Monday, May 11, 2009
Sunday, May 10, 2009
A velvet revolution, or a concrete one?
In a recent post, "Paddington" compared us with our forefathers, to our detriment. Now, Jeffrey R. Nyquist does the same:
We think that we are more sophisticated than our grandfathers. But we are less sophisticated, by far. Our descent into darkness is best demonstrated by listing old artists beside new artists; by listing old statesmen beside new statesmen; by comparing the lives of our grandparents to our own. The sociologist notices that more children are born outside of marriage, that epidemic cheating has taken our schools by the throat, that we have incompetence in business and government, that we find banality and ignorance on all sides. What conclusion can he draw? The powers and advantages of modern life haven’t made us worthy. They merely serve to amplify and accelerate our unworthiness.
I am amazed by those who think the U.S. economy is going to recover, that global peace is attainable, that American liberties are going to survive American barbarism. Look at our culture today: men are no longer men, and women are no longer women; capitalists no longer uphold free market principles; constitutional government no longer adheres to the Constitution; enemies are treated as friends. Nobody reads the signs. Nobody sees what is coming. Look at the birthrate among Europeans. Look at the abandonment of European culture. Look at the Muslim birthrate. Europe will be Islamic in fifty years. Long before that, the Russians and Chinese will achieve nuclear dominance of the globe. What do you think the investment climate will be in 2059?
Again and again, we are reminded that the issues are much bigger than mere money. I think that we could be on the verge of a social and political revolution, especially if whoever next takes on our nations' problems fails as signally as the present administration. To be clear, I don't welcome revolution, and don't expect its aftermath to be better than the state of affairs that preceded it. There must be effective reform, soon.
We think that we are more sophisticated than our grandfathers. But we are less sophisticated, by far. Our descent into darkness is best demonstrated by listing old artists beside new artists; by listing old statesmen beside new statesmen; by comparing the lives of our grandparents to our own. The sociologist notices that more children are born outside of marriage, that epidemic cheating has taken our schools by the throat, that we have incompetence in business and government, that we find banality and ignorance on all sides. What conclusion can he draw? The powers and advantages of modern life haven’t made us worthy. They merely serve to amplify and accelerate our unworthiness.
I am amazed by those who think the U.S. economy is going to recover, that global peace is attainable, that American liberties are going to survive American barbarism. Look at our culture today: men are no longer men, and women are no longer women; capitalists no longer uphold free market principles; constitutional government no longer adheres to the Constitution; enemies are treated as friends. Nobody reads the signs. Nobody sees what is coming. Look at the birthrate among Europeans. Look at the abandonment of European culture. Look at the Muslim birthrate. Europe will be Islamic in fifty years. Long before that, the Russians and Chinese will achieve nuclear dominance of the globe. What do you think the investment climate will be in 2059?
Again and again, we are reminded that the issues are much bigger than mere money. I think that we could be on the verge of a social and political revolution, especially if whoever next takes on our nations' problems fails as signally as the present administration. To be clear, I don't welcome revolution, and don't expect its aftermath to be better than the state of affairs that preceded it. There must be effective reform, soon.
Us banks vs UK banks
We are now getting used to hearing that the UK is the worst-placed among the G20 countries to recover from the credit crunch. One reason is that we have few banks, and almost all of them in trouble.
By contrast, as you see here, the US has 8,500 banks, most of them in good condition. The problems are concentrated in their handful of giants. Over there, it would be possible to bust them and have others ready to take on their books of loans (discounted) and deposits.
Here, I think we'd have to create a new bank, if only to provide some competition for Barclays and HSBC.
By contrast, as you see here, the US has 8,500 banks, most of them in good condition. The problems are concentrated in their handful of giants. Over there, it would be possible to bust them and have others ready to take on their books of loans (discounted) and deposits.
Here, I think we'd have to create a new bank, if only to provide some competition for Barclays and HSBC.
A lighter moment
I wish I could embed this one, but please click on the link to see an outstanding and very funny example of hysterical greed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70wuAWxOEZA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70wuAWxOEZA
... but the Revolution begins at home
We attended the memorial service for a friend yesterday, and the following quotation (Acts, Chap. 2, vv. 44-47 - King James version) was included in the readings:
And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
It's a big ask, as they say; and the more we have, the bigger an ask it is. Jesus' advice to the rich young man (Matthew 19, v. 21) is after the latter has confirmed that he already performs all the normal religious duties:
If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
It was too much for that trustafarian, and it's too much for modern us. So we try to explain it away, Philadelphia lawyer-style. Clever people will explain that if you give away all, you'll merely be a charity case yourself. Or they'll tell you that the advice was case-specific: the young man needed freeing from his attachment to material things (and, presumably, we don't).
Yet the history of the early Church clearly shows that these sophisticated glosses are plain wrong. They were far, far closer to the revolutionary events (and witnesses) of the New Testament, and we must assume that they understood the message better. "Such as should be saved" must join the project, and obey the project's rules.
Reportedly, 82% of Americans are Christians (even the Simpson family). Many sincerely try to follow the early example - think of the people who took in refugees from Katrina-devastated New Orleans, and how some of these good hosts were robbed and even killed as a result.
But writing comments on US blogs suggesting sharing resources (even in the bureacratic form of the NHS) will get sharp ripostes accusing you of socialism or worse.
It's still a big ask, isn't it? And still too big for me, at the moment.
And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
It's a big ask, as they say; and the more we have, the bigger an ask it is. Jesus' advice to the rich young man (Matthew 19, v. 21) is after the latter has confirmed that he already performs all the normal religious duties:
If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
It was too much for that trustafarian, and it's too much for modern us. So we try to explain it away, Philadelphia lawyer-style. Clever people will explain that if you give away all, you'll merely be a charity case yourself. Or they'll tell you that the advice was case-specific: the young man needed freeing from his attachment to material things (and, presumably, we don't).
Yet the history of the early Church clearly shows that these sophisticated glosses are plain wrong. They were far, far closer to the revolutionary events (and witnesses) of the New Testament, and we must assume that they understood the message better. "Such as should be saved" must join the project, and obey the project's rules.
Reportedly, 82% of Americans are Christians (even the Simpson family). Many sincerely try to follow the early example - think of the people who took in refugees from Katrina-devastated New Orleans, and how some of these good hosts were robbed and even killed as a result.
But writing comments on US blogs suggesting sharing resources (even in the bureacratic form of the NHS) will get sharp ripostes accusing you of socialism or worse.
It's still a big ask, isn't it? And still too big for me, at the moment.
The Revolution is beginning
This Parliament has now lost all moral and political authority and ought, by rights, to dissolve itself.
It is now not only the Government that has ceased to deserve our trust. So many members of the House of Commons have disgraced themselves so completely that their right to make laws for the rest of us has evaporated.
Read the rest of this extraordinary attack on our corrupted Parliament and broken democracy, in the Mail on Sunday here. The blogger-whingeing has now gone mainstream.
It is now not only the Government that has ceased to deserve our trust. So many members of the House of Commons have disgraced themselves so completely that their right to make laws for the rest of us has evaporated.
Read the rest of this extraordinary attack on our corrupted Parliament and broken democracy, in the Mail on Sunday here. The blogger-whingeing has now gone mainstream.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
The gold bugs are chittering - but don't get over-excited
Jeff Clark at Casey Research (htp: The Mogambo Guru) plays with the numbers to estimate gold's potential.
One stat is created from a comparison of all the world's cash with all the world's gold: "Total central banks reserves (including gold holdings) = $4.8 trillion, divided by 929.6 million ounces total gold reserves held by all official institutions that issue currency = $5,246 gold price." Or about £3,500 per ounce.
HOWEVER: the World Gold Council estimates that all the gold ever mined to the end of 2006 is about 158,000 tonnes, or 5,079.7 million ounces. If we round down to 5 billion ounces (to allow for some permanent loss, but offset to some extent by new mining - esp. in China - since 2006) we get a gold price of $960 per ounce - not far off where we are today. Allow a bit of cash held outside banks, and gold would be worth - what? $1,000? $1,200?
Yes, there may be a spike like in 1980 - and there may not be. But speculation/panic aside, it would seem that, globally, the current gold-to-money ratio is not quite so wrong as might seem at first sight. So the story is not really about gold, but about the weakness of the dollar in a heavily unbalanced US economy. Priced in a different, stronger currency, gold may not zoom to the moon.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)