A few scatterbrained musings on demography and social stability:
China's "one child" policy (which has exemptions for about two-thirds of their populace) has had the unforeseen consequence of a gender imbalance as unwanted female children are aborted. It seems that by 2020 we may expect 30 million single Chinese men of marriageable age. The link just given also cites statistics that suggest this imbalance is generally associated with more crime, aggressive expansionism etc (BBC News estimates 24 million). Niall Ferguson worried about the implications last year.
I wondered whether homosexuality (which has an ancient history in China) might take off some of the stress; it's been legal again there since 1997. But an official Chinese statistic from 2005 is that only 2.3% of the population are gay (some 30 million people, says a Wiki entry on their LGBT) - about the same proportion as in the UK, unless you believe Stonewall's attempts to inflate the figure.
A linked issue is age imbalance: it's been theorised that a "youth bulge" is a factor in civil unrest. The Chinese attempt to control the birthrate as more of their people survive and age, may have saved us from war triggered by the need for lebensraum. But other countries (especially in the Middle East and North Africa, where a Puritan Islamic revival is in progress) are experiencing this bulge and the young singles are strongly discouraged from seeking a sexual outlet for their energies.
Would it help if they got their end away more? Is it Eros v. Thanatos? But from what I read, young criminals in the UK don't seem to me to be sublimating their sex drives into their professional activities.
Having said that, women in wealthier countries show a tendency to delay having their first child (age 29 in the UK) and in countries ravaged by war (e.g. Angola) the picture is not clear but suggests that when some sort of stability returns women may "catch up" foregone childbirth but may then become reluctant to continue bearing more children (see page 13 of this study on Angola). In the latter case, we may see a sort of temporary "baby boom" which, combined with the loss of older individuals in war, could itself create another "youth bulge".
This entry includes a graph showing a correlation between GDP per capita and number of children born per woman; outliers are Angola (already mentioned), Saudi Arabia, Israel and the USA. I wonder whether these discrepancies are influenced not just by religion but economic inequality within those nations, particularly in Saudi and America? This paper suggests that poorer people invest less in education and more in having larger families, so maybe there should be better public education for all.
I'd like to see more for young people to do in the UK. The youths where I live amuse themselves by throwing stones at light fittings outside the am-dram theatre, and setting fire to plastic litter bins. Since I came here 30 years ago, most of the shops have installed steel shutters, a sure sign that an area is going to the bow-wows. Paid work would sort a lot of this, I think. And it may seem sexist, but I think work is especially important for men - women seem more capable of occupying themselves relatively productively and peacefully. Or have I got that wrong?
Tuesday, August 07, 2012
Sunday, August 05, 2012
Government is a pusher, not a killjoy
Before we start, a thought: how many of us change our opinions as a result of what we read on the Internet? Are you prepared to have an open mind for the few minutes it will take to read this?
1. We are conditioned to think that Prohibition in the USA was a government-imposed scheme that failed because of popular demand for alcohol, and thank goodness it ended because it meant no more dangerous concoctions and violent crime. Actually, it was a success (in terms of both health problems and crime statistics) and ended because the US government in 1933 was desperate for revenue. By the way, Prohibition was NOT a ban on making or consuming alcohol! If you want to follow up, here's a link to an economist (Don Boudreaux) who is generally of the free trade persuasion: Alcohol, Probition and the Revenuers
2. We also hear of the Gin Epidemic of the early to mid 18th century, but perhaps not so often why it happened. The government's motivation is made clear in the title of Queen Anne's 1703 Act "... for encouraging the Consumption of malted Corn, and for the better preventing the running of French and foreign Brandy." This Act (see p.389 here), and it seems a number of others, deregulated the sale of spirits:
Since the 1960s, the British government has progressively relaxed restrictions on access to alcohol, with predictable results. I cannot say to what extent MPs (and in what way) may have been persuaded by commercial lobbying. In 2003 a Labour government extended drinking hours.
3. Tobacco brings in a great deal of revenue (£12 billion a year). James I may have expressed his displeasure in 1604, and the health effects are now (though still disputed) generally better understood. The government makes various gestures, resented by smokers (and non-smokers: I now go inside the pub for fresh air), but it needs the money.
4. The same people-loving New Labour government that relaxed laws on drink, did the same for gambling, and now (e.g. Harriet Harman in the Mail today) is prepared to admit it was wrong. But last year, it earned £1.6 billion in government revenues.
5. A Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee has been hearing evidence bearing on drugs liberalisation this year, notably from comedian and uber-shagger Russell Brand, and there is some concern that the committee may be biased, or at least receiving biased and misleading information and terms of reference. Even if this effort (if it is an effort) fails, I expect it will be repeated: as the IRA told Margaret Thatcher, they only have to be lucky once.
I suspect that governments have learned how to serve their own wretched interests by couching the arguments for addictive products in terms that appeal to our illusions of liberty and personal self-control. Far from being killjoys, they are enablers battening on human weakness.
UPDATE:
Comments coming in on Orphans of Liberty offer me the chance to clarify and develop the argument:
Q: So, your argument is that nobody would choose to gamble/smoke/drink if the government didn’t push it on them and take their filthy revenue from the activities…?
Even though you say the reason for the ‘Gin Epidemic’ was “preventing the running of French and foreign Brandy.”
My answer:
No. But I refer you to what happened during Prohibition: it was permissible to brew and drink alcohol, but not to manufacture and distribute it on a commercial basis. So that cut out businesses and the government, who got together in 1933 to reverse not an Act, but a full-scale Constitutional Amendment.
Here’s the deal (but of course it will always be a fantasy): let the consumption of alcohol, tobacco and drugs be unregulated and untaxed, but also kept completely private and uncommercial. Grow your own, smoke your own, drink your own, share with friends in your own home or backyard – but not for money or money’s worth.
Libertarians (rightly, in my view) complain about the power and interference of government – but need to include commercial enterprises in their strictures. As I keep saying (but who listens in the world of the Internet?), Big MD/CEO is no better than Big Brother – especially when they combine, as in this case.
1. We are conditioned to think that Prohibition in the USA was a government-imposed scheme that failed because of popular demand for alcohol, and thank goodness it ended because it meant no more dangerous concoctions and violent crime. Actually, it was a success (in terms of both health problems and crime statistics) and ended because the US government in 1933 was desperate for revenue. By the way, Prohibition was NOT a ban on making or consuming alcohol! If you want to follow up, here's a link to an economist (Don Boudreaux) who is generally of the free trade persuasion: Alcohol, Probition and the Revenuers
2. We also hear of the Gin Epidemic of the early to mid 18th century, but perhaps not so often why it happened. The government's motivation is made clear in the title of Queen Anne's 1703 Act "... for encouraging the Consumption of malted Corn, and for the better preventing the running of French and foreign Brandy." This Act (see p.389 here), and it seems a number of others, deregulated the sale of spirits:
Since the 1960s, the British government has progressively relaxed restrictions on access to alcohol, with predictable results. I cannot say to what extent MPs (and in what way) may have been persuaded by commercial lobbying. In 2003 a Labour government extended drinking hours.
3. Tobacco brings in a great deal of revenue (£12 billion a year). James I may have expressed his displeasure in 1604, and the health effects are now (though still disputed) generally better understood. The government makes various gestures, resented by smokers (and non-smokers: I now go inside the pub for fresh air), but it needs the money.
4. The same people-loving New Labour government that relaxed laws on drink, did the same for gambling, and now (e.g. Harriet Harman in the Mail today) is prepared to admit it was wrong. But last year, it earned £1.6 billion in government revenues.
5. A Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee has been hearing evidence bearing on drugs liberalisation this year, notably from comedian and uber-shagger Russell Brand, and there is some concern that the committee may be biased, or at least receiving biased and misleading information and terms of reference. Even if this effort (if it is an effort) fails, I expect it will be repeated: as the IRA told Margaret Thatcher, they only have to be lucky once.
I suspect that governments have learned how to serve their own wretched interests by couching the arguments for addictive products in terms that appeal to our illusions of liberty and personal self-control. Far from being killjoys, they are enablers battening on human weakness.
UPDATE:
Comments coming in on Orphans of Liberty offer me the chance to clarify and develop the argument:
Q: So, your argument is that nobody would choose to gamble/smoke/drink if the government didn’t push it on them and take their filthy revenue from the activities…?
Even though you say the reason for the ‘Gin Epidemic’ was “preventing the running of French and foreign Brandy.”
My answer:
No. But I refer you to what happened during Prohibition: it was permissible to brew and drink alcohol, but not to manufacture and distribute it on a commercial basis. So that cut out businesses and the government, who got together in 1933 to reverse not an Act, but a full-scale Constitutional Amendment.
Here’s the deal (but of course it will always be a fantasy): let the consumption of alcohol, tobacco and drugs be unregulated and untaxed, but also kept completely private and uncommercial. Grow your own, smoke your own, drink your own, share with friends in your own home or backyard – but not for money or money’s worth.
Libertarians (rightly, in my view) complain about the power and interference of government – but need to include commercial enterprises in their strictures. As I keep saying (but who listens in the world of the Internet?), Big MD/CEO is no better than Big Brother – especially when they combine, as in this case.
Saturday, August 04, 2012
Fantastic news for the drug-addled libertarian!
Mexico has caved in. No more fighting against drugs.
The tidal wave moves up the shore. Soon, in the first self-inflicted global pandemic, we will all discover just how strong our will is; Damian Thompson knows already.
And now I must prepare to be verbally flayed by those who just know that they can handle it, and whose philosophy is atomised freedom: the solitary individual, totally disconnected from all others, making his choices in a moral and cultural vacuum and unaffected by his physiology or subconscious compulsions.
I think the fundamental issue of our age may turn out to be the Four Noble Truths.
The tidal wave moves up the shore. Soon, in the first self-inflicted global pandemic, we will all discover just how strong our will is; Damian Thompson knows already.
And now I must prepare to be verbally flayed by those who just know that they can handle it, and whose philosophy is atomised freedom: the solitary individual, totally disconnected from all others, making his choices in a moral and cultural vacuum and unaffected by his physiology or subconscious compulsions.
I think the fundamental issue of our age may turn out to be the Four Noble Truths.
Wednesday, August 01, 2012
Hope for America
I've just been reading The Economic Collapse Blog, and I'm awestruck by how the writer (and so many others on the Internet) is able to produce so much and of such quality.
But I think he and others need to distinguish between a crisis and a disaster.
I'm told that the Chinese ideogram for "crisis" is a combination of two others, "threat" and "opportunity". America is in crisis - though not, perhaps, so much as we in the UK - yet I believe that the US has everything in its toolbox and larder to be a great society.
As I submitted to the piece linked above:
The US is still the world’s leader in per capita GDP when you exclude the tax havens and oil producers.
Speaking as someone who encouraged his brother to take American citizenship, I say you have a great future.
The problem you have – the source of many you list here – is excessive inequality, founded on unfair practices. But when America has cleaned out the pigsty of high-level corruption and mutual favouritism, she will find that she has an entrepreneurial population, abundant natural resources (e.g. an excellent population-arable land ratio), and a Constitution that will work just fine when you get back to it.
But I think he and others need to distinguish between a crisis and a disaster.
I'm told that the Chinese ideogram for "crisis" is a combination of two others, "threat" and "opportunity". America is in crisis - though not, perhaps, so much as we in the UK - yet I believe that the US has everything in its toolbox and larder to be a great society.
As I submitted to the piece linked above:
The US is still the world’s leader in per capita GDP when you exclude the tax havens and oil producers.
Speaking as someone who encouraged his brother to take American citizenship, I say you have a great future.
The problem you have – the source of many you list here – is excessive inequality, founded on unfair practices. But when America has cleaned out the pigsty of high-level corruption and mutual favouritism, she will find that she has an entrepreneurial population, abundant natural resources (e.g. an excellent population-arable land ratio), and a Constitution that will work just fine when you get back to it.
Monday, July 30, 2012
UK M4 shows continuing decline
Figures released today by the Bank of England show that M4 lending (quarterly, annualised) shrank again in the second quarter of 2012 - slightly up from Q1, but still lower than before. Where will it end?
Playing the chartist game, I connected the last two pairs of highs and lows, expecting to see the lines cross somewhere and give us an indication of the bottom. Instead, the channel not only trends downward but is widening.
Join your own dots, but despite all the QE I don't see a terminus. Will the next inflection - the next "top" - be in negative territory?
DISCLAIMER: Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content.
UK M4 shows continuing decline
Figures released today by the Bank of England show that M4 lending (quarterly, annualised) shrank again in the second quarter of 2012 - slightly up from Q1, but still lower than before. Where will it end?
Playing the chartist game, I connected the last two pairs of highs and lows, expecting to see the lines cross somewhere and give us an indication of the bottom. Instead, the channel not only trends downward but is widening.
Join your own dots, but despite all the QE I don't see a terminus. Will the next inflection - the next "top" - be in negative territory?
Sunday, July 29, 2012
Monday, July 23, 2012
IRS and pension fund managers robbing distressed Americans
A miserable twist of the knife: Americans are increasingly defaulting on pension loans, and the taxman and plan manager make money out of it all.
The 401(k) plan is a contribution-based pension for employees. Many such plans allow loans, often with restrictions as to their purpose (e.g. for college fees, medical expenses or housing); but Leo Kolivakis relays reports of an estimated $37 billion in annual defaults, as the great financial crisis continues to claim victims.
The worst of it is, when the borrower defaults, income tax is charged on the loan - plus (often) an extra penalty (presumably to the benefit of the plan manager):
"This can take you from a $6,000 loan to a wipe-out of $10,000 from your 401(k savings) ... and this is happening to people at the very worse times of their personal and financial lives."
The 401(k) plan is a contribution-based pension for employees. Many such plans allow loans, often with restrictions as to their purpose (e.g. for college fees, medical expenses or housing); but Leo Kolivakis relays reports of an estimated $37 billion in annual defaults, as the great financial crisis continues to claim victims.
The worst of it is, when the borrower defaults, income tax is charged on the loan - plus (often) an extra penalty (presumably to the benefit of the plan manager):
"This can take you from a $6,000 loan to a wipe-out of $10,000 from your 401(k savings) ... and this is happening to people at the very worse times of their personal and financial lives."
What to do with bankers, G4S etc
In Papua New Guinea, they know how to deal with those who expect excessive bonuses:
"We ate their brains raw and took body parts such as livers, hearts, penis and others back to the hausman (traditional men's houses) for our chief trainers to create other powers for the members to use," one of those arrested said.
Make mine a large one.
Police in remote Papua New Guinea have arrested members of an alleged cannibal cult accused of killing at least seven people, eating their brains raw and making soup from their penises...
The 29 people were part of a 1,000-strong group formed to combat errant sorcerers who... had begun charging exorbitant fees...
Make mine a large one.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Is the generosity of Spain's social security system preventing revolution?
The Talking Clock blog is following the anti-austerity protests in Spain live, claiming that the BBC is showing little interest (though the BBC gave this online a couple of days ago).
However, Fin24's report includes an interesting detail: the newly unemployed there are to still get 50% of basic salary (down from 70%).
This raises the question of differences between social security systems across the EU, and in fact the European Commission has been looking at exactly that in a paper issued in May 2012 (pdf).
The authors find that "Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, Spain, Finland and the Netherlands appear to be relatively generous in terms of unemployment insurance replacement rates and duration compared with the EU average, while in the UK, Malta, Slovakia, Estonia, Poland and Romania benefit conditions are relatively tight", although Spain is not named among the countries (Belgium, Malta, Austria, Denmark, Ireland, Finland and Portugal) that have the most generous social security systems overall.
So while obviously financially constrained, the protestors may have enough to keep going and make a fuss, and not so little that they are driven in desperation to serious and sustained acts of rebellion.
Is this the real point of social security: to maintain safe those in power?
However, Fin24's report includes an interesting detail: the newly unemployed there are to still get 50% of basic salary (down from 70%).
This raises the question of differences between social security systems across the EU, and in fact the European Commission has been looking at exactly that in a paper issued in May 2012 (pdf).
The authors find that "Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, Spain, Finland and the Netherlands appear to be relatively generous in terms of unemployment insurance replacement rates and duration compared with the EU average, while in the UK, Malta, Slovakia, Estonia, Poland and Romania benefit conditions are relatively tight", although Spain is not named among the countries (Belgium, Malta, Austria, Denmark, Ireland, Finland and Portugal) that have the most generous social security systems overall.
So while obviously financially constrained, the protestors may have enough to keep going and make a fuss, and not so little that they are driven in desperation to serious and sustained acts of rebellion.
Is this the real point of social security: to maintain safe those in power?
Recuerdos del Forest of Dean
A special needs teaching colleague's retirement do last week. Just try to stop teachers talking. One of the older staff tells us she'd once taught in Coleford, where the children in her class shared just three surnames. Aunts, nieces and nephews all behind the desk. Some of the children were still at mother's breast - at 12 and 13.
Another teacher said she'd done supply work (commuting from refined Cheltenham) in another place in the Forest. Two huge mothers stood at the school door like (or as) bouncers. Inside, there were four adults in charge of a class of 18 children, the air nevertheless thick with missiles etc.
My old financial services boss had previously been a headteacher in Dean. His 60th birthday celebration was held in the Speech House in Coleford. He recalled that when he'd first arrived as a class teacher, his head had asked him how he was getting on with the children "I can't hear what they are saying," he replied; the first sign of the partial hearing loss (owing to noisy early-generation computer printers in the ICT suite where he taught) that eventually got him his early retirement with enhancement. Later, supplied with a hearing aid, he told the head, "I can hear them now, but I can't understand what they're saying" (he was from Lancashire). Later still, he told the head, "I can hear them now, and I can understand them now; but I don't like what they're saying."
Another teacher said she'd done supply work (commuting from refined Cheltenham) in another place in the Forest. Two huge mothers stood at the school door like (or as) bouncers. Inside, there were four adults in charge of a class of 18 children, the air nevertheless thick with missiles etc.
My old financial services boss had previously been a headteacher in Dean. His 60th birthday celebration was held in the Speech House in Coleford. He recalled that when he'd first arrived as a class teacher, his head had asked him how he was getting on with the children "I can't hear what they are saying," he replied; the first sign of the partial hearing loss (owing to noisy early-generation computer printers in the ICT suite where he taught) that eventually got him his early retirement with enhancement. Later, supplied with a hearing aid, he told the head, "I can hear them now, but I can't understand what they're saying" (he was from Lancashire). Later still, he told the head, "I can hear them now, and I can understand them now; but I don't like what they're saying."
More vernacular
At a garden centre cafe yesterday: a Yorkshire terrier was keen to make friends with people on other tables. Says her owner, "'Er's as saft as a boiled turnip".
Saturday, July 21, 2012
This could kill the big banks
...and a good thing, too.
Matt Taibbi reports on a proposed scheme for local authorities to compulsorily purchase negative-equity homes at current market value - realising big losses for the lenders - and then let the homeowners take out smaller, 100% LTV replacement loans.
Could the good guys win?
Matt Taibbi reports on a proposed scheme for local authorities to compulsorily purchase negative-equity homes at current market value - realising big losses for the lenders - and then let the homeowners take out smaller, 100% LTV replacement loans.
Could the good guys win?
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Breaking News: New EU Olympic Flag
The Council of Europe has today issued an emergency executive order to all member States concerning the use of national flags in association with the 2012 London Olympics.
Teams, contestants and sponsors must choose one of the three designs below, in lieu of the nationalistic devices displayed at previous Games. (The third option may be adapted according to the two- or three- letter designation of the member State concerned.) The new range of banners serve to remind onlookers of the unity and competitive strength of the European Union.
Spectators may on no account display flags, emblems or symbols of any EU member State, inside the grounds or buildings of official Olympic venues, or within 100 metres of such locations.
The UK is instructed to enforce the order with effect no later than 23:59 on Thursday 26th July 2012.
Financial losses on the recall of outdated items, if strictly necessary to comply with this executive order, may be reimbursed by EU central funds (details to be advised in due course).
Teams, contestants and sponsors must choose one of the three designs below, in lieu of the nationalistic devices displayed at previous Games. (The third option may be adapted according to the two- or three- letter designation of the member State concerned.) The new range of banners serve to remind onlookers of the unity and competitive strength of the European Union.
Spectators may on no account display flags, emblems or symbols of any EU member State, inside the grounds or buildings of official Olympic venues, or within 100 metres of such locations.
The UK is instructed to enforce the order with effect no later than 23:59 on Thursday 26th July 2012.
Financial losses on the recall of outdated items, if strictly necessary to comply with this executive order, may be reimbursed by EU central funds (details to be advised in due course).
Seven types of fart
A bit of social history. My late father-in-law and his brothers used to have a list of flatulence categories and it seems to date from the 1930s/40s if not earlier - I wonder if anyone has heard of these elsewhere, or anything similar?
Here they are, in ascending order of noise and destructive power:
Here they are, in ascending order of noise and destructive power:
- The Fizz
- The Fuzz
- The Fizzy Fuzz
- The Poop
- The Anti-Poop
- The Tear-arse
- The Rattler
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
How The System enslaves you - libertarians take note
How fast we agree to become laboratory rats. And note how the exultation and applause increases as you have to work harder to get the same reward.
In our Age of Abundance, is the liberty issue about self-denial? Are we enslaved as much by appetite as by force?
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Extreme blogging, extreme TV
I'm reading an Andy McNab yarn ("Exit Wound") and halfway through his protagonist (Nick Stone) says that Iranian President Ahmedinajad has his own blog (dormant since 2007). I don't know why it should surprise me, but it turns out to be true - and on blogspot, to boot. Here it is.
Any others? Did Bin Laden have one?
Mind you, I'm getting to the point where I watch Russian TV (RT) to get something like the truth about stuff that is scarcely covered on BBC et al. (Max Keiser is gonzo in style but revelatory in content) - and even Al-Jazeera, for goodness' sake. It's a reversal of the days when Germans listened to the BBC during WWII etc.
Speaking of Max Keiser, he interviewed Brit econ commentator Ian Fraser (from minute 12 onwards) a day or two ago, who revealed that following the Blue Arrow debacle in 1992 the message had come down from on high (see 15:15) that no senior banker or institution would ever again be prosecuted; and (see 16:00) that the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 included a crippling clause that said the FSA had to consider the international mobility and competitiveness of our financial sector when deciding how to proceed against our red-braced Bolly-swigging crooks.
Where was either of those messages in the papers?
Any others? Did Bin Laden have one?
Mind you, I'm getting to the point where I watch Russian TV (RT) to get something like the truth about stuff that is scarcely covered on BBC et al. (Max Keiser is gonzo in style but revelatory in content) - and even Al-Jazeera, for goodness' sake. It's a reversal of the days when Germans listened to the BBC during WWII etc.
Speaking of Max Keiser, he interviewed Brit econ commentator Ian Fraser (from minute 12 onwards) a day or two ago, who revealed that following the Blue Arrow debacle in 1992 the message had come down from on high (see 15:15) that no senior banker or institution would ever again be prosecuted; and (see 16:00) that the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 included a crippling clause that said the FSA had to consider the international mobility and competitiveness of our financial sector when deciding how to proceed against our red-braced Bolly-swigging crooks.
Where was either of those messages in the papers?
Wednesday, July 04, 2012
US financial system has now been reset
For the first time in 40-plus years, the ratio of monetary base to credit in America has returned to 5%.
(If you want to check the data, see here and here.)
INVESTMENT DISCLOSURE: Mostly in cash (and index-linked National Savings Certificates), but now planning to build up some reserves of physical gold via regular saving.
DISCLAIMER: Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content.
(If you want to check the data, see here and here.)
INVESTMENT DISCLOSURE: Mostly in cash (and index-linked National Savings Certificates), but now planning to build up some reserves of physical gold via regular saving.
DISCLAIMER: Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)