Maastricht and Lisbon

A small penny dropped this afternoon. Perhaps it's just me being thick and getting the joke long after the punchline, but the thought occurs that both the Treaty of Maastricht and the Treaty of Lisbon were signed and ratified by UK Prime Ministers who had taken over from the previous incumbent without a general election to give them a proper mandate.

Major who took over from Thatcher signed the Maasstricht treaty.

Brown who had his Buggins turn after Blair signed the Lisbon treaty.

Gentlemen (and of course non male gentlefolk) draw your conclusions. Could both treaties be invalidated on these grounds? Probably not, but we can wish. can't we?

Biggest joke is Soros trying to shoehorn Brown into the top IMF job. I think Soros must want the IMF to collapse. Because such an event is certain with such a complete fiscal idiot as Brown at the helm. Or has Soros lost so big on the flatlining Carbon futures market that he's desperate to make money some other way? Mm-hm.

Gas and other bubbles

Speculators are driving up the price of Gasoline again, even though there's no hint of a shortage. No 'peak oil'. According to some sources there's actually a glut. A full thirty seven days surplus.

Having read this piece of excellent journalism courtesy of Al-Jazeera's Danny Schechter, we're informed via investment insider Phil Davis that speculation is driving the market, not scarcity, and Josh Clark's informative article over at Howstuffworks.com. Phil's recent piece on oil prices can be perused here. Bubble, next Oil, burst, when, the, will. This was a store bought sentence, and you know how they sell everything in flat packs nowadays. Some self assembly required.

The mystery of the number of ships hanging around idle in Nanaimo Harbour is solved. Apparently CN rail are having trouble getting the grain shipments across the Rockies from the Midwest, so the ships are having to wait longer than they should for their cargoes. Food prices will rise because of this I've no doubt. Speculators will also no doubt be delighted. Although I'm informed that the grain producers aren't terribly chuffed.

You know, I don't see informed stuff like this in the UK press. All the news is full of puff pieces, poorly cut and pasted press releases, and complete Fark. Oh yes, and lots of stuff about some couple getting married on April 29th this year. Good for them, say I. Although I'm not too impressed with the nutters who think that chucking rocks at people getting married makes a valid political statement. P.S. I haven't been invited. Not that I'm going to watch any of the endless hoopla, although I did hear some porn producer was angling for the rights to film the Royal Conception. What the hell, they'll be videoing everything else.

Time for bed.

That's odd

Having the view over water that I have, one of the things I've noticed recently is the small flotilla of bulk carriers anchored at the top of the Tricomalee channel between Valdes and Kuiper Islands. I saw the lights of four last night. Three the night before, and all of them riding high and empty. Two others are clearly visible up just outside Departure bay. Too far away to make out names and numbers, but it is odd to see so many of these big ships just sitting at anchor like that. They weren't parked up like this in the last three years to my certain knowledge.

These Handymax size bulk carriers (like this one) are expensive to run, and leaving them unused makes me wonder. For it to make money, shipping has to be on the move all the time. For that much money to be effectively sitting still for the best part of a week means that the pulp trade has slacked off considerably. This does not bode well for the local economy. Normally, these guys come and go without hanging around.

Considering that the passage to that point is fairly narrow and relatively shallow for such shipping. I'm amazed that anyone would want to park even one a hundred and fifty metre long ship down there. Let alone four.

Looking East

Based as we are on the West coast, China and the Sinosphere in general are major players when it comes to BC's economy. So it was not with a happy pair of eyes that I viewed the pessimism alluded to here. There're also concerns over the current high price of gold, which some are predicting will go 'pop' in the near future.

Now such economic doom and gloom is rather like the tide and winds. It comes and goes, and whoever watches carefully may, and indeed do make fortunes.

Regarding China, I look at the current economic boom and wonder how long it can last. Also, what are the ramifications for when it does go belly up? My reasons for thinking so are as follows;

1: China Manufactures, and is dependent for its increasing wealth on how much it can sell to everyone else.

2: China's biggest market is the USA. The presses at the US mint must be running red hot to supply enough dollars to pay for the consumer goods China produces.

3: The only reason 1 & 2 happen is because the US Dollar is the World's reserve currency. It is the 'Gold standard', and with it all else rises or falls.

Now;

4: China is the biggest buyer / holder of US sovereign debt. Which means it is effectively keeping the US economy going.

5: If the US Dollar, for whatever reason, ceases to be the worlds reserve currency, where is a market for China's goods big enough to replace it?

6: Given that if the Dollar does go haywire (All right, more haywire than at present) and the Chinese dump their massive Dollar holdings, what happens? The USA goes bust and can't afford any more lovely shiny consumer goods from the busy Chinese manufactories, the Dollar gets sidelined, and the landfill hits the windfarm. Bingo! From first to third world in five seconds flat, taking the interconnected economies of the West (and East) down with it.

The Russians will be laughing, as they have massive reserves, and Europe has increasing energy needs. Canada will take a big hit because our markets are mainly south of the 49th parallel. Australia might find their Coal exports to china sitting on the dock, or taking a big (20%+) hit in price. Because without a mass market, the Chinese, who are the Aussies biggest market for coal, won't need the power. India will suffer a similar fate. So it's reasonable to assume that the economic path we are currently on leads to the edge of a very steep cliff.

Okay, so what's the solution Mr Oh-so-clever Bill Sticker?

Here goes. My thinking on the matter follows this route; massive deficits are being run up by various Western nations which are unsustainable. Huge vote buying social programmes (including Social Security) eat up the fiscal budget. I include health care, and all (Which is most) associated funding. There are too many people in the public sector who have been taking too much for too long. Too many people not actually producing or trading anything. A whole Golgafrincham 'B' ark full. They need to be productive, not just chair polishers. Administration alone will be the economic death of the West.

So, what's the solution? Am I saying that we need a massive human die-back or something? No, nothing quite so drastic, as there is one currently in progress from the 'Baby boom' of the 1940's and 50's, although there will be a 20 year lag before the effects of this will be felt. A return to more traditional 'extended family' dwelling, with three or even more generations living in the same house, might ease the pressure on living space. This will be the lot of the less economically active.

Okay, so no real answer yet. However, there is one, and I'm afraid at this point I can already see the eyes rolling up into heads at "Oh, that old chestnut". Something more tangible than the movement of small green pieces of paper. Finance for finance sake is rather like Fantasy Football, the numbers rapidly become just a way of keeping score, and any reference to the real world evaporates. Finance, at least in my world view, is the equivalent of electricity. It powers the making of the tangible. Perhaps that's too simplistic a weltanschauung, but there you go.

Like most species on this planet we are expansionist. Humans need new frontiers and empty space to expand into, or else conflict, famine, and mass death result. This is the biggest lesson of human history. Apart from the extreme Neo-Malthusian faction of Environmentalists, I think none of us want to see that happen. Well, at least no-one who isn't a complete Sociopath with all the social development of a thirteen year old testosterone freak.

My long-term solution to the coming Sino-Western crisis is this; Per ardua ad astra. Investment in properly funded international programmes to get at least some of mankind seriously off this rolling ball of rock across to another. In the process providing productive employment and sustenance for those with their feet still on the ground, including a continuing market for Chinese and other manufactured goods, and spin off technology for everyone. Our (humankind) future gets a reasonable future. Win-win I think.

The alternative really doesn't bear thinking about.

Won't work mate.....

Much as I share some of the widespread distaste for Bankers' economic misdeeds, I can't help but feel Holby's latest wheeze won't work, even if it is sanctioned by such luminaries as Eric Cantona.

The plan appears to be that everyone should go to their bank or building society on the 7th of December 2010 and withdraw as much money as they can, thus causing the banking system to implode or collapse. The idea presumably is to somehow punish all those greedy bankers for causing the current economic crisis.

If anyone can be bothered to read this, might I say that everyone withdrawing all their money might turn out to be a massive economic own goal.

My reasoning is as follows; Because money is the means of exchange, it's value is relative. In itself, it is not a commodity, but rather an enumeration of work done. Linking it's value to a specific commodity, say gold, is only useful as long as gold is esteemed at a certain value. If gold were to become worthless because it was no longer considered as a valid means of exchange, then any currency linked to it would also lose it's purchasing power. Therefore; money is not a commodity in itself, more a measure of relative value. In short; a currency is only worth what is agreed. If enough people decide that a currency is worthless and sell lots of it for other currencies, its value drops like a rock into a gravitational singularity.

Furthermore, if people do like Holby suggests and withdraw all their money, in order to safeguard the interests of those people who own the banks and various politicians will take steps to 'safeguard the money supply' by ordering the printing of more money so that the banks don't go short. The resulting inflation will only hurt those who withdraw their money only to stuff it into a metaphorical mattress. Likewise, buying items that may hold their worth against inflation, such as land or other commodities, will only protect their investment so long as those commodities are 'agreed' to be worth that much.

So making an assumption that Holby and chums do manage to crash the banking system, the money they've withdrawn, without the backing institutions as personified by those 'eeevil bankers' automatically becomes valueless, and all the poor buggers still with savings lose everything. Take enough money out of an economic system and you end up rather like in Weimar Germany. Because, rather like Space and Time are inextricably bound together, so are Banks and Money. Whether you like it or not, the Banks are the money.

Kind of like trying to stop time, and then finding out all the rules supporting your little pocket of space / time no longer apply, and so by proxy, neither do you. Especially true for those with an urban lifestyle and no real material holdings in land or foodstuffs. That's if you ask me. Not that anyone will of course.

Reading, Rioting and Arithmetic

Having watched footage of rioting students in London, I'm minded to make one of my 'modest proposals' with regards to University education. Whilst I never had the privilege of going to University, for privilege it is, I've formed the opinion that some things are best taught at University and others are just a waste of classroom time.

Universities down the centuries have nurtured great minds and helped make superb advances in some subjects, but in others, I wonder why they bother. Now subjects like Medicine, Law, Physics, Geology, and all the 'hard' science courses, even Engineering, can be taught to degree level. No problem there. I even think there is a very sound economic case for free education for those who will contribute to the wealth and well being of society far better for having had highly specialised teaching. Even commercial courses should have some discounted fee structure, this is only sensible and proper. It also makes sound commercial sense. Certain cultural courses like Languages, History, and what are called 'The Classics' are not without value and should likewise be well funded by the public purse.

On the other hand, there are subjects which Universities should receive no funding for whatsoever, and no grants or loans should be available for them. The ones I have in mind are PPE's (Political Science) and the various 'soft' subjects such as the 'Social Sciences'. Whilst there will always be a need for Physicists and other scientific researchers, Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers and Business Managers, the rest can go hang. Why should the University system be used to fund what are little better than vanity degrees? It merely devalues the degree as a mark of academic excellence.

I'm in favour of a free higher education for those of an academic and / or high level technical bent. What I'm not in favour of is sending the world and his / her / it's partner of choice through a system better suited for the brightest and best.

US Mid terms, some observations

Still trying to get my head around the near revolution going on south of the border, but it looks like a caning for the Incumbent from the electorate at Congressional level. The Republicans have taken the Senate, and what looks like a slim majority in the Governor's Mansions.

No doubt the minions of the various spinmeisters will be out in force, trying to put their stamp on the results. Lamestream media pundits will be out trying to tell everyone what to think; i.e. that this is either Racist, or in some other way challenges the supremacy of their God.

The Tea Partiers have, no matter what claims to the contrary, had significant impact on these elections, and from their beginnings back in 2007, have come a very long way in a very short time. In spite of considerable lamestream propaganda, one might be forgiven for adding. In some ways the clumsy assaults on their credibility have had limited effectiveness, in others totally counter productive. Because one neither needs to be a towering intellect to see where the blinkered ego's who think the world owes them their living have tried to take the USA, nor an Economic mastermind to see the damage done. Yet this is where the self-declared towering intellects have brought the West.

To recap; the current crisis has it's roots in Carter's Community Reinvestment act, extended under Clinton, and when the Banks sold on the ever expanding poor risks, it only took a modest downturn to create the current situation. The current Democrat led administration has done what the previous Republican one did, which was throw money at the problem because they were prevented from staunching the flow by a congress hooked on buying votes. The fallout is as we see. The bailouts essentially failed, with the irony that the Chinese, once cold war enemies opposed to capitalism, now virtually own America.

The road back to US prosperity will be a long hard one, and the only way Government can stimulate a 'recovery' is to do some infrastructure projects on the scale of the Interstate highways or Hoover Dam to provide some sort of demand. Failing that, get the hell out of the way and cut taxes and regulation to the point where the middle income bracket can afford to spend on consumer goods, and give tax breaks to small and medium sized companies willing to invest. It's what I'd recommend. Not that anyone is going to ask of course.

Up here in the not quite frozen north, the Provincial Premier sent cheques for CAD$154.00 to young people, funded from the highly unpopular HST. Considering it probably took something like double that to actually collect the tax, possibly more, the extra money gained for the exchequer might as well have stayed in people's pockets. As is well established; government is an horrendously inefficient means of transferring money around.

Hi-ho. Better log off and go and do some work. TTFN.

Wot I did on my 'olidays, by Bill Sticker

My body clock is still set to mid Atlantic time, and that's why I'm wide awake at four in the bloody morning, typing this post. No doubt it will catch up shortly.

It's good to be home. The dog is glad to see me at least, and I was treated to a thorough washing when we arrived around midnight on Friday / Saturday after thirty hours of travelling. Well, when I say travelling, I mean sitting around trying to read in uncomfortable seats lined with other people's elbows. At one point my shoulders were so compressed they almost got cramp. Didn't quite need painkillers, but it was a close run thing.

I am very glad to be out of England. Coming back to Vancouver was blessed relief to see clean streets and decent(ish) public transport. Although I'm not too happy with the antics of BC Ferries, whose decision to charge Taxi companies for the privilege of transporting customers to and from their Departure Bay terminal left me with no other option than to walk two miles in the rain at the end of a thirty hour trip. I was steaming. I mean what is the point of having a taxi rank on your premises if there are no bloody Taxis? Don't know what BC ferries are up to. It doesn't make sense. You don't shut the shop door when you need every punter you can get FFS!

Anyway, that's beside the point. Next time we fly in to Nanaimo Airport. At least you can get a cab home from there. Lesson learned young Bill. Don't do it again.

Right; Blighty. What can I say about it? What a Curate's Egg of a country. While there are some wonderfully scenic places and welcoming faces I'm afraid that these are overshadowed by the grubby damp officious greyness of the rest.

In some ways modern urban Britain reminds me of a suburban student party long since over. The furniture is covered in cigarette butt choked glasses, the bathroom and kitchen are trashed, the place reeks of stale booze, smoke, and bodily fluids, there are discarded undergarments in the toilet, the last of the drunks is scavenging the tables, and there are strange bodies in half the bedrooms.

The whole place needs a thorough clean out, fumigate and redecorate to be fit for decent human habitation. The damp course could probably use some work too, and then there's the neighbours, who are also having to face up to the long dark economic hangover of their collective souls, even though some are noisily protesting that the party isn't over until they say it is, despite the drinks cupboard and larder being empty. Oh, and no-one's got any more money to go down the shops for any more. Yes, and you've found out that the ravishing beauty / muscled hunk you shagged last night is just as big a saggy minger as the face currently greeting you in the mirror. At least economically speaking.

The party is most definitely over, and unless someone decides to clean up properly, the whole neighbourhood will go downhill faster than a Teflon coated pig on glass.

On our twelve hundred mile road trip, we avoided London, stayed near Falmouth, whisked past Bristol, skirted Birmingham, stayed in Leeds and Manchester. Falmouth is very Olde England with it's tight windy streets and wind whistled granite. The centre of Leeds is quite pleasant with all it's late Victorian brick built grandeur. As for Manchester, ahem, well, how do I put this gently; I've seen cleaner portaloos on a building site. It's almost as bad as I remember Brum. And everywhere we went the walls were peppered with 'To Let' signs. In almost every town we went to, there were whole streets of boarded up premises in the more economically depressed areas.

Well, that's all I care to remember from the trip. I think I need a couple of weeks off to recuperate.

Qu'ils mangent de la brioche

There's a certain Mr Bean at the Bank of England who reputedly made a statement concerning savers who should "Stop moaning and start spending". Actually, he said

"Savers shouldn't necessarily expect to be able to live just off their income in times when interest rates are low. It may make sense for them to eat into their capital a bit."

Okay, no issue with that, that's what savings are for; a cushion against adversity and infirmity. Pensions are no bloody use after that @#!!!? @#$%$# #@@#$$$# $%#$%#$#%!! snotgobbler Brown had finished with them, having pissed the UK's hard earned up the wall. So yes, you need savings. However, said rates savers lend the banks should reflect something close to the rate of inflation, or you might as well stuff your wages in a mattress or convert it into something more solid. However, one should not trust the banks with one's savings in this format, because sooner or later, some politician or their placemen (Like Bean) will decide to do an FDR on people guilty of 'hoarding' precious metals and given fiat currency for your 'Nationalised' property.

Further on in the article we learn that UK Interest rates are being kept artificially low as a deliberate policy designed to 'persuade' savers to spend. Now hold hard a cotton picking minute there Mr Bean. You're telling us that because banks aren't lending, savers have to withdraw their liquidity and spend to create demand, so that banks can lend to businesses? Right. Ooookay. Here's a thought; if savers withdraw too much money from a bank (Called a 'run on a bank') because they aren't getting enough bang for their buck from the bankers, the banks will lose liquidity and still won't be able to invest in businesses. In the meantime, those banks that are lending are benefiting from a bigger than usual disparity in interest rates between saver and creditor. They can't lose, and in doing so, perpetuate the problem because their lending rates are too high. For Mr Bean to make such a comment looks like one of those "Let them eat cake" moments. Even if Rousseau made up the original quotation, which appeared for the first time in this work.

What needs to happen is for the banks to cut their lending rate a little, let the savers have a little better return on their investment, and maybe the current situation will ease. From what I can see, only the Banks and their friends in Politics are making money. How come Blair is so bloody rich? He didn't make that on a public salary. Heaven forfend that they should watch their hard earned slowly haemorrhage away like the rest of us. It wasn't the savers who gave money away to people who couldn't pay it back because it was 'fair'. It wasn't the savers who gambled with derivatives based on poor credit risks and needed taxpayer dollar to stop them going broke like any normal business. The Banks did it because their friends in politics used them to buy votes. Funny how quickly the Banks 'paid back' all the bailout money isn't it?

If I sound bitter, I am. We were brought to this point by bone brained political meddling with credit and investment. The politicians tried to buy the votes of the less credit worthy by forcing the banks to lend to poor risks on the basis of 'fairness' (To whom?). Pension funds were raided for the Politicians to give away, all for the sake of 'fairness'. The Banks and investment houses colluded with this practice as they were making a handsome profit. Until the inevitable bursting of the bubble, when the Bankers threatened to cut the politicians personal money supply. Not as in the Loan Shark "Give us it or we'll break yer legs." But more a; "Well you have shares in us, and if we go bust, you sink as well. How is little Tarquin doing at Winchester by the way?" fashion. Now the politicians and banks want small savers to bail them out of the mess the powers that be created by spending their resources while those guilty of creating the whole mess carry on exactly as before. Let them eat cake indeed.

Well screw you too....

Apparently, according to Jo Nova's blog, there's an EU Directive to the effect that if other countries do not take on the whole Cap 'n Trade / Emissions Trading malarkey by 2012 then their airlines will not be allowed in EU airspace.

This is intelligent isn't it? Or rather it's life Jim, but not as we know it. In order to enter EU airspace, Airlines will have to purchase a 'Licence to pollute', the cost of which they will pass on to the travelling, importing / exporting rest of humanity. Great say I, another pointless increase in the cost of getting around. Another witless and unnecessary bar to commerce. No doubt other countries will demand some kind of reciprocal agreement, charging European Airlines a fee to enter their airspace. Guess who gets handed the bill? Us. The travelling plebs. As usual.

There are so many things wrong with this Directive, that it makes me sweat just to think about it. Mind you, I can see the opportunities too.

Say the EU is stupid enough to implement this half assed nonsense, would other countries reciprocate with their own ban on EU aircraft? The USA and Canada might, which means some kind of halfway house would need to be established where airlines from North America and Europe could land and transfer. Iceland maybe? Great for the Icelanders as they would get to rake in all those juicy landing fees from both sides of the pond. Not to mention the stopovers. Not so good for those with business or holiday homes either side of the Atlantic. Are you a UK citizen with a holiday home near Disneyworld? Oh dear. The cost / logistics of flying will get more complicated / expensive from 2012 onwards.

Thinking about it, there must be vested interests from Frankfurt to Paris desperate to recoup their losses on Carbon Trading, which at the last look was pretty much flatlining. Especially over at the Chicago Exchange, which laid half it's staff off earlier this summer. One suspects that the situation in Europe isn't that much better. If a market crashes from say $7 per unit to .05 a unit inside eighteen months, then someone, somewhere has lost big time. I understand the carbon trading market is heavily subsidised, although I'm not sure how much sense that makes, economically speaking; yet sometime a line has to be drawn under a project. A decision has to be made not to waste any more money on a dead duck, but threatening this kind of ban is like pointing a 12 Gauge shotgun at your own foot and loosing off both barrels.

Last night Mrs S and I were watching a documentary about Ireland, and she pointed at the screen and said; "Bill, that's where we're going for our Wedding Anniversary." At the time I agreed with enthusiasm. This morning, I'm not so sure.

They never learn.......

According to the Tellytubbygraph, a number of public sector Union leaders are objecting to the inevitable public sector cuts. Said leaders appear to be very dense because they still haven't worked out that there's no more money left in the public purse. Even the moths have starved to death.

We saw the same thing back in the late 70's and the consequences are as predictable as a sunrise. Rubbish rotting in the streets, what's left of the Army fighting fires with antiquated equipment, bodies unburied, hospital patients untreated, and freezing pensioners. I was working in the UK's industrial Midlands at the time and it wasn't pretty. Now I'm growing ever more uneasy about my forthcoming trip to the UK. Because I remember the Winter of Discontent.

This could be fun

The movie asks; has the US government really run out of taxpayer dollar? I know the UK has, but no one over that side of the pond seems to have the talent or inclination to make movies like the above. As for the politicians? Some are too busy arguing over a woman who once dumped a cat in a wheelie bin and appearing 'green' to address the real economic issues. Sheesh.

The thought occurs that those espousing 'big government' solutions are too far removed in real life, either mentally or physically, from the actual real privations. We're talking day on day, nose to the grindstone at a job you hate to keep a roof over your head solutions. Forever running to keep up. The stuff Michael Moore never talked about. The stuff ordinary people do every day only to find that some bastard has put another tax on the workaday to fund some pompous holier-than-thou prats pet cause. Making them worse off than they were.

H/T to I Hate the Media for the clip.

Now he tells us.....

Turns out ex US President George W (Miss me yet?) Bush didn't want Gordon Brown to be the UK Prime Minister. All I have to say is; neither did I, neither did I.

Not being resident in the UK any more and shortly to apply for full Canadian citizenship, I feel the whole question is rather academic, but any damn fool could see how unbalanced Brown was and is by the reports filtering out via Guido Fawkes and others. The reports of violent temper tantrums and other unseemly behaviour were a good indicator of how unsuitable Brown is for high public office. No wonder George W voiced his concerns; maybe his aides used to read Guido's regular mocking revelations?

As for the policies; it was IR35 that broke me and a whole lot of others. Only a complete and utter dolt with the attention span of a lightly stunned gnat could think otherwise. That and thinking raids on pension funds could ever be 'revenue neutral'. Yet the British electorate bought into the Blair bullshit three times in a row, and those of us with even the slightest hint of prescience made our plans and got out.

As for the current Labour thinking about 'taxing the rich'; it's a fairy tale for buffoons. The true rich have clever accountants to keep their money out of the hands of the voracious maw of HMRC, so higher taxation will only ever hurt the people who can't afford top flight financial advice and who can't mobilise their capital quickly. Namely the less well off, who will be impoverished by such policies. The result is that the tax take goes down when the rates go up because of the simple law of economics which says that the more taxation, the less production.

Brown of course ignored all this, and reportedly got very upset when reality conflicted with his stratagems. Hence the reports of tantrums which told anyone with a functioning brain cell that he was never going to be fit for purpose.

/PREACHTOCHOIR
/RANT

Oh, and just to rub it in; guess who's on a best selling T-Shirt right now (As if you didn't already know).
I think they do miss you George W, I really do, now the chickens have come home to roost.

New export opportunity

Now locally we appear to have a problem. Currently there is a glut of Deer in the province. Particularly in suburban areas where the 'Ah, aren't they sweet' mentality holds sway (Thank you Walt Disney - you bastard). My neighbours invest in deer proof fencing to keep the little tinkers out and off their prize begonias whatever, but I've seen a six point buck clear a four foot wire fence in our front yard recently (See photo). That fence is four and a half feet high minimum, but after a short pause to check the distance, the buck was over it without so much as a sneeze. The Deer population in urban areas is becoming a problem with 'calls for action' and other half hearted rhetoric. Now the Deer are asserting themselves in urban areas and occasionally chasing bewildered dogwalkers down the streets, which has me chuckling. Members of Earth's top predator species being chased by herbivores? Oh my.

As a connected aside; here on Vancouver Island people often raise the concern that we are not 'self sufficient' in food, yet we have a glut of an unmanaged food animal? A partial solution is obvious. Give licences for the limited collection (not shooting, safety first) of wayward urban Deer within city limits to interested companies and sell it like the New Zealanders market and sell Lamb. Maybe with a 'BC Organic' label. Manages the Deer population to manageable proportions and provides a local food source. Low cost, eco-friendly and good economic use of a resource currently in oversupply. I mean, what's not to like?

Venison is a premium meat. It is very healthy with low cholesterol and trans fats. It has a strong flavour, good texture and can be barbecued, broiled (Grilled), roasted, sautéed, stewed and stir fried. Even turned into sausages or burgers. In all of these forms it is very salubrious and deserving of a 'health food' label.

Now I know venison is wild meat, and therefore prone to all the assorted ickyness congruent with being unmanaged livestock; worms, ticks, Lyme Disease etc but those can be dealt with using gamma irradiation (no it doesn't make food 'radioactive') and freezer technology to kill the infestations Deer are often host to. Oh, and cooking food properly is always a good idea.

Having eaten venison with both relish and gusto in more affluent days (pre 2004) I know it is also delicious. Haven't tasted any in a while, although I'm sure one of my hunting neighbours has some in his freezer. Must work out some local barter; I fix his PC for a haunch of the good stuff. Cook, and put out an invitation to the neighbours for a barbecue party.

Anyone for venison?

A little rumour from Reuters

Have the Chinese just bought out Britains power grid? From a rumour of a confidential deal comes the revelation that Hongkong Electric Holdings and Cheung Kong Infrastructure Holdings have purchased three Electricity grids from EDF for a sum quoted at over five and a half billion pounds. One wonders if one of the first things those canny investors will do is sell off those bits of the grid servicing wind installations before the green money train vanishes in a puff of Warble Gloaming.

Britain is broke. It can't afford the 'Green' subsidies any longer, no matter what Cameroid and Cleggsky think. And printing money to quantatively ease the situation will only work for so long. It makes me wince just to think about it.

When I was growing up we were in the middle of the Cold War, and 'Reds were under the bed'. Now it looks like the Chinese, like the Russians, have doffed their collectivist bias and are laughing up and down their commercial sleeves at the old colonial powers. Looks like they have learned that free market capitalism can be wonderful and now own the bed. So unlike the UK and USA, who both seem hell bent on going in the opposite direction.

I dunno. Spend half your life worrying about the 'Red Menace' and you find they've turned into a mirror image of their decadent one time enemies in the West and bought the mortgages. Life; isn't it ironic?

Update: It's official.

Chocolate to cost more?

Mrs S is in full growl mode. This is because a bunch of hedge funds have managed to corner the worlds Cocoa supply. Because the price of the base ingredient for chocolate has been forced up, it is not unreasonable to assume that the price of almost every woman's favourite comfort food will rise in the near future. Mr Rowntree, Mr Cadbury, Mr Lindt and those Nestlé chaps will have to pay more for the base ingredient, or water down their recipes. All because of finance.

Her first reaction was that such things 'shouldn't be allowed', and some form of regulatory mechanism put in place to prevent hedge funds artificially controlling markets via speculation. It 'wasn't fair'. Now where have I heard that one before?

Hedge funds are in my understanding, masses of money traded around to make more money. They bought and sold Mortgage derivatives before the crunch, now they're doing it with commodities. It's business. Commerce. The market in a given commodity will inflate until it reaches an unsustainable level, then all the 'clever money' will move out and the price of whatever will crash. Sometimes the clever money isn't clever enough and goes poof with everyone else's savings. All the rest of us peons can do is keep on truckin' and stop buying whatever until the market stabilises.

It doesn't matter what the commodity is, the rule stays the same. A value is only what people are willing to pay for an item. If they aren't buying, the price will have to drop before storage cost overhead outstrips profit. Non perishable stocks of course, follow a slightly different set of rules and can tip markets into imbalance. When that happens, the fallout is much worse than with perishables, like Cocoa. As we saw recently by staking the whole economy on property values. You end up with the situation where Price, Net Worth and Value come unglued and then it's sauve qui peut and the Devil take the hindmost.

Some of these financial markets seem to this poor commentator little more than a means for big ego's to keep score. Ever since Ug first decided that a particular valley was his, and maybe a couple of the others he saw on the way over; men, and occasionally women, have played ego games with land and possessions. This has led to the rise and decline of empires, the raising of massive edifices and occasionally the slaughter of millions. Anything set on domination, be it money or a political philosophy, eventually ends up the same way.

People continually try to manipulate markets to make more money. A case in point is the whole Carbon Trading thing, which is no more than a desperate attempt by some very rich people to make more money than Bill Gates, but without producing a real end product. Put money into a propaganda (Marketing) machine proposing that Mankind will destroy the planet unless everyone has to pay 'taxes' for, oo lemme see now, some colourless atmospheric trace gas. Anonymously fund research, usually via various witting or unwitting proxies, that 'proves' your point of view, and recruit a whole bunch of people without real critical thinking skills to fight your battles for you. Natural human tribal polarisation will do the rest. The Carbon goes up in price, and the people behind the proposition get so incredibly rich that their offspring will live in huge mansions and never have to work again. Nothing to do with 'saving the Earth' at all.

The Earth can get on without us. Anyone who does a little critical overview thinking about what causes the rise and fall of empires can tell you that. The ruined proof is all over the world, from Rome to Angkor, Ancient Persia to India and China. If Mankind were to vanish tomorrow, the Earth would still be orbiting the sun, only plus some interesting geological layers for putative alien explorers to puzzle over. It's almost comforting to think that in the long term, we're all Archaeology.

Back to Cocoa and commodities speculators; If Mr Ward and friends push the price of Cocoa too high, there is always the risk for him that people will simply stop buying the product and so impoverish the speculators. It happens. We are transient. Tout passe, tout casse, tout lasse. No matter what; Mrs S will get her chocolate. I will see to that.

Unemployment benefit; a modest proposal

In most industrialised societies there is a large unemployment problem. To wit; the people in receipt of 'benefits' don't always put those monies towards the purpose they were intended for. Essentially being fed and housed. It is widely acknowledged that those with less willpower are known to put the cash at their disposal not towards rent, seeking work or food for the kids, but instead investing in a bottle or five of cheap strong alcohol, or perchance something illegal; subsequently proceeding to get wasted and often becoming a less than productive, law abiding member of society.

Here's my idea; pay those on unemployment benefit or whatever via a special 'pre paid' credit card, rather like these 'Oyster' cards currently being trialled. Every week the unemployed person would get their money, not via cheque or cash, but via a limited credit account which they could then use for transport, food, and utilities. Rent would need to be funnelled direct to their landlords via a similar, but separate method. Like with ordinary credit cards, the bill could then be remotely monitored, and limits set in place. The methodology for such credit management is well established and deals for purchase tracking would readily be done with Mr Tesco or Mr Sainsbury, or as over here, Mr Safeway to honour said source of credit.

To placate the prohibitionists, purchases such as alcohol or tobacco and suchlike would not be allowable on said cards, but that's not what public money is for, is it? Such a card might be also usable for deep discounts on public mass transit and local facilities like Cinema, Theatre, Swimming pools, and fitness clubs, child care, night classes and training schemes etc. Said card might also be proof of eligibility for free medical assistance / prescription drugs. Payments made for non public facilities like pubs and clubs would be ineligible to take unemployment credit off said cards, therefore unemployed person on benefits therefore can't use unemployment credit for becoming more unemployable through drink, drugs, or daytime TV, as at present. People on unemployment benefit get fed, watered and allowed entertainment. No-one starves. Again, public money doesn't go where it shouldn't.

Of course there's nothing to stop those so inclined setting up a still or home brew setup for barter; that would involve actually doing something positive, and developing skills with a possible marketable value. Before the Excise man comes battering down the door of course. However, if said scheme was regulated by the revenue service, tracked purchases would mean the person bulk buying various ingredients might find authority figures politely enquiring what is flavour of the month sooner rather than later. Likewise; accounts would have similar safeguards to normal 'pre-pay' type credit cards put in place. User only with a secondary piece of genuine Photo ID for example.

I'm sure there are those who would decry the relatively minimal loss of civil liberties involved for the unemployed, but then, if the cash payments are hard to come by taxpayer dollar; whose money is it anyway?

Euro trouble?

Read this piece in the Torygraph financial pages by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. Then I read this article. Now if what both articles say is true, then the IMF are telling the European Central Bank to buy as much Grease Greek bonds as possible, in order to do something which is, according to Mr Evans-Pritchard, specifically forbidden under the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty. Apparently there are no less than four legal challenges in the German constitutional courts upon this very issue. Oh dear.

Oo-er. All I have to say is this for those stuck with the final round of 'Club Med' bonds and Euro's.


Regrettably Allied Dunbar, last I heard absorbed by Zurich, are no longer around to help. Not that they could assist with the possible massive fallout from a collapse of the Euro. Swiss Francs? Pounds? Kroner? Anyone?

Common knowledge, innit?

I keep on seeing people in the comments section of newspaper articles, which are often unintentionally funnier than the articles themselves, repeat this quotation, attributing it to an 18th Century 'Historian' Alexander Fraser Tytler (Not Tyler), from a book ('Cycle of Democracy' published around 1770) Having looked extensively for this title, I can't find any trace of via the various online catalogues I browse for research. However, the quotations provenance is probably far more convoluted, at least according to this researcher.

Now I'd always thought these remarks, or some like them, originally came from Benjamin Franklyn, which just goes to show how wrong you can be. The 'quotation' runs as follows;

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

Now this false attribution doesn't make the words any less true. Spend more than you've got, and you're cruising for a very bruising time financially. As our Greek friends are finding out the hard way.

Just as an aside, French political thinker and Historian, Alexis de Toqueville really did make this remark;

A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.

Many people, especially those on the left wing of politics, don't seem to get the connection between prosperity and work done. They miss the fundamental truth that parties always end, and the bill has to be paid sometime. The bigger the party, the bigger the bill. This is one of the less pleasant financial 'facts of life'. You know what they are, the ones your Mum and Dad were always bleating on about and you didn't listen to. Remember them? Got it in one.

Being fiscally prudent, any non food purchases we make today are to come from Garage sales and the local 'Swap meet'. Just helping the local economy go round.

Am feeling particularly smug today because yesterday afternoon, with the help of our landlords workshop (The man is utter diamond), we built a custom padded headboard for our bed. Now I can sit up and read in languorous comfort without banging the back of my head on the wall. Very cosy.

An expatriate view of the UK economy

A muvver was checkin 'er cash flow one night,
She’d hardly a fiver an’ money was tight,
The muvver was poor and the money was thin,
Barely a cheque stub to list her bills in;

The muvver turned rahnd for a pen out the rack,
She was but a moment, but when she turned back,
Her money was gorn; and in anguish she cried,
Oh, where is my money?' – the Chancellor replied:

The economy 'as fell dahn the plug-'ole,
Brown’s flushed it right dahn the plug;
Your tiny bank balance so skinny and thin
It oughtern been banked in a mug;

The Chancellor 'as 'ad all your money,
E won't need to tax you no more,
The economy's fell dahn the plug 'ole
Not lorst....... but gorn before!

Revamped by Bill Sticker; H/T Anonymous.