Accountability - but not to the citizens

Reuters reports yesterday that a bank in Abu Dhabi is suing Morgan Stanley, Bank of New York, Mellon and the ratings agencies for fraud relating to understating the risks in the complex debt packages at the heart of the credit crisis. (htp: Jesse)

Answerability to the voters is so last millennium, pace idealistic dreamers like Karl Denninger; but money talks.

If voting made a difference, it'd be Paris Hilton for Prez, and do you know, she could be a surprisingly good choice. Much more can be achieved laying on a sun lounger than crashing around the world. A film quote from Lawrence of Arabia:

Colonel Brighton: Look, sir, we can't just do nothing.

General Allenby: Why not? It's usually best.

And what a pleasant change it would be, to have a politician who only pretends to be dumb. I can just imagine her sweetly commanding some tough dudes to go and give the financiers the drubbing they deserve, then turning her attention back to her fashion magazine.

Yes, it's money that talks and the people are dumb. In 1930 Ludwell Denny wrote, "Too wise to try to govern the world, we shall merely own it. Nothing can stop us." America forgot that lesson; rising foreign powers now pay the piper, and will call the tune.

If you can't beat 'em... every dollar and pound you save in your bank account, is a vote in this new electoral system. With luck, one of your descendants will be accepted into the Superclass, while the rest vainly try voting for improved social security and healthcare; when the well is dry, the vote won't fill it. The freedom for which America thinks it stands, isn't founded on supplication. As here in Britain, it would be a hard road back.

Perhaps Chesterton's observation on Christianity may apply equally to the US Constitution: "[it] has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried."

In praise of the American Constitution

On The Great Depression Of 2006 recently the talk has turned, inevitably, to rich vs. poor. When societies are under stress, the people turn on each other. I think they are forgetting what holds them together.

I hold no brief for American foreign policy (perhaps nations and religions should be evaluated according to how they treat "the others"), but I wish we in the UK had something that guaranteed our international independence and defined and limited the powers of our government. My comment on Jim's piece is as follows:

Would we have to be talking like this if the banks hadn't exploded the money supply?

After much heart-searching (and encouragement from me), my brother recently became an American citizen. He sent me the crib book ("The Citizen's Almanac"). Page 5 ("Responsibilities Of A Citizen"), item one: "Support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic." The explanatory paragraph ends, "When the Constitution and its ideals are challenged, citizens must defend these principles against all adversaries."

Please don't bridle if I quote the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 10: "No State shall [...] emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts..."

It's not just about money, but allowing the bankers and politicians to corrupt the money system threatens liberty. We in the UK had a constitution based on civilised understandings that have been thrown out by mad revolutionaries, but you have a clearly expressed founding document more precious than any wretched paper dollars you may have. Lincoln said that the American nation was conceived in liberty and dedicated to equality; "... Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure."

Then as now, you may be the last major nation to hold up that flame. It is not gold and silver that made America admirable, but the principles that bind her citizens. Perhaps excessive material wealth has proved a distraction and a subversion.

After the crash, there will still be Americans, and the American nation. May I humbly suggest that Denninger is right, and the miscreants who have threatened the community with their greed and irresponsibility, should be held to account?

Gold: "reculer pour mieux sauter"

A very interesting, concise post from Mish. He says deflation forces borrowed money out of speculation, so gold and silver will drop while this happens; but then - it could take some time yet - will come the rise: "The reason gold will reassert itself is that Gold Is Money."

Mish's line appears to be consistent (June 2007):"Typically gold is a counter-cyclical asset that does best in real terms when liquidity evaporates."

Gold seems unpredictable - the demand for it as jewellery is unrelated to price - but if his chart below is correct, there is an underlying trend of steadily increasing demand. New gold mined each year is only some 2% of the total still available above ground - gold generally doesn't get used up (though I have drunk Danziger Goldwasser) - so the supply cannot be easily boosted by the State in inflationary times.

Gold, or paper? Your choice.

Judge Mental on broken families

Even though he is a judge, and an expert in dealing with the results of family breakup, Mr Justice Coleridge will be panned for observations like these:

"... almost all of society's social ills can be traced directly to the collapse of the family life."

"I am not saying every broken family produces dysfunctional children, but I am saying that almost every dysfunctional child is the product of a broken family. "

He's not wrong. I'm the last to hug a hoodie, but you have to know why they're like that. Knowing the causes doesn't make them any better; the point is that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. In years of teaching children in social services care, and children excluded from mainstream education, I don't recall knowing even one case where the child came from a hard-working, addiction-free, two-parent family.

By the way: to what extent is the government fanning the flames, with its tax-greedy promotion of alcohol, its popularity-seeking liberality on drugs law enforcement, and its negligent attitude to employment (especially, I hesitantly suggest - expecting to get it in the neck for saying so - full-time employment for men)?

But it's not just about keeping the parents together. There needs to be a commitment to nurturing the child emotionally: squabbling parents who want the child to take sides make a deep and enduring split in the child's psyche. No law, judge or social worker is going to remedy that; putting the child first should be a screamingly obvious moral point. But who is allowed to make it? "Musn't be judgmental."

Oh yes, we must. Watch the American Judge Judy on Freeview when the subject of children, marriage and responsibility comes up. She did many years in family court, and she doesn't have any time for the mealy-mouthed approach.

The big one is yet to come

Karl Denninger gives his interpretation of recent events: hedge funds have been caught out badly betting against oil and the dollar, and the frantic unwinding hit gold. His prognosis is that sooner or later all the over-borrowing is going to take its toll:

There is a "supercritical" point where all asset values will get hit at once, unless the process runs to exhaustion first, and I don't think there is a snowball's chance in Hell that it will.

Meanwhile, keep your money safe.

Authoritarian governments are winning

From Brad Setser's blog.

I've said before now that 2003 was the year the UK and USA blew it, with reckless credit expansion.

The US owes China a trillion dollars - Setser

"... China’s government already plays a significant role in determining the allocation of credit inside the US economy, not just the allocation of credit inside China’s economy..."

Brad Setser (htp: Jesse's Cafe Americain)

Setser reported to Congress a year ago on the USa's vulnerability to foreign creditors and investors. See my blog here and here.