Paris Hilton: an observation

Speaking of Paris Hilton, there's something odd about her: smooth, featureless, un-angular; as if she were, I don't know, inflated and unstable. One feels it would only take a little prick to make her explode.

Posh tarts and Pop Tarts

How much social disruption is caused by posh people's boredom?

The Grumbler today whines about schoolgirls aping whores to get attention - a survival strategy in today's feckless-male world, I'd have thought - and a Dr Ringrose of London's Institute of Education (they never ask actual schoolteachers, do they) opines that teaching about the history of feminism is "needed to overcome the negative influences of celebrities such as Paris Hilton, Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera".

Paris Hilton is a world-famous millionaire socialite am-porn star and now part-time political commentatrix. Britney Spears is a world-famous millionaire entertainer, and her disastrous private life is a moneymaker for her and a raft of reporters and photographers; besides, her misdeeds and misfortunes are no worse than those of the underclass whose offspring I teach, nor much different from the self-indulgence of many rich and aristocratic women in the first half of the twentieth century. Christina Aguilera ditto - and currently a Google search for her yields nearly 29 million pages.

Emmeline Pankhurst was a rich businessman's daughter, married a barrister, joined the Independent Labour Party, toured North America lecturing on VD and joined the Conservative Party when she returned. Her daughter Adela went to Australia, joined the Communists and then the Fascists. Another daughter, Sylvia, got knocked-up out of wedlock and she and her mother fell out and never met again. The third, Christabel, enthusiastically promoted the First World War and internment of enemy aliens, visited Russia after the Revolution to urge its continuation in the conflict with Germany, became a Christian evangelist in the USA, returned to Britain, was made a Dame Commander of the British Empire in 1936, and fled the country when war broke out again.

Yep, I can just see all that on the syllabus.

The need for civil rights

Professor James Duane explains in shocking detail why, in the USA, everybody should remember to exercise their right under the Fifth Amendment to remain silent. (htp: Obnoxio The Clown, referring to Philip Thomas' post)

"The following is the common Miranda warning used by most law enforcement agencies in the United States today:

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense."

How about here in Britain?

"You have the right to remain silent. But it may harm your defence if you fail to mention anything that you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

"Free legal advice is worth what you pay for it." Having said that, here is a site purporting to give advice to activists being questioned by police in the UK.

How many laws are on the Statute Books in the United Kingdom? Is there anybody in the country of legal age who could not be accused of having broken one of them? Do we not have too much law?

UK worse than USA?

If it's the USA (aka The Great Santa) that's in dire trouble, how come the pound sterling has dropped 5 cents against the dollar, since July 17?

Bill Gates: charity begins at home

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is set up to give away $38 billion (plus another $30 billion pledged by Warren Buffett).

While I'm in the mood for mad ideas, how about sparing some fraction of that (oh, a billion?) to go back to Bill's crazy source code and finally straighten out all the problems with Microsoft's core products, then send out a one-use-only disk to all previous purchasers, to reload everybody's programs with reliable updated versions?

Or should I stick with dreaming up more realistic schemes, like the deposit-free banking idea?

Fractional reserve banking - why bother?

Karl Denninger comments on the unfolding crisis of non-subprime mortgages, where he thinks losses will be even worse.

A question: why bother with any kind of reserve?

Once you've determined that banks can lend a high multiple of deposits, you may as well make deposits entirely irrelevant. In fact, it would save quite a bit on operating costs if you could have banks that specifically didn't take deposits from anybody - no cash in or out, so no tellers, no branches. Let the Federal Reserve or the Bank of England give a handful of providers a total lending limit, and then stand back and watch them pump away.

Insolvency? Loan-to-value not good enough? Raise the limits again, pump harder. Get a punter to overpay for one house and you increase the value of all the others in the street, so making their mortgages safer. And if the bank doesn't have to pay interest to depositors, it can charge as little as it likes for its loans.

I can't see the flaw here, any more than I can see the difference between a banker and a swindler.

I don't know why I didn't think of it before.

House prices underpinned by shortages, boosted by inflation?

The Centre for Economics and Business Research reckons house prices will steady next year and shoot up for three years after that, thanks to housing shortages and building project cancellations - reports The Grumbler.

"Real estate could become a very good investment and inflation hedge once the government starts seriously printing money," commented Jim from San Marcos (who still has a realtor's licence) after his July 27th post.