Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Breaking News - "Debtman" sunk
British 'Debtman' Gordon Brown ditches in Atlantic
Not Philippe Naughton
The British political adventurer Gordon Brown found himself in deep water today after a failed bid to make the first long-range economic flight using a debt-powered wing attached to his back.
Brown, 58, planned to fly 7 years from the 2008 Credit Crunch to the 2015 General Election, at a speed of almost £120 million per hour, a flight that should have taken about 80 months.
Only a year into the flight, however, the British "Debtman" disappeared from TV feeds. Live pictures shortly afterwards showed him up to his neck in it, swimming around beside his Parliamentary pension golden parachute, while the IMF prepared to winch him to safety.
The reason for his failure was not immediately apparent to anybody except the blogosphere, but the British premier seemed to be unhurt and waved at a passing TV crew.
Saturday, November 07, 2009
The Pollitt Sanction
Time for conspiracy theory. Which of the following seems most likely?
Gordon Brown is authorising throwing more cash onto the bonfire because:
1. It alleviates a problem he himself, embarrassingly, allowed to develop as Chancellor
2. It will get us out of the mess, helping the economy recover
3. It will buy some feelgood leading up to the next General Election, limiting the damage to Labour
4. As a scorched-earth policy, it will leave Cameron nothing but blood, toil, tears and sweat and as soon as Cam has heroically dealt with it, in will come another 1945-style Labour landslide as the population again votes for what it thinks it deserves
5. It represents an "Iceland strategy", so effectively ruining the country that we have to throw ourselves into the arms of our communautaire pals on the other side of La Manche
6. As (5) above, but part of a grander plan to advance the cause of international Communism.
There are little conspiratorial threads we can weave together if we wish. For example, we read this week that Brown's candidature for the Labour slave state (sorry, safe seat) of Dunfermline East was sponsored by the TGWU's Jack Jones, now revealed as a traitor in the pay of the USSR at a time of great danger to our country. Could this have been part of the entryist approach of Harry Pollitt? Is Gordon Brown a man of Pollitt's stamp?
Like the Communists, one-eyed Wotan may fantasise that the destruction is merely part of the process leading to the Millennium, for after Ragnarök and the ensuing Flood, "... the world resurfaces anew and fertile, the surviving gods meet, and the world is repopulated by two human survivors."
And if he's wrong?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Duty
Update: the media are focusing on rumours of Brown's taking painkillers, allegedly related to his eye problems, which the PM denies. I thought they wanted a regime change? If so, they'd be keen to keep him on, as the Tories must be, and so wouldn't probe him like this. But maybe they're also keen not to be shown up by the blogosphere, which maintains that the news media are colluding to avoid raising a more serious health issue - this one is doing the rounds.
He's not the only one suffering from dark whispers. There was that mysterious 2004 family crisis of Blair's, which some suspected really had to do with his own supposed nervous debilitation; and Leo Abse's book on Blair attempted to unravel the man's psychology. I myself was asking friends within a year or two of 1997 whether they thought he was mad; at that point, they looked at me as though they thought I was, instead.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Trusting soul
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Predicting the 2010 General Election Result
Many voters and critics have been left confused by Prime Minister Gordon Brown's explanation of how he appeared to predict Thursday's General Election results.
Some 4.6m viewers saw him claim to have asked 24 people to guess the successful candidates for the 646 commons seats and use an average of the total for each to predict the result.
But some mathematicians have dismissed his explanation as "complete nonsense".
And on blogging site Twitter one fan said he was "still confused", while another called it a "massive letdown".
IT trickery
On Brown's own Twitter account, he said: "Well there you go. I trust all is clear now."
He also added that his blog, which has been set up for people to comment on his tricks, has received 5 million hits.
However, it is currently not working.
Thursday's show on Channel 4 attracted 2.7 million people - beating the actual Election 2010 programme on BBC One, which 2.4 million tuned in for.
Brown successfully produced the correct numbers during The Live Event programme, at the same time the actual results were announced on the BBC's coverage.
He then promised viewers they would discover the secret of the trick on Friday's Channel Four News.
During How To Win The Election - which attracted a peak of 4.6 million viewers - he revealed that he had worked out the election numbers by asking a group of 24 people to guess them.
Once he had their answers Brown said he added the numbers up for each candidate and divided them by 24.
However, Alex Newton, a professor of Pure Mathematics at the University of Oxford, has dismissed Brown's explanation.
"Mathematically it is complete rubbish. It is a bluff on his part," he said.
And Roger Penwiper, professor of psephology at the University of Cambridge added: "There is a difference between guessing between the weight of an ox and guessing election candidates, which is un-guessable.
"That is just a clear wind-up and complete nonsense. There is absolutely no way he did that."
Other theories, that have been suggested in the newspapers, claim Brown used IT hacking trickery or a wall of postal votes to help him complete the stunt.
Michael Pundit of The Times newspaper rated the show five out of five, saying Brown has turned from "most irritating man on television to the most intriguing".
However, he added: "It was, of course, still one hell of a trick — far too good for him to give away."
Twitter critics of the explanation show include dCameron1966, who said: "I'm still confused about what way he did it to be honest."
T-Benn called the 59-year-old a "massive letdown" and AnthonyCLB said: "Is it just me or was Gordon Brown's explanation last night very disappointing?"
But some voters enjoyed Brown's stunt.
Peterm&elson posted on his Twitter page that the show had been "very interesting & entertaining".
Kjongil added: "Gordon Brown is pretty cool... I can see why people are so skeptical [sic] about him, but I think he's on to something here."
Sunday, September 06, 2009
Fisk this - Jack Straw on oil and Al-Megrahi
Mr Straw also claims today that Mr Brown had nothing to do with his change of heart over the PTA [Prisoner Transfer Agreement], adding: “I certainly didn’t talk to the PM. There is no paper trail to suggest he was involved at all.”
Even if literally true, the above statement is consistent with the possibilities that:
- Mr Straw communicated via a third party with the PM on oil-for-Lockerbie-bombers (or, the PM raised the matter with others)
- Mr Straw communicated directly with the PM, but not through speech
- There were once paper-based records to show the PM's involvement, but they have been destroyed
- There were, or still are, records held in other form (e.g. email)
A good example of a "non-denial denial"?
PM to quit?
What will all these people do for a hate-figure if Mr Brown quits, as I think he will probably do on ‘health grounds’ before the Election?
I reconfirmed our electoral register details by phone yesterday; but I really don't know whether I will be able to vote for any of the candidates. Have we got to the point where mass abstention sends a stronger signal than positive choice?
It occurs to me that even using the phrase "sending a signal" reveals how much the political class has lost touch with us.
Saturday, September 05, 2009
Lone wolves and the herd instinct
It's true even now. British PM Gordon Brown is down, heir-presumptive David Cameron is up. We shall see what Balloon Head makes of the economy when he gets in.
The problem with Brown is that he is, in my (educationally experienced) opinion, mildly autistic. He's the kind that academically dumber, normal kids pick on and wonder why he doesn't fight back. He hasn't helped himself by aiming obsessively at a job which requires quite different skills, which the flashy Blair has in spades; but self-knowledge comes hard for ASD types. Star Trek fans will understand that Scotty could never take Captain Kirk's seat in the Starship Enterprise; but maybe he harboured ambition, all the same. Had Kirk made Scotty his deputy, it could have lit the touchpaper.
The autistic child senses his vulnerability, and will make compromises to be part of the flock. Desperate for acceptance and respect, Brown has paltered with the truth throughout his political career, as commentators on his time as Chancellor have often noted. The brawling pit of the House of Commons has never been the place to nurture an inner-directed, analytical man's integrity.
But the pack is blind, too. Unrestrained, the instinct to group-bully the outsiders, the different ones, would send the human race well back into the Stone Age. And then look at the ones they instinctively, collectively follow. How many years was it before the Press revealed what they must have known all along, that the overjoyed crowd that greeted Blair in Downing Street after the 1997 General Election, was a handpicked mob of Party members? I shall believe in journalistic independence when a new incumbent is promptly probed and criticised.
And what is the pack now saying about Afghanistan? Are they correct? Would it solve our problems to withdraw and concentrate on more achievable aspects of domestic security (some British Army regiments stationed by our ports, airfields and the Channel Tunnel might not go amiss); or would it be a sign of weakness, the crumbling that in ancient times not only ceded the provinces formerly under the Pax Romana, but at last saw Alaric's Visigoths rampage through Rome itself?
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Saturday, April 04, 2009
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Götterdämmerung
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Christmas viewing
Friday, December 12, 2008
History repeats itself - because it's getting old
As my select and distinguished readers now know, I'm an optimist (by the standards of unfolding reality), and I say, not so. I say, maybe 4,000 - 5,000, adjusted for CPI.
The comparison I'd urge is not with 1929-32 (stockmarket deflation exacerbated by monetary strictness), but (in inflation-adjusted terms) from January 1966 to July 1982: stockmarket deflation prolonged and partially disguised by monetary inflation; I said so here and here, last month. I maintain that the bear market began in 2000 and the symptoms were masked by the terrible extra debts taken on over the last 8 years. Karl Denninger showed us yesterday that these debts account for all the US GDP growth since the New Millennium, plus $9 trillion.
The debate about inflation and deflation continues, though from a British perspective we've seen practically the whole of the rest of the world become one-third more expensive in sterling terms, in only five months. However, Einstein's theory of relativity rejects the notion of any absolute standpoint, and we shall see next year which other currencies mimic sterling's vertiginous fall.
In these shifting times, it becomes very hard to discern real value; but however hard to measure, it exists nevertheless. There is a real bill to pay for our excesses, and I think 2008 will be seen in retrospect as the year that the global balance of power underwent a sudden tectonic shift, from West to East. Yes, the East will suffer for a while, too, but it has long been acquiring the means of production and developing its local markets, and will emerge from the crisis ahead of us.
And there will also - must also - be an intergenerational shift of power, within our Western societies. As globalization continues and real income and real house prices decline, existing debt (set in fixed terms) will become proportionately greater, until the weight is too great to bear; and the worst of it falls on the people who are also struggling to raise families and save something, however inadequate, for their old age. They cannot be crucified in this way. How can savers be taxed at 20% and workers at (effectively, on margin, including National Insurance) 40%? Real wealth must flow from one to the other, just to maintain civilization. I think either savings must be taxed more (perhaps the removal of tax exemption for some savings products will be the start), or inflation must come, though I don't know how long the play will go on before the denouement.
We did have another option, and I was only half-joking: cancel mortgage debts on a massive scale (bankrupting the banks and the bankers, and serve them right). Then, with our productive populace relatively unencumbered, it would be possible to let Western wages and prices fall to much nearer Eastern levels, and we could begin to compete.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Gordon Brown and the New World Order
Does he know what he is saying? How would one vote out, or flee, a world government?
As Huckleberry Finn says,"I reckon I got to light out for the Territory ahead of the rest, because Aunt Sally she's going to adopt me and sivilize me, and I can't stand it."
Any suggestions as to good places left to flee to?
Sunday, November 02, 2008
Saturday, June 07, 2008
Stock up your larder
I believe the Mormons have a rule that members of their church must have 12 months' security set up for their families - I remember an old colour supplement article with a picture of a Mormon sitting on a year's supply of baked beans. Doesn't seem so daft now - and it's worth remembering why landlocked Utah is the Seagull State.
More generally, there is now a feeling that the government has failed to prepare for material and financial shocks. Genesis 41 has been obscurely referenced by George Osborne ("Our competitors used the fat years to prepare for the lean years"), though back in 2002 Treasury Committee member Dr Nick Palmer was using the same analogy, but in Gordon Brown's favour ("in the first years [Gordon Brown] repaid a lot of government debt so as to give us a really strong basis for difficult times as and when they arose").
On the financial front, I think the government cracked in 2003, when extra liquidity (simplified graph here) began to be released into the system, over-hydrating the housing market. Radix malorum est cupiditas, and that applies here if you interpret "cupiditas" in the general sense of over-attachment to worldly things, especially to power and its accompaniments.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Sunday, January 13, 2008
To Gordon Brown: please remit £4bn ASAP
"U.K. Sold 395 tonnes of gold at an average price of $274.9 per ounce. The first sale at $254 caught (or caused?) the low point in a 20-year slide in the price of gold.
The losers are us, Brown's gold sales raised around $3.49 billion.."
-- Telegraph.co.uk , January 2, 2006
That was written when the price was $627 and at today’s gold price of $895 the position would be worth $11.4 billion. And - remember the reason for selling was to improve central bank returns - what did they buy with the funds?
I make that a loss of $8 billion to date, or £4bn sterling.
We hear a lot about accountability. If only politicians could be made personally financially accountable.
Or if they could be paid to go away. In recent times, it would have saved the country a fortune if each senior politician had been given £10 million to do nothing at all.