve gotten too much credit,” she says. “I did raise alarm bells, but I didn’t know the half of it.” “Read more: Enronathon http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/media/features/5756/#ixzz0dvvQZvUI
My Comment:
Please note also that the book was co-authored with Peter Elkind, who isn’t attributed in many of the stories.
Not that I’m all that sympathetic to the Wall Street Journal on the Enron story, since they don’t give credit to the alternative press either, and what goes around comes around. (My own experiences of plagiarism from articles and books can be found at the tab, ABOUT - half-way down the page).
If liberal columnists steal without attribution even from liberal bloggers, can you imagine the cone of silence that descends when the victim isn’t liberal? Libertarians and conservatives get stripped clean by the vultures of the “free” (of all ethics) press.
With them, it’s never about public welfare or the good of the nation, even though that’s the standard that they like to foist on other people. Even with the global economy melting down under their noses, they’re jealous of sharing the information that activists, bloggers, and ordinary citizens give out generously for the common good.
(Again, there are honorable exceptions).
In short, they make up credit - just like the Federal Reserve.
Or they steal it - like their banker friends.
Or they collude with each other to “take-down” anyone not part of their game - just like their hedge-fund allies.
And no matter what, they always cover for each other.
Notice how other people’s personal lives are fair game for stalking, extortion, and exposes, but never theirs, as this piece on Maria Bartiromo suggests.
(Ms. McLean figures in that piece too. In fact, a brief google tells us that McLean´s had plagiarism problems and conflicts of interest more than a couple of times).
Item One. Here’s an earlier complaint about Fortune magazine plagiarism. A Fortune writer apparently used material from interviews and articles by an outfit called Annex Research, without attributing or acknowledging it. An email to Fortune got no response, either. The Fortune writer? Bethany McLean…
Item Two: McLean at it again, swiping material from the Orange County Register Weekly
Item Three: Libertarian economist, Bill Anderson, in a piece called “The Most Dishonest ´Journalists´ In the Room,” describes how McLean was having a romantic relationship with the lead prosecutor in the Enron trial, Sean Berkowitz, before the sentencing, while she was covering the trial and getting out the government´s side of the story. Omitted in that story as well was the disturbing fact that the prosecutor had suborned perjury in order to get a full conviction of Jeffrey Skilling.
And that´s besides Item Four….
That fetching stock-manipulation thing she had going with hedge buddies Marc Cohodes and Jim Chanos.
No wonder none of them can get the story right.
And no wonder they still won’t get it straight, not until after activists, or bloggers, or less-known writers at their own outfits or elsewhere do the hard work. Then they’ll slide in to take the credit.
Nice work.
Just as cushy and exploitative as anything on Wall Street, in its way.
Business men and real capitalists do the hard work of producing. Then the faux capitalist money-men and their shills in government rush in to cream the money off and cover themselves with glory via their mouthpieces in the shill media.
No wonder the media doesn’t understand capitalism. No wonder they love the crony capitalist bordello they call home. It’s the only one they know, the poor things.
[Again, they really ARE a minority of journalists, just a powerful minority. There are hundreds of honorable hard-working journalists who write their own stories rather than steal them off the net, whose names never get into headlines, and who wouldn't be caught dead behaving like this].
And don’t miss the other telling details:
Enron’s Ken Lay was a Republican.
Goldman Sachs is a Democrat cash-cow, for the most part.
Jim Chanos, hedge-fund master mind, used to work at Deutsch Bank.
And Bethany McLean was once a Goldman Sachs banker….. (Maybe that explains her kid-glove treatment of Hank at Vanity Fair).….
….And her equally interesting white-washing of Spyro Contogouris, who colluded with hedge funds to attack Prem Watsa’s Fairfax Financial.
Honestly. Rielle Hunter has nothing on any of these gold-diggers.
Climategate: Indian Environment Minister Says IPCC Wrong On Glaciers Melting
There are some interesting developments on the climate-gate frontier.
Apparently, the Himalayan glaciers aren’t melting, after all.
Or at least, not as fast as the IPCC (the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change , the UN body tasked with climate change) thinks they should. (more…)
Bernard Stiegler On Justice And Shame
French philosopher Bernard Stiegler writes about the need to have an ideal that informs the competition of the market place. This ideal would prevent competition and efficiency from degenerating into what he calls shamelessness, a state he associates both with globalization and with the suppression of individuation in modern societies:
“Imitation cannot be the first or unique principle of a new political and economic community. It is precisely to the degree that relations between countries allied in the same political community are not reduced to economic exchanges and competition, but instead presuppose a common interest above particular interests, that one can distinguish between a political union and a simple league of economic interests like the Hanseatic League or the Alena today, as well as countless other zones of special economic exchanges.
Ron Paul: No Military Occupation Of Haiti
Statement of Congressman Ron Paul, United States House of Representatives Statement in Opposition to H Res 1021, Condolences to Haiti, January 21, 2010
I rise in reluctant opposition to this resolution. Certainly I am moved by the horrific destruction in Haiti and would without hesitation express condolences to those who have suffered and continue to suffer. As a medical doctor, I have through my career worked to alleviate the pain and suffering of others. Unfortunately, however, this resolution does not simply express our condolences, but rather it commits the US government “to begin the reconstruction of Haiti” and affirms that “the recovery and long-term needs of Haiti will require a sustained commitment by the United States….”
Obama’s Man In China - Jon Huntsman Jr.
I’ve been thinking that any real change in the US..or anywhere else… will only come from outside politics, from business, or from technology, or from a cultural trend (such as, off-grid living) or from a spiritual movement. But occasionally, I wonder if some politician could actually push things in a new direction, make some kind of real difference.
Recently, some people have been touting a GOP dark horse who´s joined Team Obama. That’s former Utah governor and current Ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman Junior, who even struck some writer at the Washington Post as a potential ‘next big thing.’ (more…)
Is Latin America Moving Right?
Alvaro Vargas Llosa of the Independent Institute asks whether Latin America is moving right and what that could mean:
“Chile’s runoff election this month will probably mean the end of the center-left coalition’s two-decade hold on power and the emergence of businessman Sebastian Pinera as a political tour de force.
Lanka Needs Soros Like A Hole In The Head
“In 1992, Soros earned the epithet “the man who broke the Bank of England” by demanding the Bank to raise its interest rates or to float the currency (so that he could make more money). The Bank did neither. He retaliated by selling “short” more than $10 billion worth of pound sterling, forcing the Bank of England to depreciate the pound: Soros amassed an estimated US$ 1.1 billion in the process.
The Machinery of Habit
A piece I wrote four years ago, The Burgh: Downsizing,” examines the nature of change and habit in relation to urban economies transformed by globalization and war.
“The boys come in and the beer flows. Ricardo tells us about training. Four-mile runs, 200 push-ups every morning, wall-climbing. “They break you, man,” he shakes his head. “They make you tough.
“I said I hoped so, considering where he was going. But Melanie, who studies the theology of the medieval anchoress Juliana of Norwich and sells papers on a corner in Oakland for the Socialist Worker, is more worried about his getting into what she calls killing mode. I ask her if a mode is the same as a habit. It takes time after all to form a habit. A mode on the other hand sounds like a gearshift on an Audi. And if you can shift into a gear, you can shift out. Maybe it’s really a question of what sort of habits. Learning, retraining, moving need effort. They don’t come easily. But war is a machinery that moves on its own and blood-lust, like a winter flu, might be easy to pick up and impossible to get rid of.
War and demolition come too easily to human nature. And take away too much. Anything worth pursuing, on the other hand, needs to be stalked through the years with the patience and vigilance of a hunter, cultivated through seasons of scarcity and remembered in times of forgetting. In our sophistication we laugh at those who buy dear and hold dearer. Who stay when they should have left. Bag holders. Fools. Who step into the river and expect the waters to stay the same. The immobilized in our mobile society. What is the value of an abandoned church, an obsolete mill, an aging worker? Flux, we shrug, is the only certainty. Change is the first law of nature.
“People talk about joining but they don’t,” says Ricardo, “I’m the only one who did.” He sounds proud.
“I ask him if he thinks good health insurance and tuition money are worth risking his life for. He laughs.
“Look — I ain’t gonna die. Most of the guys who teach me, they’ve been there. They got through. More chances I’d get shot in a ghetto. So some guy’s lost an arm…or a leg. So what? All this new technology now, reconstruction…they can make you another leg; it’s really no big deal.”At 26, you can think of that as a good trade. An amputation of the body or the mind is all it takes to keep up with change. Like those translucent lizards which shed their tails seasonally as they wait immobile and vigilant for flies on dusty window sills, we might grow new limbs just as good. New memories to replace old ones. Here in the hills, at the confluence of three rivers, we have learned not to resist the laws of nature.
“But perhaps we don’t live by nature alone. Perhaps, as Juliana of Norwich said, we also need mercy and grace.”
“The need to change and the machinery of habit that makes it difficult - a theme I find myself returning to , over and over, especially when I’m confronted with the depressing spectacle of people going back to the same propaganda, the same bogus assertions that caused this global catastrophe in the first place.
Going back, like dogs to vomit.
I’m sorry if that sounds ugly, but what’s happening now in DC is ugly….and very very dangerous.
Delingpole On Wiki Manipulation
James Delingpole on Wiki manipulation…
“If you want to know the truth about Climategate, definitely don’t use Wikipedia. “Climatic Research Unit e-mail controversy”, is its preferred, mealy-mouthed euphemism to describe the greatest scientific scandal of the modern age. Not that you’d ever guess it was a scandal from the accompanying article. It reads more like a damage-limitation press release put out by concerned friends and sympathisers of the lying, cheating, data-rigging scientists
Which funnily enough, is pretty much what it is. Even Wikipedia’s own moderators acknowledge that the entry has been hijacked, as this commentary by an “uninvolved editor” makes clear.”
Which is just what we said a while back
You get the scoop here…
“Scientific” Academies Need A Taste Of RICO Too
Alan Caruba , a conservative writer and reviewer:
“Consider a letter dated October 21, 2009 and signed by the presidents of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Society, the American Society of Plant Biologists, the Association of Ecosystem Research Center, the American Chemical Society, the American Institute of Biological Sciences, the American Society of Agronomy, the American Statistical Association,
And the Botanical Society of America, the Crop Science Society of America, the Natural Science Collections Alliance, the Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, the Soil Science Society of America, the Ecological Society of America, the Organization of Biological Field Stations, the Society of Systematic Biologists, and the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.
Together, they asserted that “Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver.” It went on to repeat all the usual scary scenarios of rising sea levels, urban heat weaves, wildfires, and other climate-related events.
In a footnote, the letter to U.S. Senators said, “The conclusions in this paragraph reflect the scientific consensus represented by, for example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. Global Change Research Program.”
We now know that the “science” being cited by these two entities was, at least in the case of the IPCC, totally rigged, but the presidents of these alleged science-based organizations took it on face value despite ample scientific evidence it was false. The revelations of emails exchanged between the perpetrators of the hoax have demonstrated the deceptions…….
In light of this, who can trust these organizations? And who can trust the “science” produced by NASA and other U.S. agencies that have benefited from billions in grants directed at so-called climate, i.e. global warming research?”
IPCC Chief Pachauri Central To Cap-and-Trade Scam
From Mish Shedlock:
“The crux of the scheme is this: European steelmakers have threatened to leave the EU for India, eliminating the jobs of thousands of workers in the process, unless the EU grants the steelmakers free carbon credits worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
Eurofer, a European trade group, is at the center of the scheme. The web of the plot, however, weaves in not only several companies, but also the United Nations’ climate change chief:* Among its members, Eurofer represents two EU steelmakers, Corus Redcar and ArcelorMittal, each of which has ties to India as well as to Rajendra K. Pachauri, the Indian industrial engineer who has been chairman of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, since 2002.
* Eurofer appears to have coordinated a threat to the European Union Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading System that its steelmakers would move their operations from the EU to India unless the EU cap-and-trade exchange issued them – at no cost – carbon emissions permits worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
* Once the bureaucrats in Brussels acquiesced, Corus Redcar and ArcelorMittal maneuvered to cash in windfall profits from the EU carbon permits given them at no cost.
* Additionally, Corus Redcar has now announced a decision to close operations in Great Britain nonetheless and relocate its steelmaking activities to India in order to gain additional U.N. carbon credits.
Ironically, EU and U.N. officials who might have thought requiring cap-and-trade permits would operate as “protection racket” in which EU companies need to buy carbon credits to continue operations, have now found themselves on the losing end of the reverse scheme.
In the final analysis, the winners are the European Union corporations willing to play hardball with the European Union Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading System, and the losers are the EU middle class workers that are held hostage in the scheme.”
Open Letter To The Secretary-General Of UN
Wednesday, December 9th 2009, 2:07 AM ESTCo2sceptic (Site Admin)Dear Secretary-General,
Climate change science is in a period of ‘negative discovery’ - the more we learn about this exceptionally complex and rapidly evolving field the more we realize how little we know. Truly, the science is NOT settled.
Therefore, there is no sound reason to impose expensive and restrictive public policy decisions on the peoples of the Earth without first providing convincing evidence that human activities are causing dangerous climate change beyond that resulting from natural causes. Before any precipitate action is taken, we must have solid observational data demonstrating that recent changes in climate differ substantially from changes observed in the past and are well in excess of normal variations caused by solar cycles, ocean currents, changes in the Earth’s orbital parameters and other natural phenomena.
We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.
Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;
Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate…”
For the rest of the post and the complete list of signatories, see Climate realists.
Danish Climate-Gate
From the Washington Examiner:
“Police and authorities in several European countries are investigating scams worth billions of kroner, which all originate in the Danish quota register. The CO2 quotas are traded in other EU countries.
“Denmark’s quota register, which the Energy Agency within the Climate and Energy Ministry administers, is the largest in the world in terms of personal quota registrations. It is much easier to register here than in other countries, where it can take up to three months to be approved.
“Ekstra Bladet reporters have found examples of people using false addresses and companies that are in liquidation, which haven’t been removed from the register.
“One of the cases, which stems from the Danish register, involves fraud of more than 8 billion kroner. This case, in which nine people have been arrested, is being investigated in England.
“The market for CO2 trade has exploded in recent years and is worth an estimated 675 billion kroner globally.”
Climate-Gate: Summary
I found this excellent summary posted by a contributor to the New York Times blog of the evidence of manipulation of data in the outed emails:
• Phil Jones writes to University of Hull to try to stop sceptic Sonia Boehmer Christiansen using her Hull affiliation. Graham F Haughton of Hull University says its easier to push greenery there now SB-C has retired.(1256765544)
• Michael Mann discusses how to destroy a journal that has published sceptic papers.(1047388489)
• Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results (0939154709).
Analysis of impact here. Wow!
• Phil Jones describes the death of sceptic, John Daly, as “cheering news“.
• Phil Jones encourages colleagues to delete information subject to FoI request.(1212063122)• Phil Jones says he has use Mann’s “Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series “…to hide the decline”. Real Climate says “hiding” was an unfortunate turn of phrase.(0942777075)
• Letter to The Times from climate scientists was drafted with the help of Greenpeace.(0872202064)
• Mann thinks he will contact BBC’s Richard Black to find out why another BBC journalist was allowed to publish a vaguely sceptical article.(1255352257)
• Kevin Trenberth says they can’t account for the lack of recent warming and that it is a travesty that they can’t.(1255352257)
• Tom Wigley says that Lindzen and Choi’s paper is crap.(1257532857)
• Tom Wigley says that von Storch is partly to blame for sceptic papers getting published at Climate Research. Says he encourages the publication of crap science. Says they should tell publisher that the journal is being used for misinformation. Says that whether this is true or not doesn’t matter. Says they need to get editorial board to resign. Says they need to get rid of von Storch too. (1051190249)
• Ben Santer says (presumably jokingly!) he’s “tempted, very tempted, to beat the crap” out of sceptic Pat Michaels. (1255100876)
• Mann tells Jones that it would be nice to ‘”contain” the putative Medieval Warm Period’. (1054736277)
• Tom Wigley tells Jones that the land warming since 1980 has been twice the ocean warming and that this might be used by sceptics as evidence for urban heat islands.(1257546975)
• Tom Wigley say that Keith Briffa has got himself into a mess over the Yamal chronology (although also says it’s insignificant. Wonders how Briffa explains McIntyre’s sensitivity test on Yamal and how he explains the use of a less-well replicated chronology over a better one. Wonders if he can. Says data withholding issue is hot potato, since many “good” scientists condemn it.(1254756944)• Briffa is funding Russian dendro Shiyatov, who asks him to send money to personal bank account so as to avoid tax, thereby retaining money for research.(0826209667)
• Kevin Trenberth says climatologists are nowhere near knowing where the energy goes or what the effect of clouds is. Says nowhere balancing the energy budget. Geoengineering is not possible.(1255523796)• Mann discusses tactics for screening and delaying postings at Real Climate.(1139521913)
• Tom Wigley discusses how to deal with the advent of FoI law in UK. Jones says use IPR argument to hold onto code. Says data is covered by agreements with outsiders and that CRU will be “hiding behind them”.(1106338806)
• Overpeck has no recollection of saying that he wanted to “get rid of the Medieval Warm Period”. Thinks he may have been quoted out of context.(1206628118)
• Mann launches RealClimate to the scientific community.(1102687002)
• Santer complaining about FoI requests from McIntyre. Says he expects support of Lawrence Livermore Lab management. Jones says that once support staff at CRU realised the kind of people the scientists were dealing with they became very supportive. Says the VC [vice chancellor] knows what is going on (in one case).(1228330629)
• Rob Wilson concerned about upsetting Mann in a manuscript. Says he needs to word things diplomatically.(1140554230)
• Briffa says he is sick to death of Mann claiming his reconstruction is tropical because it has a few poorly temp sensitive tropical proxies. Says he should regress these against something else like the “increasing trend of self-opinionated verbiage” he produces. Ed Cook agrees with problems.(1024334440)
• Overpeck tells Team to write emails as if they would be made public. Discussion of what to do with McIntyre finding an error in Kaufman paper. Kaufman’s admits error and wants to correct. Appears interested in Climate Audit findings.(1252164302)
• Jones calls Pielke Snr a prat.(1233249393)
• Santer says he will no longer publish in Royal Met Soc journals if they enforce intermediate data being made available. Jones has complained to head of Royal Met Soc about new editor of Weather [why?data?] and has threatened to resign from RMS.(1237496573)
Finished in next post …
November 21st, 2009
11:29 am
Continued from previous:• Reaction to McIntyre’s 2005 paper in GRL. Mann has challenged GRL editor-in-chief over the publication. Mann is concerned about the connections of the paper’s editor James Saiers with U Virginia [does he mean Pat Michaels?]. Tom Wigley says that if Saiers is a sceptic they should go through official GRL channels to get him ousted. (1106322460)
[Note to readers - Saiers was subsequently ousted]• Later on Mann refers to the leak at GRL being plugged.(1132094873)
• Jones says he’s found a way around releasing AR4 review comments to David Holland.(1210367056)
• Wigley says Keenan’s fraud accusation against Wang is correct. (1188557698)
• Jones calls for Wahl and Ammann to try to change the received date on their alleged refutation of McIntyre [presumably so it can get into AR4](1189722851)
• Mann tells Jones that he is on board and that they are working towards a common goal.(0926010576)
• Mann sends calibration residuals for MBH99 to Osborn. Says they are pretty red, and that they shouldn’t be passed on to others, this being the kind of dirty laundry they don’t want in the hands of those who might distort it.(1059664704)
• Prior to AR3 Briffa talks of pressure to produce a tidy picture of “apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data”. [This appears to be the politics leading the science] Briffa says it was just as warm a thousand years ago.(0938018124)
• Jones says that UK climate organisations are coordinating themselves to resist FoI. They got advice from the Information Commissioner [!](1219239172)
• Mann tells Revkin that McIntyre is not to be trusted.(1254259645)
• Revkin quotes von Storch as saying it is time to toss the Hockey Stick . This back in 2004.(1096382684)
• Funkhouser says he’s pulled every trick up his sleeve to milk his Kyrgistan series. Doesn’t think it’s productive to juggle the chronology statistics any more than he has.(0843161829)
• Wigley discusses fixing an issue with sea surface temperatures in the context of making the results look both warmer but still plausible. (1254108338)
• Jones says he and Kevin will keep some papers out of the next IPCC report.(1089318616)• Tom Wigley tells Mann that a figure Schmidt put together to refute Monckton is deceptive and that the match it shows of instrumental to model predictions is a fluke. Says there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model output by authors and IPCC.(1255553034)
• Grant Foster putting together a critical comment on a sceptic paper. Asks for help for names of possible reviewers. Jones replies with a list of people, telling Foster they know what to say about the paper and the comment without any prompting.(1249503274)
• David Parker discussing the possibility of changing the reference period for global temperature index. Thinks this shouldn’t be done because it confuses people and because it will make things look less warm.(1105019698)
• Briffa discusses an sceptic article review with Ed Cook. Says that confidentially he needs to put together a case to reject it (1054756929)
• Ben Santer, referring to McIntyre says he hopes Mr “I’m not entirely there in the head” will not be at the AGU.(1233249393)
• Jones tells Mann that he is sending station data. Says that if McIntyre requests it under FoI he will delete it rather than hand it over. Says he will hide behind data protection laws. Says Rutherford screwed up big time by creating an FTP directory for Osborn. Says Wigley worried he will have to release his model code. Also discuss AR4 draft. Mann says paleoclimate chapter will be contentious but that the author team has the right personalities to deal with sceptics.(1107454306
Gold Sinks Further, Dollar Surges..
We will need to see a few more days of supporting action, but as of now, it looks like gold might be beginning the long-awaited correction.
How deep that will go is anyone´s guess, though the recent central bank buying is supposed to lay a floor for it above $1000. Now, normally I wouldn´t bet the house on that, but I´ve come to see that pronouncements from insider analysts (at GS) are no longer just market analysis to be weighed. They are announcements about the course of action the banking cartel is going to be supporting.
The trigger for this? I think it´s that upbeat jobs number, which is probably taking some speculative money out of gold …especially as gold is technically very overbought and institutional buyers want to lock in profits before the year end.
Dubai is more important than most commentators think, even Marc Faber. They say the numbers involved are too small.
But, as I blogged earlier, they´re not seeing the contagion possible.
Here´s what they´re discounting:
1 We don´t know what the numbers from Dubai really are. We can´t be absolutely sure. They keep changing them. $125 billion (the highest figure I´v heard) may not be enormous in a global context, but we don´t know how its tied up with investments and where. A firesale of Dubai Worlds real estate could have unsettling effects all over the world.
2. Dubai has an impact on the property market, not just in Dubai, but in London and New York where Dubai Worlds has holdings, and also in India, where real estate and employment could take a hit.
3. Banks have leveraged exposure through derivatives, beyond what they are admitting in public.
4. These are banks that are already broke, for all purposes.
5. When the banks involved are not themselves broke, they are backed by governments that are broke, or near-broke.
6. The government with likely the most exposure is Britain. Britain is on the verge of sovereign default.
7. This happens just as the second down-leg in real estate is unfolding, and along with it the just-as- leveraged commercial real estate market (see the recent zero hedge post on an ongoing CRE failure in Chicago), where there´s little pressure for the Feds to step in.
8. This happens after a 10-month run up in the stock market in what is essentially a bear rally, according to many experts.
9. This happens when the government has escalated an unpopular war in Afghanistan, calling for more troop commitments and more money
10. This happens after massive further government commitments in health care and other social spending.
Would the dollar move up just on the back of an employment number that was widely acknowledged to be misleading? I don´t know.
Do I know if gold will sink below $1000? No.
But CB (central banks of India etc.) buying is said to have set the floor. Me, I think that was a bit of help given by the RBI (CB of India, Sri Lanka, etc.) to the IMF, seat of power of the globalists. Even the IMF admitted it got lucky.
Will that bit of market manipulation to the upside be enough to stave off the deflationary effect of develeraging asset derivatives?
I don´t know, but I suspect it won´t.
I’m anticipating a rush into the dollar like we had in 2008…maybe not as strongly…
maybe gold will sop up some of the rush this time. I think that´s what the CB´s are hoping will happen.But again, one can´t be sure, for the simple reason no one knows how much more bad debt there is and where it is.
Climate-Gate: Media Ignored Scientific Back-Trackers
This story back in September ought to have made a lot of headlines, but didn´t. Perhaps it will now:
“When a leading proponent for one point of view suddenly starts batting for the other side, it’s usually newsworthy.
So why was a speech last week by Prof. Mojib Latif of Germany’s Leibniz Institute not given more prominence?
Latif is one of the leading climate modellers in the world. He is the recipient of several international climate-study prizes and a lead author for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He has contributed significantly to the IPCC’s last two five-year reports that have stated unequivocally that man-made greenhouse emissions are causing the planet to warm dangerously.
Yet last week in Geneva, at the UN’s World Climate Conference — an annual gathering of the so-called “scientific consensus” on man-made climate change – Latif conceded the Earth has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering “one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.”
The global warming theory has been based all along on the idea that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans would absorb much of the greenhouse warming caused by a rise in man-made carbon dioxide, then they would let off that heat and warm the atmosphere and the land.
But as Latif pointed out, the Atlantic, and particularly the North Atlantic, has been cooling instead. And it looks set to continue a cooling phase for 10 to 20 more years.”
My Comment
Now why would Latif come out with this suddenly? Maybe he had a peek at some of that data the CRU scientists were trying to hide and decided to dissociate himself in advance from a scandal threatening to blow up…
UN Funds Missing Billion Plus in Climate Change Donations
The Telegraph reported a few days ago that UN Funds were missing over a billion dollars contributed to tackle climate change in developing countries:
“A total of 20 nations pledged up to 410 million dollars (£247m) a year in 2001, resulting in a pot that should be worth well over 1.6 billion dollars (£963m).
But only 260m dollars (£157m) has been paid into two United Nations funds earmarked for the purpose according to the latest figures, the BBC World Service investigation said.
The EU told the broadcaster that the money was collected in ”bilateral and multilateral deals”, but was unable to provide data to back up the claim.
The sums were pledged in the 2001 Bonn Declaration, which was signed by the 15 countries that then made up the European Union, plus Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland.As of the end of September this year, the two UN funds - called the Least Developed Countries and Climate Change Funds - contained 155.4m dollars and 104.1m dollars respectively, the BBC said.
Boni Biagini, who runs the funds, told the broadcaster: ”These numbers don’t match the 410m per year. Otherwise, we’d be handling billions of dollars by now.”More Fall Out From Dubai On Indian Market
“Segments of the economy such as consumer durable and core industrial growth that are driving the current recovery in the Indian economy are purely a function of domestic stimulus initiatives and remain to that extent relatively insulated,” HDFC Bank said in a report today.
However, areas such as exports, remittance, banking and construction as well as real estate are likely to see further damage, the report added.
Exports are going to be the most affected by Dubai woes, as the UAE region is now India’s largest export destination toppling the United States.
Besides, bullion trading in Dubai is likely to be impacted, which may have ripple effect for India as around $29 billion of gold from the country is being traded in Dubai.”
Madoff -Related Accounting Firm Does Dubai´s Accounts..
From the Independent:
“Dubai World will start a formal process next week that will see it invite leading banks, including HSBC, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), Lloyd’s Banking Group and Standard Chartered, to create a steering committee to represent the many lenders. KPMG has been lined up by the lead banks to represent them in negotiations, with a formal appointment expected once the compilation of the five-to-six bank steering committee is finalised.
My Comment:
Now, KPMG is the big four accounting firm that gave Madoff´s representations to Tremont Group Holdings (a US fund that Madoff purportedly hoodwinked) a thumbs up. The Tomchin Family Charitable Trust, one of numbers of investors who were allegedly scammed by Madoff, has launched a lawsuit against KPMG and Tremont for negligence in monitoring one of Tremont´s funds that invested with Madoff.
The lawsuit included a list of other Madoff clients that included Victoria de Rothschild of the banking family of the Rothschilds and a Tory party contributor:
“Also on the list of Mr Madoff’s British clients is Lady Victoria de Rothschild, who is related to Nathaniel Rothschild, the co- chairman of Atticus Capital, the hedge fund.
Lady Victoria is a well-known figure on the society circuit and became known more recently as a lender to the Tory party, having set up a special company that gave the party a £1,014,000 loan that is due to be repaid in 2010.”
KPMG has also been hit with a $1b lawsuit for “reckless and negligent” auditing of failed subprime broker, New Century Financial, reportedly the first major case against an auditor arising from the financial crisis.
My Comment
So we have a Madoff-tainted accounting firm KPMG, with multiple legal problems, representing the banks that loaned to Dubai on one side, and (as I noted before) French banking legend Rothschild on the other side, heading up the restructuring efforts for Dubai….
Wiki has a list of KPMG´s legal infractions that includes this:
“In February 2007 KPMG Germany was investigated for ignoring questionable payments in the Siemens bribery case.[29] (Siemens agreed to pay a record $1.34 billion in fines to settle the case in December, 2008.) In November 2008 the Siemens Supervisory Board recommended changing auditors from KPMG to Ernst & Young.[30]
In 2006, Fannie Mae sued KPMG for malpractice for approving years of erroneous financial statements.[31]
In March 2008 KPMG was accused of enabling “improper and imprudent practices” at New Century Financial, a failed mortgage company[32] and KPMG agreed to pay $80 million to settle suits from Xerox shareholders over manipulated earnings reports.”
Some confidence-builder… a bank that´s been closely connected to the Madoff scam and to the Fannie and Freddie case (and hence, to Goldman Sachs)…
KPMG and Deloitte were brought in to investigate India´s ¨Madoff¨” - the fraud- riddled IT outsourcing giant Satyam (now Mahindra Satyam, its post-merger avatar - over the objections of the Institute of Chartered Accountants, India´s regulator, which said KPMG was not registered with it and would thus not be subject to its code of conduct or disciplinary proceedings.
Dubai Government Thumbs Its Nose at Creditors
After tentatively implying that there would be a back-stop to Dubai World´s debt problems, the Dubai Government on Monday disowned any legal obligation to Dubai World and told creditors that they needed to take responsibility for their loans.
“Creditors need to take part of the responsibility for their decision to lend to the companies,” said Abdulrahman al-Saleh, director general of Dubai’s department of finance. “They think Dubai World is part of the goverment, which is not correct.”
My Comment:
What´s going on here? The back and forth isn´t recent, but has been going on the whole year, with Dubai implying at one time that its debt load was taken care of, and at another, that it still had more problems; and in this instance, first seeming to back up Dubai World and then, backing-off from its backup….
The timing and vacillation seem to suggest that the government is testing the market and the reaction of investors before making its move. Not good.
And it leaves open the possibility, already raised by UBS in a recent Bloomberg piece, that the problems exceed the $80 billions of government liabilities and might extend to off-book structures that are not presently known.
Update:
After weekend assurances from Dubai that its much richer fellow-emirate Abu Dhabi, seat of the UAE federal government, would help, and that liquidity would be assured for local and international banks that needed it (through a “special additional liquidity facility”), Asian markets recovered this morning from their sell-off last week. But this morning, the local stock exchanges have been hit hard and this new announcement could provoke a second sell-off in world markets, especially in the UK FTSE, since British banks, especially Royal Bank of Scotland, have loan exposure to Dubai World.
Then, there´s also the exposure that UK banks have to other investments where Dubai World holds a stake.
And there´s the indirect exposure US banks have to Dubai through ties with UK banks.
Pollution, Not Global Warming, Is Biggest Environmental Threat
Mark Sircus. from Globalresearch, via Lew Rockwell:
“Meanwhile despite the international financial crisis pollution is still increasing as we continue to blanket the planet with mercury from coal fired electrical plants around the world. Mercury and thousands of other chemicals continue to be released in staggering tonnages and this is the real threat that we and our children face. Again they had most people worrying about the wrong thing – our old friend CO2.
Should we count the huge tonnage of Coke and Pepsi into our calculations of poisons released on earth directly into peoples’ guts?
Things are quite a bit different today than in 1918 when the last pandemic (first large experimental vaccine program) happened. Today people and our children are walking chemical time bombs. Diseases are accidents only waiting to happen and the triggers that will set us off get more fine-haired every year. The global catastrophe with chronic diseases like cancer, diabetes, heart and neurological diseases has more to do with chemical poisoning running head on into nutritional deficiencies; and the fact that too many have lost their souls and don’t know truth from untruth anymore than anything else.”
India Fears Effects of Dubai Meltdown
After earlier assurances that the Dubai meltdown wouldn´t impact the Indian market much, top officials now admit in published reports that the Indian labor market could be affected.
“Annual remittances to India from UAE is about 2 billion US dollars, out of the $52 billion sent by Indian expats from across the world.Two-thirds of the six million people living in Dubai are Indians, more than 60 per cent of them Malayalis, much to the worry of Kerala’s Finance Minister T M Thomas Isaac.“One main fear,” he notes, “is that the credit to realty sector in Dubai would be frozen for some time. It could seriously affect the construction sector, thereby our workers.” There is also concern about the fate of Kochi’s Smart City project as the Dubai-based real estate giant TECOM is already alleged to be in a bad shape.Most of the Indians employed in the UAE, according to recruitment agencies, are in the real estate sector, financial services and retail.“The Middle East meltdown,” says E Balaji of Chennai-based headhunting firm Ma Foi Management Consultants, “will lead to at least 25 per cent contraction in the job market. It can have a ripple effect.”
My Comment:
I´m assuming that the job market refered to is the job market for Indians in the Middle East….
Meanwhile, the rupee has come under pressure as the Indian stock market sold off on the events in Dubai.
Rothschild Helps Dubai Put Assets On Auction Block
From The Daily Telegraph:
“Paul Reynolds, head of Rothschild’s advisory operations in the Middle East, was this week asked to work for the Dubai government’s chief restructuring officer alongside Aidan Birkett of Deloitte, who was appointed on Wednesday.
The team is tasked with assessing the group’s assets, which is likely to result in a large scale sell-off of assets as varied as the QE2 cruise liner; Turnberry, the golf course that hosted this year’s Open Championship; and a raft of properties.”
My Comment:
This was the first I´d read about Rothschild´s involvement in Dubai, but it turns out Rothschild has been advising Dubai about the potential bankruptcy of Dubai World and its subsidiary Nakheel for a while. The advice is in connection with the bond issue to funnel money to Nakheel through something called the FSF (Financial Support Fund), which will apply certain tests (equivalent to the US “stress” tests) to pick and choose which of Dubai World´s operations will qualify.
“Those seeking FSF cash will have to demonstrate they have a long-term plan for financial and commercial viability, not least because the cash will have to be repaid, probably within a three- to five-year time frame. …..
It is worth noting, too, that the Dubai financial sector appears to fall outside the Rothschild guideline of FSF eligibility. Although they are obviously a key part of ongoing economic development, the emirate’s banks are generally regarded as being in a comparatively healthy condition, well-capitalised and with acceptable levels of non-performing loans. But whether the Rothschild strategy would allow a big financial institution with a high real-estate exposure to qualify for FSF funding is open to debate.”
More at Global Reearch.
What´s interesting is that Dubai World´s real estate assets wouldn´t qualify, which means that a lot of expensive real estate, some of it in New York and London, is likely to be on sale for cheap, although Dubai itself is stating that it will not allow itself to be forced to sell its prize assets at what it considers unfair prices.
Now with Dubai´s own property prices already down 50-60% from their 2008 peaks (with another 20% to go), what´s a firesale in London or New York property going to do to prices already showing signs of entering the famous second dip?
Secy of IMF - Siddharth Tiwari
On November 21 an Indian was named Secretary of the IMF, according to Press Trust of India:
“With a proven track record in managing complex work programmes, Indian economist Siddharth Tiwari has been named as the Secretary of the IMF by its Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
Tiwari, currently Director of the Office of Budget and Planning, is set to assume the position, which was held by Shailendra Anjaria before his retirement from the IMF earlier this year.
“Mr Tiwari has the experience and skills” to promote consensus building, which is a critical goal of the IMF Board and Management, Strauss-Kahn said in a statement.”
China Bubble, China Trouble
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF’s Managing Director ended a 6-day trip in Asia by telling Chinese authorities to continue with their stimulus program.
“The main goal is to help with public demand, weak private demand. And the reason why we have to continue with stimulus is because a self-sustaining private demand is not yet visible,” he said.”
He also called for
1) Asian countries to rebalance their economies by becoming less export oriented and fostering internal demand
2) for the renminbi to strengthen to raise household purchasing power and labor’s share of income
Strauss-Kahn said he anticipated Asian growth of nearly 6% for next year (double the forecast for the global economy) and called for Asian leadership in the global financial crisis.
What does this mean?
Let’s start with Eclectica Fund Manager, Hugh Hendry, cited in “Outside the Box” (JohnMauldin@InvestorsInsight.com). Hendry writes:
“Now, if we repeat the Japanese experience then it is possible that nominal US GDP will rise from $14trn today to perhaps just $16trn in ten years time….. The Chinese are building capacity to meet a world where US nominal GDP is $25trn in ten years time. I fear they could be in for a nasty shock.”
That is, the IMF is banking on the remninbi strengthening so that domestic household expenditure can pick up the slack from weakening US consumer demand because there’s huge overcapacity in China.
Serendipitously, just as Strauss-Kahn and the Chinese premier Hu Jintao agreed that domestic demand has to be stimulated, along comes this Bloomberg report that quotes China International Capital Corp. as predicting that Chinese steel demand will rise 12% rather than the 5% predicted by the World Steel Association.
Now, where will the steel go? To a boom in housing construction and auto manufacture.
I blogged earlier that Jim Chanos, the dark prince of short-selling, has declared China a bubble set to burst, on the strength of these mysterious auto purchases that seem to be entirely production driven. One one hand, the government is using its dollars to manufacture cars, demand be damned. But the government has also committed to stimulate demand by social spending (on education and health) that’s intended eventually to make the Chinese loosen up…. and spend on those big-ticket items, like cars and houses.
But there’s an irony in thinking about China’s demand as affecting the commodity market. The irony, says Hendry, is that China is the commodity market.
“Huge demand and numerous small players are a perfect setup for price increases by the Big Three miners, which often cite high spot prices as the reason for jagging up contract prices. But the spot market is relatively small, and mines can easily manipulate spot prices by reducing supply. On the other hand, numerous Chinese steel mills simultaneously want to buy ore to sustain production so their governments can report higher GDP rates, even if higher GDP is money-losing. China’s steel industry is structured to hurt China’s best interests.
The Chinese government is very much wedded to it’s 8% growth target and will do whatever it takes to come close to that target – including flooding the domestic banks with a wall of cheap money to lend as economic stimulus. However, preventing a downturn with easy money is a dangerous way to reflate the economy.
As profitability for the businesses that serve the real economy remain weak, there has been of shift of investment in the first half of 2009 disproportionately into property, stock and commodity markets rather than private sector capital formation. This shift in the medium term threatens to undermine China’s financial stability. Thus, China is experiencing a relatively weak real economy and red hot asset markets.
The Chinese imports that revived the bulk carrier market this year were mostly for speculative inventories. Bank loans were so cheap and easy to get that many commodity distributors used financing for speculation……
Even more foreboding is a looming real estate bubble. The real estate sector in China is especially critical to the bulk carrier market because approximately 50% of Chinese demand for steel is generated by the construction industry. Most Western shipping forecasts are based on unlimited future need in China for new construction. The reality is quite different. China’s urban living space is 28 square meters per person, quite high by international standard. China’s urbanization is about 50%. It could rise to 70-75%. Afterwards the rural population would decline on its own due to its high average age.
So China’s urban population may rise by another 300 million people. If we assume they all can afford property (a laughable notion at today’s price), Chinese cities may need an additional 8.4 billion square meters. China’s work-in-progress is over 2 billion square meters. There is enough land out there for another 2. The construction industry has production capacity of about 1.5 billion square meters per annum. Absolute oversupply, i.e., there are not enough people for all the buildings, could happen quite soon.
…..The nationwide average price [of housing] is about three months of salary per square meter, probably the highest in the world! Consequently, a lot of properties can’t be rented out at all. Those that can bring in 3% yield, barely compensating for depreciation……
Some argue that China’s property is always like this: appreciation is the return. This is not true. The property market dropped dramatically from 1995-2001 during a strong dollar period. Property prices could drop like Japan has experienced in the past two decades, which would destroy the banking system.
IMF Sells Gold to India (Updated)
Update 2 (Nov 3): The only other explanation I can think of is that the Indian government is privy to information indicating that the demise of the dollar is much closer at hand than is being given out..
Update 1:
OK. As you know, I’ve found this Indian purchase a bit puzzling. I have a bunch of questions:
*Why didn’t the Indian government make a big purchase earlier this year, at $900, rather than now, at the top?
*What, if any, is the connection between this and the Fisk report a few weeks ago about the Gulf Arabs moving out of the dollar, which a lot of people found odd, despite the reputation of the reporter? The report bumped up the price of gold.
Now, here’s Chuck Butler of Everbank, via The Daily Reckoning:
“I told you yesterday that I thought it would be a “wash” for the dollar and the gold price… But that was before I learned that the Reserve Bank of India paid for their $6.7 billion dollars worth of gold with… SDRs.”
(Note:Reuters reports that the sale was in dollars - which would be dollar negative).
What does this mean? That, over the whole past 15 -20 years of “globalization” while the US Govt. inflated its money and sold its treasuries and fake derivatives all over the world in return for real work and real savings, who were the buyers?
Countries like India, where large parts of the middle-class stored its savings in dollars. Now those dollars are seen as so unsound that the IMF (which is the new locus of Anglo-European global domination) won’t accept them for payment of gold.
That means the Indian government has to give up its SDRs (Special Drawing Rights) in exchange.
Now the resurgent IMF is where the globalists are exerting their power and not in the G20 (which was supposed to augment the power of developing nations when it was established in 1999).
As I blogged earlier, the Financial Stability Board is the new regulatory agency that will coordinate with the IMF, but it includes the G20 and also Spain and the European Commission and is headed by ex-Goldmanite, Mario Draghi and it’s housed at the Bank for International Settlements in Basel. So that is a double hit to any representation India will have in the forum.
India sold gold at the bottom in the 1990s; and is now buying it at the top nearly 20 years later - thus selling part of the gains of these past years. At least, so it seems to me. To me this smacks of neocolonialism.
And now, it becomes easier to understand why the center-liberal establishment media is interested in co-opting the anger against Goldman and channeling it into various subplots of the financial crisis (naked short selling, the bail-outs etc.etc).
I see this as an elaborate feint to divert world attention from the reprise of Anglo American and European colonization over the last two decades - accomplished, with a “black” president in charge.
Here’s a piece on IMF sales of gold in 1999. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/imf-sells-gold-to-hep-debt-of-poorest-nations-1090154.html
Notice how similar the language is - they’re doing it to increase funding to the poorest countries, etc. etc.
In the news, Bloomberg reports:
“The International Monetary Fund sold 200 metric tons of gold to the Reserve Bank of India for about $6.7 billion, its first such sale in nine years.
The transaction, equivalent to 8 percent of global annual mine production, involved daily sales from Oct. 19-30 at market prices and is in the process of being settled, the IMF said in a statement yesterday. The average price to India, the biggest consumer, was about $1,045 an ounce, an IMF official said on a conference call. Gold for immediate delivery gained 0.2 percent.”
My Comment:
Interesting. The Indian government doesn’t buy gold at the bottom (2000) but now, when it’s at all time highs (shades of the British government selling gold at the bottom).
Now, the Indian central bank is reputed to be very savvy, as are Indian gold buyers. Most commentators expect gold to consolidate, if not correct, before pushing on. It would make sense for the Indian government to wait and buy it on dips.This is a good move for the IMF. But for the Indian government, which managed to steer the banking system past the whirlpool of unwinding derivatives, I wonder if this move is astute.
Look at the peculiar facts, as reported in the New York TimesWall Street Journal)
“In the last one year, China has increased its gold holdings, by weight, by 75.69%, Russia by 18.78%, the Philippines by 18.50% and Mexico by 108.91%.
Compared with this, India’s central bank did not add anything to its gold reserves in the last one year, according to Bloomberg data.(Lila: Why not? Why buy gold at record prices when the government was unwilling to buy when it was trading much lower, only this year?)
In fact, the share of gold in India’s total reserves has dwindled over the decade.
In March 1994, the share of gold in the total reserves of the country was 20.86%; by the end of June 2009, gold constituted only 3.7% of the total reserves.”
Even the IMF expressed surprise, as Breitbart.com notes:
“A senior IMF official said that the IMF was “lucky” in selling the 200 tonnes to India for roughly 1,045 dollars an ounce, compared with 850 dollars an ounce in April 2008.”
(Lila: In other words, over the whole period of globalization, India sold it’s gold and bought US treasury…dollars…just what the US government was desperate to get rid off, so it wouldn’t drive inflation at home…)
Again, India sold gold cheap and bought it back at its height. Does that sound like savvy behavior from a country renowned for well trained economists and smart gold buyers?
A former governor of the Indian central bank (Reserve Bank of India), Bimal Jalan, said it was to help the IMF meet its funding needs for loans to the poorest countries, for which it had looked to India and China.
As an aside, in an earlier post, I speculated that the report (by Robert Fisk, a very respected source) about Gulf Arabs moving out of the petrodollar - which was promptly denied - might have been a rumor circulated to bump up the price of gold to help IMF gold sales….maybe, I wasn’t so far off, after all.
I went back to an earlier post this year, in February, which quotes from a list in Richard Russell’s letter:
Note: The list looks inaccurate. I’ll go back and find why Russell’s numbers are so different from the World Gold Council figures below them). (Note: Russell is referring to tonnes of gold; the WGC figures are for dollar amounts. So the discrepancies we refer to at in the percentages).The US has 8,135 tonnes….64.4% of reserves
Germany — 3,412… …64.4% of reserves
IMF — 3,217… … …(1)
France — 2,508… … …58.7%
Italy — 2,451… … …61.9%
Switzerland — 1,040… …23.8%
Japan — 765.2… …1.9% …(a potential gold-buyer)
China — 600.0… …0.9% …(should be a big buyer)*A reader notes that this number is too low. I assume it’s a number from before China started buying off market. Compare with list below.
Russia — 495. 9… …2.2% …(is a buyer)
Taiwan — 422.2… …3.6% …(should be a buyer)
India — 357.7… …3.0% …(should be a buyer)
UK — 310.3… … …14.5% …(sold most of its gold at the low price)
Saudi Arabia — 143.0… …11.4% (should buy gold)
South Africa — 124.4… …9.0%
Australia — 79.8… … …6.3%So there you have it. Among countries, Italy, France, Germany, and the US have the most gold. Switzerland has a third of what they have. The UK, South Africa, Australia, and Saudi Arabia are next with about 1/5th - 1/10th as much. Russia and Japan have only a small percent in gold. China and India have even less. What do most Asians have? Debt (treasuries and dollars) from the US. Neo-colonialism anyone?
Correction:
CNBC has the following completely different list of top gold holding countries compiled by tradermark via Seeking Alpha, posted October 13, 2009.
(Note: Data is based on the World Gold Council’s September 2009 report and is converted to US short tons at a rate of 1 T = 1.102311 US tons. All monetary estimates are calculated at the rate of 1oz gold = $1042 US).
United States $298.4 N/A
Germany $125.0 69.2%
International Monetary Fund $118.0 N/A
Italy $89.9 66.6%
France $89.7 70.6%
China $38.7 1.9%
Switzerland $38.2 29.1%
Japan $28.1 2.3%
Netherlands $22.5 59.6%
Russia $20.9 4.3%
European Central Bank $18.4 18.8%
Taiwan $15.5 3.9%
Portugal $14.0 90.9%
India $13.1 4.0%
Venezuela $13.1 36.1%China Saved Brazilian Economy, Says Brazilian Economist
From the Brunei Times:
“In Latin America, IMF economists said the crisis is affecting countries differently depending on whether, like Mexico, they are more closely tied to the US or, like Brazil, they have more links with China.
“If it was not for China we wouldn’t have seen positive growth in the second quarter in Brazil,” Ilan Goldfajn, chief economist at Brazilian bank Itau Unibanco, said at an IMF-organised conference in Istanbul. He said the world would now start to “rebalance towards Asia”.
India’s Man at the IMF: Arvind Virmani
The global crisis has had the effect of making over the IMF and giving it renewed power.
Until recently, the Fund had lost its international reputation for what was seen as mishandling of the debt crises in Argentina, Asia, and Russia in the 1990s.
Now, however, with a universal cry of “do something” going up, it’s the IMF to the rescue. The Fund has had its monies tripled, and is at the center of a new global regulatory regime, ostensibly working with the G20 (the Group of Twenty, a forum that includes the twenty countries with the greatest GDPs).
The idea is that the G20, which has room for countries like Argentina, Brazil, China, India, and Indonesia, among others, will be more inclusive than forums limited to the developed nations. To check if this is actually the case, I’ve been looking at the structure and organization of the IMF and its affiliated groups, and will be posting what I find as I go along.
Exhibit A is India’s representative to the IMF. That’s Arvind Virmani, Chief Economic Advisor in the Ministry of Finance. Virmani, according to this article in the Indian Express, was educated at Harvard (PhD in Economics), was the Principal Adviser to the Planning Commission, and was also a contender for Vice President of the Reserve Bank of India. Before joining the government, he was a Senior Economist at the World Bank research department.
It’s always the case. The people who end up representing countries like India are all trained in the elite schools in the West, where the faculties are drawn from the US government, as well as the very corporations and international institutions that the representatives will interact with, and often be responsible for monitoring or regulating.
How independent can they be? And even if they’re personally ethical people, how easy will it be for them to even think outside the parameters set by the institutions in which they’ve trained and operated all their lives? Not easy at all. In fact, impossible.
Let’s see if we can trace some of the connections:
Virmani is an alum of Harvard.
It so happens that Larry Summers, current head economic adviser of President Obama, was the 27th President of Harvard (2001-2006).
Summers is said to have been behind Harvard’s investment in interest rate swaps that eventually lost the university over a billion dollars.
Before that, Summers was Chief Economist of the World Bank (1991-1993) - where Virmani worked before 1987- and then Undersecretary and Deputy Secretary of the US Treasury, before becoming Secretary in 1999..
Summers’ long-time mentor is Robert Rubin, whom he succeeded at Treasury Secretary.
In the 1990s Summers was a leading advocate of the Washington consensus–the proposition that free financial markets, “free” trade and fiscal discipline would bring prosperity to the world.
I put “free” in quotes because what it really amounted to was managed trade, manipulated by the US government with carrots and sticks of sorts…from nuclear weaponry to aid to penalties to sabre rattling
While Summers was pushing the Washington Consensus, his mentor Robert Rubin, a former Goldman co-chair, was US Treasury Secretary, where he was instrumental in blocking legislation to regulative the derivative market.
Rubin also pushed through the repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act (keeping apart merchant banking and commercial banking), which enabled the consolidation of the banking industry.
Then, Rubin became the director of Citigroup, one of the banks whose consolidation was made possible by that repeal. Citi shareholders have filed a lawsuit against Citi executives including Rubin charging that they sold shares at inflated prices, hiding the risks. Shareholders are said to have suffered losses over 70% since Rubin joined Citi.
Meanwhile, Rubin also has a Harvard connection, being a member of the executive governing board of the university, a position he landed a year after getting an honorary doctorate from Harvard.
Importantly, Virmani also shares his Harvard ties with current World Bank president, Robert Zoellick. Zoellick is also an alum of Goldman Sachs, a former US State and Treasury official, a Presidential assistant and US Trade Representative, and a double graduate of Harvard (JD and MPP).
Finally, the IMF position is known to be a sinecure for retiring Indian government economists, who can earn some hard currency for their retirement.
Question: Even if Virmani were scrupulously honest himself (and he might be), how easy would it be for him to be able to stand up to policies carrying the imprimatur of some one like Rubin or Summers or Zoellick? Not easy at all. In fact, impossible…
China’s Gold Rush..
From Adrian Ash at Bullion Vault, via goldseek:
“The International Monetary Fund confirmed on Friday that it will sell 403 tonnes from its hoard to finance development projects in poorer countries, offering gold to central banks before considering steady, pre-announced open-market sales.
“China has no need at all to Buy Gold from the international markets,” counters Lila Lu, chief precious metals trader at Minsheng Bank Corp. in Beijing, speaking to Reuters.
“Because China is a large gold producer, it can source gold directly from its domestic makers, most of which are state-run enterprises.”
Off-market purchases direct from domestic Gold Mining firms enabled South Africa – then the world’s No.1 producer – to double its gold reserves during the late 1960s.
“Why should we use US Dollars to Buy Gold?” Lu added today. “We can use Yuan instead to purchase gold from domestic producers.”
Early Tuesday the state-owned China Investment Corp. announced taking a 15% stake in Singapore-listed commodities trading house Noble Group at a cost of $850 million.
Physical gold demand from private Chinese households rose 9% in the first half of this year, trade marketing-group the World Gold Council said today, announcing an “unprecedented” sales push across rural China.”My Comment
There are several terribly important things going on in the capital markets and in international politics.
I’ll start with what most investors are probably watching anxiously - the teetering of the dollar at the lower end of the long term band of support (76-80), below which it plunged only a year ago. After showing some strength yesterday, the dollar is down again and gold is back up strongly over 1010. The reason seems to be the whispering in the markets that China will be buying IMF gold to supplement what are said to be meager reserves.
Rumors like these could be seen as a threat by the Chinese, for they expose China’s weakness in relation to other countries, especially those that possess better gold reserves. I suspect the comments by Lu are intended to diffuse that threat.
Another reason for dollar weakness is that the relative strengths of currencies are on the table at the G20 meeting, which is scheduled to take place in Thursday in Pittburgh, Pennsylvania and trade deficits are going to be considered - which is likely to be dollar negative.
The IMF sales are pretty interesting, although it’s hard to tell exactly what’s involved. It seems the gold will be sold to central banks (which ones?) and the proceeds will go to supplement and improve the financing now available to low-income countries (how?).
Question: Why should these professed good intentions be taken at face value, given all we know about the IMF?
At present, the IMF also allocates SDRs (or Special Drawing Rights) to each member country based on its contribution to the IMF (this is supposed to be a way to improve members’ liquidity in the international markets).
The SDR’s are based on a basket of currencies - currently, the US dollar, the euro, the sterling, and the yen - that can be traded for other currencies or used directly.
The IMF will use the gold sale proceeds to invest in other things. The interest from those investments will then benefit low-income countries. At least, that’s what I took away from my reading.
It all sounds suspiciously convoluted and opaque. My fear is that this is all an elaborate charade to leave some countries/institutions holding the “paper” bag, while real value is siphoned off by other countries/institutions.
I’ll leave you to decide who the winners and the losers will be….
Meanwhile, this is only my suspicion. I’ll need to go and do some more digging. But I’m putting my suspicions out here to fuel some leg work in the blogosphere.
Here’s a link to some relevant information on gold market manipulation at the website of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA), the leading activist group on gold price manipulation.
Especially read through the events surrounding the sale of Britain’s gold by then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown. Unlike other countries, UK gold sales are under the authority of the politicians. Brown sold British gold at a price lower than the market price at the time. The timing was extremely suspicious and followed on Robert Rubin’s unsuccessful attempts to get the IMF to sell its gold. The ostensible reason was to “help poor countries” - the same reason being given now. But the actual reason was a simpler one and one I’ve discussed a number of times. It was to keep the gold price low to support the dollar, disguise the rate of monetary debasement, and pump up the stock market. That in turn helped the derivative market, which Rubin and Greenspan had also helped to keep out of regulation. This was in the late 1990s….
Now, a decade later, the IMF hasn’t been weakened by the revelations of its sins. Instead, it’s been strengthened. And now, again, the IMF is selling gold - and again, the excuse is “helping the poor.”
Vulture Funds Prey on Third World Debt..
Johann Hari has a critical piece on “vulture funds” at The Independent that is sure to be polarising:
“Would you ever march up to a destitute African who is shivering with Aids and demand he “pay back” tens of thousands of pounds he didn’t borrow – with interest? I only ask because this is in effect happening, here, in British and American courts, time after time. Some of the richest people in the world are making profit margins of 500 per cent by shaking money out of the poorest people in the world – for debt they did not incur.
Here’s how it works. In the mid-1990s, a Republican businessman called Paul Singer invented a new type of hedge fund, quickly dubbed a “vulture fund.” They buy debts racked up years ago by the poorest countries on earth, almost always when they were run by kleptocratic dictators, before most of the current population was born. They buy it for small sums – as little as 10 per cent of its paper value – from the original holder and then take the poor country to court in Britain or the US to demand 100 per cent of the debt is repaid immediately, plus interest built up over years, and court costs.”
My Comment
I’ve been interested in these lucrative public-private philanthropic ventures for some time. “Doing good” has become the avenue for “doing well.” This is touted by some people as the “markets working for people.” But the markets work for…and against..people all on their own. They don’t need the bells and whistles of public philanthropy added.
And when philanthropy been added, as my earlier post on Jeffrey Levitt indicates, it’s usually been added for an ulterior motive. Thus Hari’s activism against vulture funds.
Having made that point, I have a few problems of my own with Hari’s post that I’ll come back later.
First, here’s a response from the object of Hari’s criticism - one Michael Sheehan, the founder of Debt Advisory International (DAI) (which manages several vulture funds) and a Republican donor to George Bush’s campaigns. Sheehan’s letter is cited by Felix Salmon at his Reuter’s blog. The crux is at the end:
“At the end of the day, then, the anti-vulture legislation will accomplish exactly the opposite of what it set out to do. It will have increased the debt burden of all HIPC countries, increased the cost of credit for all HIPC countries, increased the barriers to foreign direct investment for all HIPC countries and increased the amount that will be demanded from the OECD countries in support of aid budgets for all HIPC countries. There won’t be any savings. The costs will be in the billions and will be annual costs you won’t get rid of.
You will, of course, in the process have increased the power and leverage of the development set, but then that was the intention all along, wasn’t it.”There’s more on Sheehan and the creator of the concept - Paul Singer - in this piece, which also sheds some light on just how influential vulture funds are:
“Debt Advisory International are very generous to their lobbyists in Washington. They have been paying $240,000 a year to the lobby firm Greenberg Traurig - although recently they jumped ship to another firm after Greenberg Traurig’s top lobbyist was put in jail.
Paul Singer has more direct political connections. He was the biggest donor to George Bush and the Republican cause in New York City - giving $1.7m since Bush started his first presidential campaign.”
Many of the debt purchases are also corrupt, as this BBC piece indicates:
“The Zambian deal with Donegal for instance involved an official in former President Frederick Chiluba’s administration who was later found - along with the president - to have stolen £23m from Zambia.”
From Third World Traveler come further details:
“The debt, originally owed to Romania for agricultural machinery and services, was accrued during the cold war. The amount claimed by Donegal was far more than Zambia is due to receive this year in debt relief - as agreed at the G8 meeting in Gleneagles in 2005. It is equivalent to more than six months of Zambia’s health budget.
Since qualifying for debt relief, Zambia has introduced free primary rural healthcare and announced plans to employ 4,500 teachers and hundreds of nurses. But one in three children in Zambia still does not go to primary school, nearly 80% do not receive secondary education and the average income is barely $1 a day. Donegal International’s claim threatens to undermine Zambia’s plans for poverty reduction.”
My Comment:
The vulture funds are, of course, behaving unconscionably. But moral outrage after the fact is less effective in stopping such things as not providing the incentives that entice unscrupulous people in the first place.
And these incentives are usually put in place by the state…in this case, by the global financial organizations, the IMF and World Bank, which were behind the economic policies that turned the once relatively prosperous country of Zambia into a basket-case, where half the population is malnourished.
So yes, the vulture funds are predators - but their predation is secondary and far smaller than the predation of the scavengers of the first order - the global managers whose “aid” has a strange way of devastating its recipients...
Central America Musings…
A number of people have written me and asked my opinion about different parts of the Americas as possible destinations. So here’s a brief precis of some of my thinking on the subject:
Before I came down here, I went through a lot of research on the different Central American countries and on Mexico too.
Mexico was my prefered expat location, because I’m deeply interested in the Mayans. I love Mexican food, the architecture, the people, the crafts, and the weather. It was always my first choice. But the drug wars and the accompanying violence scared me off. Then too, land is not cheap in Mexico, except in the Yucatan, and the Yucatan has problems. Some areas look like they might have water problems, and other areas are targets for hurricanes. Then there’s the weather - humid and very hot. But the primary problem for me was corruption. I hear everyone has to be paid off and that police can be untrustworthy. Crime is said to be high. And then the Mexican economy is very tied up with the US economy. So, reluctantly, I looked elsewhere.
In Central America, the only country I really thought long about was Panama. But there again, there were problems. The weather is very humid and hot. Panama City is overcrowded and expensive - more expensive than many parts of the US. I liked the mixed culture, the entrepreneurial energy and the fact that it’s become a hub of financial services and banking. But that has its draw backs too. It’s also attracting attention from the US authorities who are concerned about off-shore havens. Also, land isn’t cheap and what there is of it is attracting the developer crowd - which I tend to avoid. Nothing turns me off more than condo complexes going up, Starbucks everywhere you look. For that, you can go to Miami. It’s probably cheaper now. So no to Panama.
The Honduras struck me as too poor a country. Extremes of wealth, especially in a small country, are a bad sign. How long will the place go without a revolution of some kind, I asked myself. And how long before US business or government interests start fiddling around. And sure enough, there’s been a coup.
The rain forests of Guatemala sounded..and looked..beautiful. But clearing rain forest isn’t exactly the easiest or the wisest thing to do. Guatemala also has a reputation for corrupt and cruel police. Real estate prices in the capital city were high. I nixed it too.
Nicaragua was cheaper. But also poor and unstable. No foreigner would make it a permanent base, unless they liked living dangerously. It’s the kind of place where a certain sort of person from Norte America hides out…keeps a low profile.. or swindles the next fool who comes along..none of which interests me. And it’s too close to other hot spots for comfort.
And so it’s turned out….the Honduras coup seems to be spilling over into Nicaragua (see below).
Belize has its problems with hurricanes and it’s not cheap, except in the more remote areas. It also doesn’t have much to offer in the way of infrastructure and business. But again, the main problem, as for the other Central American countries, was that it looked like the back yard of the US, vulnerable to interference, to a spill over of the drug wars, and to increased surveillance.
That’s why I decided to go further south, despite the expense, and despite the feeling that overwhelms you every so often in a foreign country - what the heck am I doing here? But I was asking that in the US anyway…
And in the US, I understand everything’s that being said….which tends to upset me, as you can guess from my fiery boycott-the-US post (it’s preceded by the word “IF”).
Here, I don’t understand most of what’s said. Ergo - peace of mind…
Some news on the spill over from the Honduras:
”Mónica Zalaquett, director of the Center for Prevention of Violence, says the problem in Honduras has become a “political instrument” in Nicaragua, used by both the Sandinistas and the opposition to promote their own agendas..
….On Aug. 4, a group of four Nicaraguan opposition lawmakers who tried to travel to the Honduran border to express their discomfort with what they called Zelaya’s two-week “occupation” of northern Nicaragua were turned back 12 miles before the town of Ocotal. Sandinista and Zelaya supporters blocked their caravan on the highway and attacked their vehicles with sticks and rocks…”
I feel vindicated in my research…I usually do. My problem isn’t sound investment decisions. I make good choices. My problem is I’m too cautious and tend to wait a bit too long. I don’t lose, but I sometimes miss out - which some people would say is the same thing.
I don’t see it like that though, because you have to take into account your risk appetite and tolerance for stress. If you live your life pretty much on your own terms, answer to no one, can walk away from unpleasant people and things, and spend all your time in your own company and not in the company of annoying people, you are way ahead of 99% of the world.
And the other 1% is probably broke.
Which means that if you’re not broke, then you are better off than practically everyone.
I’m not broke.
The Ghost Ships of Singapore
“Some experts believe the ratio of container ships sitting idle could rise to 25 per cent within two years in an extraordinary downturn that shipping giant Maersk has called a ‘crisis of historic dimensions‘. Last month the company reported its first half-year loss in its 105-year history.
Martin Stopford, managing director of Clarksons, London’s biggest ship broker, says container shipping has been hit particularly hard: ‘In 2006 and 2007 trade was growing at 11 per cent. In 2008 it slowed down by 4.7 per cent. This year we think it might go down by as much as eight per cent. If it costs £7,000 a day to put the ship to sea and if you only get £6,000 a day, than you have got a decision to make.
‘Yet at the same time, the supply of container ships is growing. This year, supply could be up by around 12 per cent and demand is down by eight per cent. Twenty per cent spare is a lot of spare of anything - and it’s come out of nowhere.’
These empty ships should be carrying Christmas over to the West. All retailers will have already ordered their stock for the festive season long ago. With more than 92 per cent of all goods coming into the UK by sea, much of it should be on its way here if it is going to make it to the shelves before Christmas.
via Lew Rockwell.
Argentina and Uruguay Fight Over Polluted Water at the Hague
The Pentagon, among others, has made the point that riparian disputes are going to be at the top of the agenda in global politics in the coming years. Water is essential to survival and central to border disputes between China and India, Pakistan and India, and even in Latin America, where water is abundant.
In this case, Uruguay’s construction of two paper mills on the River Uruguay has set off a dispute with Argentina, which claims the construction is in violation of a long-standing treaty and is polluting the river as well as the Argentina tourist town on the other side of the border. The two countries have taken the dispute to the Hague, which is now hearing the case.
What’s my interest in this?
Uruguay remains comparatively unpolluted next to its neighbors, but the paper mills, which will boost Uruguay’s exports by 15% are symptomatic of increased development that could very well change that picture shortly. Uruguay’s attraction as a farming country is the relatively cheap cost of good quality soil, abundant water, and a history of organic use . But with multinationals and governments gobbling up land all over the world, you wonder how long that will continue.
The area around the middle of the border with Argentina, especially at the lower end, near Colonia (the Soriano area), has the highest quality soil and is intensively cultivated. Argentines often buy there because of the proximity to Buenos Aires, via the ferry at Colonia. The farming tends to horticulture, with potato farming and dairy well represented. I haven’t looked in that region because of the high prices - a hectare can run to over $8000, and I’ve seen prices as high as $20,000 and more, depending on the improvements and the location of the land.
In the middle of the border area, in the department of Paysandu, land usage runs to cattle farms and wheat.
Further north, in Salto, a pretty university town, citrus farming takes precedence, as the soil isn’t as high in fertility.
All these areas are well watered by rivers, like the Uruguay and the Rio Negro, which cut through the relatively flat, unspectacular land. But these are also the areas where land prices have shot up the most recently because of the influx of Argentines, looking for a safer place for their money and freedom from increasingly onerous agricultural laws….
China Files WTO Complaint Over US Tire Tariffs…
In the news:
“Beijing filed a World Trade Organization complaint Monday over new U.S. tariffs on Chinese tires, stepping up pressure on Washington in the latest in a series of trade disputes.
The conflict is a potential irritant as Washington and Beijing prepare for a summit of the Group of 20 leading economies in Pittsburgh on Sept. 24-25 to discuss efforts to end the worst global downturn since the 1930s.”
More here at AP.
My Comment:Begin the trade wars..or rather, so continue the trade wars.
America dumps subsidized farm products in China, China levies penalties on exporters who don’t use 40% Chinese parts in their products….it’s all part of the effort to shore up exports to prevent the economy of either country from sliding further into depression…World Bank’s IFC Suspends Investment in Agrofuels in Indonesia
From The Third World Institute’s Choike program, here’s a recent report that World Bank and International Finance Corporation (IFC) head Robert Zoellick has agreed to suspend World Bank/IFC financing of the agrofuel sector (oil palm, in this case) in Indonesia, in response to activists’ concerns about environmental degradation and social troubles:
“In response to an appeal by a global coalition of NGOs, IFC / World Bank President Robert Zoellick has agreed to suspend IFC funding of the oil palm sector pending the development of a revised strategy for dealing with the troubled sector.
The response follows a highly critical audit by the IFC’s independent ‘complaints advisory ombudsman’ which had shown that, as claimed by the NGOs, IFC funding of the Wilmar Group had violated the IFC’s own procedures, and commercial concerns had been allowed to override the IFC’s environmental and social standards.”
My Comment:
The IFC is an arm of the World Bank group and is based in Washington, DC. It differs from the World Bank in being entirely private and for-profit and in not being backed by sovereign (i.e. government) guarantees. It’s focus is on investment in the private sector in emerging markets.
This will be a big blow to top agro-fuels producer Singapore-based Wilmar International, whose business activities in Sumatra and Kalimantan have provoked complaints from some 19 environmental groups, plantation small holders, and indigenous people’s organizations:
“IFC’s ombudsman had conducted an audit following the NGO complaints and found that IFC funding of Wilmar International, listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange, had violated IFC’s procedures and commercial concerns had been allowed to override IFC environmental and social standards.
The ombudsman’s report was released earlier this month and focused on four financing arrangements made by the IFC between 2003 and 2008 in favor of Wilmar International, which runs more than 200,000 hectares of palm oil plantations in Indonesia and Malaysia.
IFC had earlier agreed to provide the company with US$33.3 million in investment guarantees and $17.5 million in loans over five year.” (Jakarta Post, Sept 14, 09)
Wilmar is also the supplier of cheap palm kernel that’s used to feed cows by New Zealand dairy giant Fonterra. Fonterra uses 1/4 of the world’s palm kernel - a trade that has drawn fire from NZ environmental groups, which call it a national scandal that a company in a country known for its environmental quality should be doing business with a corporation they describe as destroying Malaysian and Indonesia rain-forest at unsustainable rates.
UN Recommends New Global Currency
In the news, on September 7, Bloomberg reports that the UN wants a new global currency, ostensibly to protect emerging markets:
“UN countries should agree on the creation of a global reserve bank to issue the currency and to monitor the national exchange rates of its members, the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development said today in a report.
China, India, Brazil and Russia this year called for a replacement to the dollar as the main reserve currency after the financial crisis sparked by the collapse of the U.S. mortgage market led to the worst global recession since World War II. China, the world’s largest holder of dollar reserves, said a supranational currency such as the International Monetary Fund’s special drawing rights, or SDRs, may add stability. “
My Comment
(coming up)World Bank Global Outlook: No Green Shoots
This harsh reality is reflected in the World Bank Global Outlook Report of June 22, 2009.
It notes the following for 2009:*Global growth is set to fall by 2.9%
*World trade is likely to shrink by nearly 10%
*Industrial production in rich countries will drop by 15% from August 2008
*Developed economies will contract by 4.5% in 2009 and grow only in 2010 and 2011
*The US economy will decline by 3%
*Private capital flows to developing countries are likely to be halved, from $US 707 billion (2008) to $US 363 billion (2009)
*Industrial production in developing countries, excluding China, is set to fall by 10%.
*GDP growth in developing countries will fall from 5.9% (2008) to 1.2%.
China Quotes Ben Franklin, Criticizes Greenspan for Asset Inflation
“Mr Cheng [former vice-chairman of the Standing Committee and current head of the green energy drive] said China had learned from the West that it is a mistake for central banks to target retail price inflation and take their eye off assets. This is where Greenspan went wrong from 2000 to 2004,” he said. “He thought everything was alright because inflation was low, but assets absorbed the liquidity.”
Mr Cheng said China had lost 20m jobs as a result of the crisis and advised the West not to over-estimate the role that his country can play in global recovery. China’s task is to switch from export dependency to internal consumption, but that requires a “change in the ideology of the Chinese people” to discourage excess saving. “This is very difficult”. Mr Cheng said the root cause of global imbalances is spending patterns in US (and UK) and China.
“The US spends tomorrow’s money today,” he said. “We Chinese spend today’s money tomorrow. That’s why we have this financial crisis.” Yet the consequences are not symmetric. “He who goes borrowing, goes sorrowing,” said Mr Cheng.
It was a quote from US founding father Benjamin Franklin.”
More here at The Telegraph (UK).
My Comment:
Three things give this remark away, in my humble opinion as a long-time propaganda watcher.
1. The speaker is the head of China’s green energy drive. That means he is likely to be on good terms with the green energy people in the US government, the financial center of which is Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs has extensive ties with China’s state sector and is counterparty to huge derivative contracts with state banks and companies.
2. It is notable that Mr. Cheng’s language echoes the language of the left-liberal governing class in emphasizing the role of Greenspan at the expense of everything else. Greenspan, being a former Randian and an avowed libertarian, is expendable to this group. Cheng does not mention the role of cheap money, the creation and trading of mountains of derivative contracts, and debt-based policies that go back to long before 2004, and indeed long before Greenspan. He does not mention the Federal Reserve itself.
3. It’s also notable that Mr. Cheng echoes the left-liberal line about over-saving being a problem in China. But the problem is not thrift and savings (i.e. capital formation), which by definition can never be excessive in a capitalist economy where investment is put to work by genuine market forces. The problem is malinvestment caused by manipulation of the interest rate. And that’s a problem in which the Federal Reserve’s role is critical.
Major Market Move in Offing
Looks like there’ll be a good deal of volatility ahead in the markets this coming week and through the fall:
*From Monday last week onward, New York has been riled up by the news out of China that Chinese SOEs (State Owned Enterprises) might walk away on derivative contracts that they think have been deeply manipulated. (They’re right on that). The SOEs involved are Air China, China Eastern, and Cosco.
*The derivatives are not mortgage-backed securities (the cause of the 2008 melt-down) but - likely- hedged oil futures in the OTC (over the counter) market, which is unregulated (that is, the SEOs hold synthetic longs).
*The threat - if it is that - has forced gold out of its summer trading range to within points of the $1000 mark, before falling back..and it pushed up the Chinese market by about 5%.(Sept 3)
*The counter-parties are 6 foreign banks, said to include Goldman Sachs, UBS, and JP Morgan. Goldman could take a hit on the contracts for around $15 billion, it’s rumored.
Note: The Chinese have been buying IMF bonds (50 billion) and watching the US meltdown and “stimulus” hocus-pocus with a good deal of warranted alarm, because all it means is their investments are being manipulated and driven down.
Obama’s reappointment of Bernanke was also taken as a bad sign by the Chinese. (correctly).
*Rumors have been swirling of further defaults of major US banks.
*The G20 has a preliminary meeting this weekend and the Chinese are said to have put the purchase of off-market gold on the table.
*The Chinese are pushing gold and silver on their populations, probably in anticipation of a currency meltdown.
*Meanwhile, Hong Kong has asked for all its gold to be returned from London.
*Last week, Germany asked for all its gold to be returned from London.
*Meanwhile, Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank and King County, Washington State have brought suit against Moody’s, S&P, and Morgan Stanley on fraud charges for the contracts they wrote, a case that would have massive implications for how other contracts are treated.
*[Oddly (?), Washington State is also where the earliest swine flu cases in the US were detected and where one of the largest outbreaks on campus just surfaced today - with some 2000 students at Washington State University coming down with the virus. Washington State had previously received large grants from Homeland Security for emergency preparations for pandemics, had TV Public Service Ads in place, had written up plans and practiced exercises].
Argentina Farmland Troubles
Here’s a clip from early in the year that might interest libertarians who’ve been looking outside the US for farmland, in anticipation of any further worsening of the economy.
The video depicts the effects of drought in Santa Fe province….and makes a rather vague (and likely, insubstantial) reference to global warming.But there are many other problems in Argentina besides drought - bad government policies, problems with squatters, the depletion of the soil from soy monoculture, the influx of genetically modified foods, and the relatively high prices of land in recent years.
And now there’s also increasing social unrest.
I was talking to some American friends who live in one of the north-eastern provinces, Misiones. They liked where they were, but there were certainly problems. Foreigners couldn’t own the land outright, since it was on the border. And the little enclave of immigrants didn’t always get on with other foreigners. On the good side, they thought the land itself was a natural paradise….
Posterboyz of the Science-Industrial Complex: Vol. 1
The Daily Mail had this in June:
“A scientist who advises the Government on swine flu is a paid director of a drugs firm making hundreds of millions of pounds from the pandemic.
Professor Sir Roy Anderson sits on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), a 20-strong task force drawing up the action plan for the virus.
Yet he also holds a £116,000-a-year post on the board of GlaxoSmithKline, the company selling swine flu vaccines and anti-virals to the NHS.”
Note, 25% of that is in the form of shares, so he would directly benefit if the company’s stock were boosted by larger sales. But, apparently, he’s completely unrepentant about it.
There’s more:
During the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak, Sir Roy’s advice to Tony Blair led to the culling of more than 6million animals.
The previous year at Oxford University, Sir Roy was at the centre of controversy after claiming a female colleague had slept with her boss before getting a job. He was forced to apologize and pay compensation.
A university inquiry in the wake of the scandal found that he was in breach of rules by failing to disclose his business interests as director and shareholder of International Biomedical and Health Sciences Consortium - an Oxford-based biomedical consultancy, which had awarded grants to his research centre.
Sir Roy was forced to resign, although his career soon recovered. He moved to Imperial College within months, was made the Ministry of Defence’s chief scientist and, last year, took over as Rector of Imperial College, London where he earns up to £400,000 a year.
Why More Swine Flu Deaths in Bangalore?
From Sify.com:
“State health commissioner P.N. Sreenivasachari told IANS: ‘It’s difficult to say why Karnataka, more precisely Bangalore, which is endowed with adequate healthcare facilities, is witnessing large number of swine flu deaths. We too are puzzled.
‘We can say the virus is already in the air and it’s time people became more aware and cautious to stop the spread of the virus. However, from the point of view of the administration, we have provided adequate healthcare facilities to treat swine flu patients,’ added Sreenivasachari.
Principal secretary (Health) I.R. Perumal said people should not get panicky.
‘People with swine flu like symptoms should immediately get themselves checked, as the city is well equipped to deal with the pandemic,’ added Perumal.
On Friday, two deaths were reported from Bangalore, one came from Bijapur.
My Comment
Why? I have no idea. More international travelers is one reason and a plausible one. But I confess I couldn’t help thinking about this piece I wrote in 2005, “Terror Hits Bangalore.”
One result of swine flu scare-mongering will be a shift of money to influenza research - hitherto absent in India. That means funding for drug trials. I wonder who the lucky drug companies are that will benefit?
The two states hit hardest are Karnataka (where Bangalore is) and Maharashtra (where Bombay is). Those are also the states that are the destinations of most foreign travelers and where India’s IT business and stock market are located. Bangalore is the home of a booming biotech business. And a locus of the anti-globalization movement as well. Just thinking out a loud…
Deaths so far are a hundred or less. That’s in a country of roughly a billion and a quarter where tens of thousands die from traffic accidents (300 a day or around 100,000 a year) and from water-borne diseases like diarrhea, typhoid, and jaundice. Hundred of farmers are committing suicide. None of that has qualified for the term pandemic….OR for the accompanying switch in research funding..
Here’s some information on malaria in India in 2008:
“While the official figures state that in 2008 India had 1.5 million malaria cases, resulting in 924 deaths, the real number of deaths is higher by several orders of magnitude.
“These numbers are a joke,” said Sunil Kaul, a doctor who works for a volunteer organization called the Ant that treats villagers. “In Assam alone we had at least 1,500 deaths last year.”
The real number of malaria-related deaths in India was closer to 40,000 in 2008, according to various non-governmental sources and some government officials who didn’t want to be named.”
Under-reporting and lack of knowledge about the disease are two of the main obstacles in retarding the spread of malaria. But interestingly, it’s also international organizations like WHO that obstruct progress in many ways:
“These problems are further complicated by foreign agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), which — under the influence of global lending agencies like the World Bank and big pharmaceutical companies — have pushed India to adopt prevention methods that don’t suit the local conditions and to initiate huge, ill-considered projects rather than targeted ones. ….”
More here at The Global Post.
Wiki Editor’s Incorrect Assertions Display Bias
(Note: Some correction of grammar, typos, removal of upper case letters, improvement of style made on August 1 (no change to substance), to make the post more readable, per my usual blog policy.
I make grammatical, stylistic, and unimportant factual corrections without strike-through. All major or important factual corrections, however, are notated)Update (July 31):
Further corrections of the wiki editor who nominated my post for deletions:
*My book contract was with Wiley, not Agora. Agora is nowhere mentioned in the contract. The wiki editor who brings in Agora is confusing the issue.
*Another wiki editor claims my post is irrelevant. Actually, the context in which the deletion nomination appeared is very relevant. The blog posts on Agora, on the Wall Street media mafia, and on certain powerful political figures that manipulate opinion are all highly relevant.
*Notability, at least ordinarily, is established by more things than just the number of books. Influence, popularity, and the quality of work is also important.
*I did not have a blog at the time the original wiki entry was set up in 2006. My blog started in April 2007. Thus, I couldn’t have canvassed through it. There are no Indymedia posts as he suggests, either. The only person who asserts that is a web-stalker who started posting in November 2007, apparently as part of a campaign against Agora Inc. in general.
*I posted my response on this blog. I did not ask anyone to link it. I cannot control how readers act. A wiki editor cannot make baseless charges that are damaging and then tell me I have no right to state my side of the issue on my own blog, without being guilty of canvassing. Much the same could be said of wiki editors.
*This post is going invisible each time I publish it, because code keeps appearing that makes it disappear or get garbled, not because I am removing it for ulterior reasons.
Original Post:
I visited my wiki page and saw that whoever nominated the bio for deletion has made several incorrect assertions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lila_Rajiva_(3rd_nomination)
How do I as an author correct this sort of thing, without then being accused of something else?
*The editor accuses me of “canvassing” supporters for the ORIGINAL entry. This is false.
*The editor accuses me of “canvassing” supporters now. Well, I did make a blog post about the entry because I was taken aback by the deletion, but I quickly took it down.
Why? Because I then read on the wiki page (and it’s hard to even figure out what is permissible) that (apparently) authors can not defend themselves or they’ll be seen as canvassing.
On the other hand, editors can say whatever they like anonymously without informing the authors? Does that sounds fair?
What it amounts to is that anonymous wiki editors can nominate pages for deletion, and canvass other editors to do so, without even bothering to tell the author.
And they can say whatever they want, even if it’s false, without inviting the author to present his side. I don’t think any fair observer would claim that’s anything but arbitrary.
Respectfully, this editor also made several other false and damaging assertions:
He says the original wiki page was set up because of my “canvassing” and “Indymedia posting”?
False Actually, there was NO “canvassing” or “Indymedia posting” to set up the wiki. I didn’t even have a blog. The editor can verify by checking with the original editors who debated the entry. I know none of them, wrote to none of them, and had nothing to do with the setting up of the page. I’d ask the editor for one email or post soliciting that page. I would ask that he/she check with the original editors and writers who set up the wiki.
True I discovered I was on wiki entirely by accident in 2006. I wasn’t terribly happy with it first, because it had a large picture of a tortured prisoner and a picture of my face, and it was actually causing me problems at work. I later asked for the images to be removed. I can send the emails in which I asked for that. That doesn’t sound too much like promotion to me.
The editor says I posted and canvassed for a wiki on Indymedia. FALSE
My articles on politics in online magazines have been republished (without my permission) on Indymedia. That’s not anything I can control. And it’s not “posting”. And it has nothing to do with canvassing for wiki or anything else. Here’s what’s true: Some posts that I deleted ON MY BLOG were fished out of the google cache by a web stalker and reposted by him on Indymedia, but they have nothing to do with my wiki bio.
They describe my problems with Agora Inc. I deleted these posts not because they aren’t true, but because whenever mentioned by name, the stalker would reappear on my blog and spam me. I do not know this stalker at all but he has harassed me on and off for two years with wild slanders, and is a stock felon who lives abroad. He’s an incessant poster on message boards and Indymedia. He has been charged repeatedly with libel and now lives abroad to elude US law (you can see him described on “Deep Capture” blog. Maybe it’s my citing of this blog that’s got me in trouble, come to think of it….)
Now, is a
convicted felon<shady securities dealer and a web-stalker who lives in Guatemala the source of a Wikipedia editor’s assertions about a published writer?Is a Wikipedia editor confusing the victim of web-stalking with the stalker?
False: Information about my articles being the first on a couple of subjects are unverifiable. True: They are quite verifiable. There are two assertions that were made about my being the first on certain topics: The torture of women as part of US policy. Articles in Dissident Voice in July 2004 are the first magazine articles by a journalist in the American media that present the torture of women as part of a systematic US policy. My book, published in November 2005, is in fact the first book to describe the torture of women as systematic and part of a US torture policy. Later articles in The Nation (to whom the book was sent in 2006 January) were published in July 2006, fully six months after the book. My original articles laying out the torture of women were published in July 2004 in Dissident Voice. They can be googled, they were widely read, and reprinted in a number of online magazines. They were read and followed by American Prospect, which is an influential magazine. It’s true that this refers to the English language press in the US. It’s quite true, there may be Arab articles that laid the story out more extensively.
My article on Goldman Sachs and on Sachs and AIG were in fact the first to suggest that the derivative fiasco was an intentional scam by GS and AIG and to draw a link between the two outfits and shows systematic corruption. My first articles on Goldman were published in Money Week (2006 July) and Dissident Voice (2006- July and later) - and they do predate other systematic accounts of Goldman’s corruption. That can be verified by checking against the New York Times coverage of Goldman and AIG, which began only after my article in 2008. Morgenson’s article on an AIG nexus dates from just after my AIG article appeared.
Again, this can be googled. I’ve described the propaganda effort to sideline alternative journalists or co-opt their work into mainstream coverage on my blog, repeatedly. Those statements about my articles being the first were removed not because they are incorrect, but because there were no links provided that would prove this. It would be better to add the links to the mainstream articles, before having those assertions there. When a deletion nomination is made, it’s natural to try to correct anything you can find that might not conform to wiki criteria. It’s editing and it’s done all the time to articles. The editor’s contention that the removal means the assertions are unverifiable or marketing is a leap of logic.
I would request the editor to contact me directly, and I will provide referees from academic and activist circles of sufficient standing.
An anonymous editor on wiki should not unilaterally make assertions that are inaccurate and damaging, without first inviting the author to rebut them. What are the editor’s credentials to do so?
And even if the wiki editor believes the claims are unverifiable, the usual procedure is to delete them and ask the author for further links.
The action of deleting the entire page shows clearly that there was a bias and a political motivation. Pages are constantly being modified to improve them. False:
The editor claims I am “circling the wagons.”
True: I posted the wiki entry for deletion on my blog. Why shouldn’t ? If wiki can secretly and unilaterally (without informing the author) nominate (and possibly delete) articles, because they dislike something or misunderstand something from a random blog post, that’s giving a lot of power to anonymous editors to coerce or manipulate credentialed writers and prevent them from exposing certain things.
Wiki is an international source, not simply an American source. It should not be biased toward mainstream American news
This editor could have done nothing stronger my point that the web is sometimes as manipulated as print media.
Why wasn’t I notified about the deletion nomination? It was only because I suspected that my blog posts would result in a social media attack, that I had a chance to respond. Since deletion discussions are over within a few days, does that mean I would have been deleted by an anonymous editor, on the basis of wrong statements?
True:
*I wrote certain extremely provocative but verifiable things (they’re actually in the public domain in the news archives) on my personal blog about certain powerful people. I later made those posts private, not because they aren’t true, but because I saw how my wiki was attacked and was worried about what else might happen.
*I defended myself against a spammer. The defense has led to the wiki editor assuming certain things wrongly, without checking. That’s not very professional.
*The blog post in which I defended myself against the spammer happened to mention the names of some people who have a history of editing Wiki from political motives. Should I follow the editor’s method of reasoning and assume the editor is one of them or connected to one of them?
*I mentioned that certain left-liberal associates (briefly) cold-shouldered me for writing with a right libertarian author. I believe the editor at wiki took this as a notice that he should keep in step …
*The editor uses the term “vanity press” to deride my co-author’s company (which is the same word used by my stalker - in his rants on Indymedia). Using the editor’s logic, it would be just as plausible for me to conclude that he is some way associated with the stalker.
*My question: Is he?
* My co-author’s company has nothing to do with the authorship of the book. The book is written by Bonner and me and is published by John Wiley. My contract is with Wiley. Trying to run down the book by calling it the product of a vanity press is lame and using the stalker’s assumptions and language is suspect. My first book was published by Monthly Review Press, which is a very reputable and scholarly socialist press. From my experience with both outfits, I would say MRP is actually better at editing and fact-checking, which are the important scholarly criteria.
*I tried to defend myself against the stalker, because he was publishing disinformation on the web. I contacted Indymedia about it but was told that trying to get people like that to stop through legal means isn’t easy. They just change their names and IPs. I have found this to be true.
* I tried to correct Agora Inc.’s incorrect postings of joint pieces. It was making for multiple web-pages where my name was not showing up on my own pieces and I thought it could lead to copyright infringement or confusion. I fail to see how correcting incorrect web attribution is marketing. In fact, it’s a defense against marketing.
By not recognizing this, wiki is lending itself to use by the very forces that are manipulating the public record and destroying the work of independent journalists and people of conscience who are trying to keep the record straight. It’s telling that the editor tries to disparage me by asserting that the wiki page was set up a 9-11 conspiracist.
First. This is irrelevant, since the page was discussed and approved by other editors.
Second. The editor is not the definitive authority on 9-11. If he is, let him show his credentials. Why doesn’t he reveal his name and his publications?
How does he know for sure what’s conspiracy and what isn’t if he hasn’t been studying the subject?
Third. It’s unseemly for a wiki editor to nakedly express his political preferences.
I’d respectfully ask the editor to think through the implications of what, given the context in which it occurred, amounts to censorship of independent journalists.
Falwell Versus Flynt - Notes On a Comment
One reader, commenting on my Berlusconi post, defends Larry Flynt’s attacks on Jerry Falwell (something I’ve written on before).
Note: Flynt attacked Rev. Jerry Falwell with a satire in print of the pastor having sex with his mother. Falwell sued Flynt and lost.
I decide to debate the assertions he made in his comment, point-by-point in this post, because they misuse language in ways that are quite common these days.
COMMENT: “I found Flynt’s raunchy satire of Falwell to be very funny and appropriate, although I can understand if others might have different opinions…..”
RAJIVA: Funny? Sexually and publicly humiliating someone in terms that rubbishes the most sensitive areas of their life - their family, their mother, their childhood affections, their sexuality, their religious beliefs, the public’s perception of their work as a minister, their capacity to perform professionally (counseling young people on sexuality or faith or family) - is “very funny,” and “appropriate”?
Actually, it’s considered torture (when done in the military), domestic abuse (when done in the family), and sexual harassment (when done in the work-place).
But it seems as though, if it’s printed, then suddenly it goes scot-free, it gets tagged “free speech.”
Well, some speech is not speech. It’s effectively action. And it should be treated as action.
Libel is a tort.
COMMENT: “He wasn’t attacking Falwell directly, so much as his absurd pompous messianic holier-than-thou persona and the oppressive and xenophobic underpinnings of his beliefs — the very same oppressive and xenophobic culture that was trying to silence and sue him.”
RAJIVA: You’re doing a lot of name-calling.
I disagree with Falwell’s fundamentalism. I never found him to be “holier than thou”. He was genuinely affable, as far as I could tell. Your opinion that someone else is personally xenophobic and oppressive doesn’t equate to their actually being those things, unless you show some evidence of injury, as I did in my previous response. Whatever Falwell said, he said quite courteously and even affectionately, when he spoke to Flynt. I saw them on TV (after the lawsuit, I believe).
COMMENT: The two had completely and violently opposing views on almost everything — I don’t see how anyone can be “cheerful” and “tolerant” and “reasonable” with someone who so thoroughly undermines one’s values.
RAJIVA: The essence of civilization and civility is to be tolerant of views that undermine your own. I have good friends who are evangelical Christians and devout Catholics. Many of them probably hope I will leave off my “heretical” views. It doesn’t bother me at all. And likewise, they aren’t bothered by my questioning of their dogmas. Ideology is only a dimension of personality…
COMMENT: Moreover, Falwell was not cheerful nor tolerant nor reasonable — he brutally tried to sue Flynt for $45M because of this insignificant work of fiction printed in his own private subscription-based magazine,
RAJIVA: You’re worried about the “brutality” of suing a man who made a huge fortune out of overtly misogynistic imagery of female sexuality (this is Hustler, not Playboy)….That’s a twist. Why should you “tolerate” any injury done to you? Do you tolerate muggers and bank robbers or financial criminals? Why should you tolerate vicious slanders in the media? Being civil in debate doesn’t mean you have to give up your legal rights, I hope.
The image was very damaging to Falwell and to his memories of his mother. It was degrading. How do you cap the monetary damages on that? Personally, I don’t think monetary damages alone are suitable for all torts. I think Flynt needed to have some small taste of what he himself had inflicted.
And it’s interesting that he ultimately did. His daughter accused him of incest, didn’t she?
Karma?What’s more, it turned out, he was the incestuous one. Cheap psychoanalysis isn’t very useful usually, but in this case, it does seem that some compulsion made Flynt deride Falwell for exactly what he (not Falwell) was guilty of.
Shades of all those CEOs and political bosses who harass their female employees…. and then protect themselves by turning around and preemptively accusing disaffected employees of “stalking”… or in other ways undermining their professional claims. I’m talking about the sainted Bill Clinton, beloved of liberal feminists….and of a few other people……
I’m sure this satisfaction with punishment won’t sit well with those who see religious and spiritual values as all “milque-toast” and “mildness.” -
To me, that’s a sign of the decay in our sensibilities and the loss of the noble and chivalric value of honor, which is now confined to the Muslim world, or so it seems.
COMMENT: “Not to mention the far more insidious repressive venom he would spew to his students (all his draconian Religious anti-sexuality stuff, and twisted anti-free-speech poison).
RAJIVA: Did Falwell libel anyone when he was expressing his views? No. Then, those are precisely the views the first amendment is for, not for nasty, libelous attacks.
Also, disliking Hustler-type imagery and language don’t make you anti-sex or repressed, unless your idea of sex is not much more than what boys scrawl on bathroom walls. People can be quite sexual, and not want their sex lives displayed like graffiti.
Or can’t anyone tell the difference any longer? Throwing around the word “prudish” at anyone who doesn’t agree with your own level of tolerance for public coarseness is a misuse of the word.
COMMENT: I’m still not sure how the two managed to become friends later in life. (Also, unless there is more credible evidence — why doesn’t Tanya take a polygraph like her dad did? she already wrote a book about it — one can’t simply assume such character-assassinating crimes :b.))
RAJIVA: Again, most of your argument is personal bile, ad hominem, and assumption.
Jerry Falwell got on with Flynt at the end because, like him or not, Falwell took his religious beliefs seriously, and really did feel he could “hate the sin and love the sinner.” That may not sit well with the left, but my opinion of him has nothing to do with his political views or his dogmas - none of which I share. My opinion of him is based on my perception that whatever he was otherwise, as a public person, he presented himself genially, affably, and reasonably (
[Correction: I should add the phrase 'when speaking to other people.' It is true that Falwell used harsh language about groups of people, but that was language based on evangelical and fundamentalist criteria that he held about their behavior. This was the argument I made in a piece called, "God's Son, Falwell's Mother, and the Rest of Us Ho's"].
He did not deserve the filth slur thrown at him by Flynt, he was a better man than Flynt
(Correction: I should add the phrase - ‘in this respect’), and Flynt recognized it at some level….Update: The fact that through most of history both secular and religious thinkers have regarded homosexual behavior as morally wrong can provide some rational justification for differentiating between Falwell’s attacks on homosexual behavior ( in language like “part of a Satanic system”) and any other random personal attack on another human being. There is a distinction that can be made between those two types of attacks.
Camille Paglia makes this point in an essay she wrote about a Martha Nussbaum critique that I’ll try to link here…
Note: I am a firm supporter of gay marriage.
Social Media Attacks..
1.Shortly after blogging on certain ongoing and past problems, I got two emails. Each of them is from an IP from my residence in the US… and now here abroad. The messages were odd and mildly threatening.
2. RSS feeds and twitter have been broken - for some time apparently.
3. And now, the latest - my wiki entry (set up by others) has been tagged to be deleted. Why now suddenly? After 5 years and support by numbers of people? Editing is one thing. Why tagged for deletion?
Sri Aurobindo on Reason versus Experience
They proved to me by convincing reasons that God does not exist; Afterwards I saw God, for he came and embraced me. And now what am I to believe- the reasoning of others or my own experience? Truth is what the soul has seen and experienced; the rest is appearance, prejudice and opinion.
– Sri. Aurobindo
[Aurobindo, one of the brightest minds that ever existed, a poet, polymath, revolutionary turned sage, and author of some of the most profound books ever written, is for me the central figure of modern India - not Gandhi. And he is for me also the central figure the West has to adopt from the East...]
Casey: Good Speculator, Bad Theorist..
Bad thinking and bad actions are more closely connected than we think.
Inevitably, bad ideas give rise to questionable ethical propositions.I am just realizing it after reading Doug Casey’s recent attack on charity ….
by which he means business philanthropy..Which is of course only one part..of “charity””
So much confusion of terms..so many questionable assumptions
It was a disappointment.
Filled with arrogance…
Inner law, outer law - perish them all, we’re libertarians - a great, unwashed mass of yahoos who feel it’s ok to do just about anything , because - blimey - Doug Casey, latter-day casuist and emeritus professor of ethics — in between land speculation and stock-pumping - has just discovered that the best thing we can do in life is to do whatever we want however we want - because that makes it better for everyone else..
Oh yay. What an insight.
How did I miss that..and all those idiot moralists and artists who thought differently - various nonentities who didn’t amass wealth through speculation..why, they’re just envious fools who got what they deserved..
Casey succumbs to theory..and bad theory, at that.
Although, any theory about ethics at all, if it pretends to rest on its own logical machinery is on its face bad.All true ethics proceeds from the practice of an ethical life. Not from theory.
Recent Comments