Ta-ta industrial wages, hello Mcjobs

India's leading car-maker Tata seems likeliest to take over Jaguar and Land Rover. The fiddle plays, Rome burns.

Mirror, mirror

A few days ago, I said, "This is where I thought we were in 1999. Thanks to criminally reckless credit expansion in the interim, we're still there, only the results may be worse than I feared then." Now, Tom Madell draws comparisons between 2000 and 2007.

Few are brave enough to come out and declare the start of a bear market; but the watchword is "proceed with caution".

Consequences

Michael Panzner turns his attention to the human implications of recession, as I have been doing for some time, most recently here, here and here. At least America is a democracy and so politicians must have some incentive to clean the Augean stables; I don't know about the UK.

Bad news: we depend on the banks

The long-experienced team at Contrary Investor thinks the credit market needs watching, not the equity market. Outlook: oh, dear.

When things turn vengeful, let's take a careful look at the banks, and those who give them their orders. Not for the first time, they've lifted us up, and are making ready to drop us from a great height.

As the song from Mary Poppins has it:

If you invest your tuppence
Wisely in the bank
Safe and sound
Soon that tuppence,
Safely invested in the bank,
Will compound

And you'll achieve that sense of conquest
As your affluence expands
In the hands of the directors
Who invest as propriety demands

[...]

You can purchase first and second trust deeds
Think of the foreclosures!Bonds! Chattels! Dividends! Shares!
Bankruptcies! Debtor sales!

... for the whole lyric see here.

The scene ends, happily enough, with a run on the bank as young Michael loudly demands the return of his twopence.

Small is beautiful

J R Nyquist argues that internationalism is used as a cover for expansion by aggressive states, and the nation-state is our stoutest defence.

I think this links in with our domestic EU in-or-out debate, on which the allegedly Conservative British MP David Cameron has recently been making flirty noises. I say "flirty" because although the headline talks boldly of tearing up the un-referendum-ed Constitution, the leader of the Opposition says "We think the treaty is wrong because it passes too much power from Westminster to Brussels." How much is enough?

Perhaps some will say mine is a typical reaction from a little Englander, but originally that term meant an opponent of imperialism. Well, I'm used to ignorant brickbats. It was Philip Toynbee who - his son told me - called me a Colonel Blimp while I was still at school, I think because I had dared to ask him about the significance of colour in Lorca's poetry. What I gathered from this experience was: never ask a posh leftie for an explanation, he'll only look down his egalitarian nose at you. (I haven't met his daughter Polly, though.) Intriguingly, though the term "little Englander" is said to date from the 1899-1901 Second Boer War, there is an 1833 German dictionary-cum-phrasebook (published in Grunsberg) called "Der kleine Englander ober Sammlung". I do hope the title wasn't intended to have a pejorative tinge, but you can never be sure with the Germans - they do have a wry sense of humour.

The relevance of all this, aside from the asides? I think the themes of diversity, dispersion and disconnection will grow in importance over the coming years, in politics and economics. As with some mutually dependent Amazonian flowers and insects, efficiency and specialisation will have to be balanced against flexibility and long-term survival.

Recession QED

In an educational (and mercifully profanity-free) essay, Karl Denninger builds up his case from first principles, explaining the processes of creating and destroying money. He expects house prices to fall back by 30 - 50% and notes that in a recession, equities typically lose 30%.

He says the media is not reporting the truth. I tend to agree: I now throw away the Sunday football and financial supplements at the same time. If you want to know what's really happening, he says, watch what is going on at the banks, the Federal Reserve and Goldman Sachs, all of whom are battening the hatches, while CNBS (also castigated by Jim Willie) plays a cheerful tune to the proles.

I've written before how in 1999, as a financial adviser, I sat through a presentation from a leading UK investment house about tech stocks, which were supposedly about to start a second and bigger boom. I suspected then, and even more so now, that they were looking for the fabled "bigger fool" to offload their more favoured clients' holdings. Denninger intimates the same:

Are these shows, newspapers, and others reporters on the financial markets, entertainers, or worse, puppets of those who know and who need someone – anyone – to unload their shares to before the markets take a huge plunge, lest they get stuck with them?

Then he gives his predictions - which are grim, but not apocalyptic. It's the fools who will get roasted, not everybody. (By the way, Denninger is another Kondratieff cycle follower.)

What to hold, in his opinion? Cash, definitely; anything else, check the soundness of the deposit-taker. If you want to gamble on hyperinflation, he thinks call options on the stockmarket index are likely to yield more than gains on gold, even if the gold bugs are right.

This is where I thought we were in 1999. Thanks to criminally reckless credit expansion in the interim, we're still there, only the results may be worse than I feared then.

Oh, and he thinks the dollar will recover to some extent, because the rest of the world is going to get it just as bad, and probably worse. (Interesting that the pound is now back under $2.)

The answer to Olduvai?

I am most grateful for a comment by "APL" on the heroic "Burning Our Money" blog, which directs us to an article on the potential of radiation-free fusion energy.

There is an international project (ITER) in the south of France to develop this, and if it works...

UPDATE

Thanks to GMG for a link to this discussion of fusion power, which tends to the conclusion that a successful and economically viable fusion system is a very long way off, if feasible at all, and we'd do better to concentrate on fission, i.e. the present type of nuclear power station.