Managed economy, or blowup?

"And so the system broke down, the Empire collapsed, and a long sullen silence settled down over a billion hungry worlds, disturbed only by the pen scratchings of scholars as they labored into the night over smug little treatises on the value of a planned political economy."

- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy (what a genius he was!)

But is there a distinction to be made between a planned economy and a managed one?

Left to its own devices, big-money capitalism will tend to consolidate, shut out competition and reap the excessive benefits of monopoly, as Ms Hearn shows here:



Naturally, because organisations develop a life-instinct of their own, they will resist anything that tries to limit them. So part of their budgets will be to influence politicians and the news media in their favour. Look how the EU and its fellow travellers in the UK managed the news in 1975 - the mystery to me is why there was anything like a fair hearing for both sides in 2016.

Somehow, the cat must be belled.

Quite how the US managed to do this in the "Progressive Age" I don't know exactly, though I imagine responsiveness to the people via the machinery of democracy had something to do with it. Hence the introduction of antitrust laws.

But I suppose a lot of work goes in to "managing democracy" these days; perhaps bought tongues and internet trolling will prevent a recurrence of mass antitrust understanding and sentiment.

And the battle continues, not only within countries but between them: fast- moving globalist capital versus captive local populations.

Just as the immigration question is not one of "nobody in" versus "everybody in", perhaps there is a position to hold between no-imports protectionism and unconditional "free trade."

Some of us are so focused on the EU membership question that we are forgetting the same issue is writ much larger in the world as a whole. It must be possible to allow the Third World to rise without destabilising the social fabrics of the developed nations.

To use an analogy, if you have a car, it does not only stop or go, it has a steering wheel and brakes.

I should have thought that the British Labour Party would have understood this - I think it used to, but as an organisation with its intrinsic desire to survive and thrive it decided some time ago to extend its pseudopodia towards the prosperous middle classes, and despite the appointment of a Left leader has not adequately developed its analysis and reformulated its objectives.

Absent a coherent political and economic platform, things are coming to a head:

Four Factors for Life Success

(Htp: https://fritz-aviewfromthebeach.blogspot.com/2019/01/google-gets-down-with-deuteronomy.html)

Starting c. 6:52 in this clip, Professor Jordan Peterson names four factors that taken together are good predictors of life success:

• IQ, or general cognitive ability
• Conscientiousness (or "grit")
• Freedom from negative emotion (aka "low autoeroticism")
• Openness to experience

I read long ago that IQ (as measured) can be increased by doing more problem-solving, and is also influenced by early mental stimulation; though presumably there is some limit. Perhaps it is is more easily crushed than developed?

I should think that conscientiousness and openness to experience can also be systematically encouraged.

But all of these won't result in much happiness if negative feelings about oneself are not tackled. Where do they start - nature or nurture? - and how if at all can they be corrected? Otherwise, even if the other traits are pronounced, we have the equivalent of a high-performance car steered by a crazy driver.

I read that efforts to boost self-esteem tend to result in narcissism; so are they pointless, or just the wrong kind of intervention?

UPDATE (8 Jan 18, htp "JD"):

Peterson offers answers to the emotional side:

"Peterson draws on reams of studies to show that fundamental changes to personal habits such as sleep and exercise schedules can dramatically improve serotonin levels, thereby increasing the chance of personal success and fulfilment. From there he draws in stories from world mythology and religious texts to show that humans derive great meaning from overcoming psychological and social obstacles."

https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/books/2018/01/22/jordan-peterson-on-embracing-your-inner-lobster-in-12-rules-for-life.html

I Have Never Heard So Much Sense Talked In Such A Short Time

JD emails me - and I just have to share:

A comment at The Slog posted a video by Mark Blyth but it was 'explained' by some American TV show host. Don't know if you saw it but I found the original:



Blyth thinks it is about more than the EU and he explains "it is a revolt against technocracy."

By a bit of synchronicity I had pulled off the bookshelf the other day Fritz Schumacher's book called "Good Work" published in 1980. It is a collection of lectures he gave during the 1970s and one of the things he emphasises in those lectures is exactly what Blyth has figured out, the problem of the economic system is that it is built around technical 'improvements' which are all designed, albeit unwittingly, to reinforce the economic system. Instead of 'trickle down' we get a further increase in 'trickle up' so the majority continue to get poorer and the 1% continue to get richer.

At the end of the video he mentions the Hamptons on Long Island. A very astute man is Professor Blyth!

ADDENDUM:

I wonder if it is because Mark Blyth is Scottish that he thinks independently?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Blyth

"The man o' independent mind 
He looks an' laughs at a' that."
- Robert Burns
https://www.poemhunter.com/poem/a-man-s-a-man-for-a-that

Blyth is following traditional wisdom, as was Dr Schumacher in his books. And so too was the late John Michell in all of his books and magazine articles-

"The big idea of today is that human beings are unreliable and should be replaced by computers"
John Michell; The Oldie magazine, October 2005.

See also -
http://theylaughedatnoah.blogspot.com/2017/06/jd-work-to-live-not-live-to-work.html
http://theylaughedatnoah.blogspot.com/2017/07/what-is-purpose-of-work-by-jd.html

"What began as a way of duplicating human skill on a greater scale will end by replacing skill altogether in order to produce goods regardless of any human intervention. As a necessary part of the process any call for the control of machines, however desirable in human terms, is bound to seem illogical since it amounts to the destruction of the system for generating the wealth needed to perpetuate the consumption that underpins the social fabric."

"Such is the remorseless pressure of this process that it becomes, in due course, a sort of cannibalism, first of all destroying the machine minder through automation then in a further step destroying the machine by an economy based on the virtual reality of computerised information. At this stage the question of human needs hardly arises, having been displaced by the internal demands of the productive system itself. This 'system' possessing no vision of an end other than its own perpetuation, must eventually bring about its own destruction."

The above two paragraphs are copied more or less verbatim from Brian Keeble's book http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6623824-god-and-work

Beware the Ides of June 2040: Death of the Welfare State

Martin Armstrong is a financial analyst who believes in cycles. In a recent online post discussing the desire of government to convert us all to cashless payments, he says:

"Governments are going broke. They will not listen and instead, they are obsessed with just a solution for the next quarter. They lack any vision of the future and will NEVER [take] responsibility for their own mismanagement. Their single solution is to always raise taxes rather than reform. The more they press toward this cashless society the greater the economic implosion. What comes after the elimination of cash and the budgets are never balanced with institution starting to shift to private assets rather than government bonds that pay nothing and present huge risks, will be the default on social programs without the corresponding reduction in taxes. This all leads to the inevitable collapse of Western Society just as we witnessed the collapse of Communism in 1989.

"Our model is famous for forecasting the collapse of Communism and even the fall of the Berlin Wall (November 9, 1989; 1989.857). The likelihood of Western Socialism surviving as some benevolent government will come to an end by 2041.457. The 1989 Tiananmen Square protests that culminated on June 4th, 1989 (1989.424). This means we should begin to see a sharp rise in civil unrest cyclically speaking beginning October 28th, 2020 going into the US Presidential elections."

This is a thing I fear, for the UK.

• Taking the long view, we are overpopulated: research published some years ago on populationmatters.org estimated that we can only support around 17 million people from our own agricultural resources, using sustainable methods
• We have lost much of the industrial base that multiplies labour power, allowing for high wages and a tax base that can support the "social programs" we have become used to since 1945, such as free education, health, help with housing, unemployment benefits, family and earned-income supplements
• We have a high level of disguised un/under-employment
• Social bonds are under strain and massive, expensive inputs from social workers, police, teachers etc are barely coping - at a time of bogus (debt-fuelled) prosperity
• Public and private indebtedness continues to increase
• At least half the Conservative Party wants us to stay in the EU, which has weakened our economy by acting as a scale model of globalism and undermining working-class prosperity with cheap imported/offshored labour; the other half wants out of the EU in favour of full-scale globalism, which may work on paper (looking only at GDP) for a while but exacerbate other problems including widening inequalities
• Half the Labour Party wants to remain in the EU, under some illusion (against evidence) of the latter's benevolence; and has been happy to loosen controls on inward economic migration because it would "rub the Right's nose in diversity" (note the focus on political party, rather than consideration of what might benefit the country)

So far, I see only a handful of old Labourites (plus the recorded voices of some of their deceased comrades) who understand that we need to be free of the EU and at the same time resist the destructive forces of global cattle-raid capitalism (which some call corporatism so as to distinguish it from the long-term business-building capitalism that made us a rich economy.)

I am altruistic for selfish reasons: if our labouring classes can be employed at good wages and the Welfare State can be sustained, then I will be able to live and move around in my country in relative safety. 

If Armstrong (and Kondratieff, and others) are correct, though, we cannot hold back the tide of history. Note above that Armstrong predicts social unrest in the US in late 2020; another cycle-theorist, Charles Hugh Smith, forecasts a financial crisis in c. 2025. Time will tell.

Song Stylist: Nancy Wilson, by Wiggia

Outside of modern jazz I don’t put up music pieces on here as JD is the ‘man’ for that - his knowledge across the whole spectrum of music leaves me a long way behind in his wake.

With Nancy Wilson who recently died however I feel I am justified to write this. She came to prominence after meeting Julian “Cannonball” Adderley in 1959. When he suggested she could make it as a singer and should move to NY, she engaged Adderley's manager and after four weeks she had made it.

Born in Ohio in 1937 she was the youngest of six children born to working parents. From an early age as with so many of her contemporaries she was exposed to music brought home by her father. She was influenced by Nat King Cole, Billy Eckstine, Lionel Hampton's singer Jimmy Scott, Dinah Washington, Ruth Brown, LaVerne Baker and Little Esther among others.

She won a talent contest at fifteen whilst still at school and the prize was a twice weekly appearance on a local TV show. It was the beginning of a long and illustrious career spanning six decades.

She covered the whole gamut of music styles during those years: blues, jazz, R&B, pop and soul. She was the complete entertainer, with acting roles and her own TV shows.

It was after Adderley’s manager sent Capitol Records four demos including Guess Who I Saw Today that she was signed up in 1960. The single of that number was her first hit and four albums followed in two years with Capitol.

Nancy never had a Number 1 but her albums (which ran to seventy) sold in large numbers throughout her career.

She won three Grammys: in 1965 for best R&B recording “How Glad I Am”, in 2005 for best jazz vocal album RSVP - rare songs, very personal - and in 2007 in the same category for “Turned to Blue”.

Her frequent television appearances resulted in her getting her own show, The Nancy Wilson show (1967-1968) for which she won an Emmy, appearing also in many TV shows from I Spy to Hawaii Five O, Police Story, and all the major shows such as the Danny Kaye, Andy Williams etc.

She was also a successful business woman and a major figure in the Civil Rights Movement; a very full and meaningful life.

Yet her singing career though known for the more ‘pop’ aspects really took off after the Adderley meeting and she returned to jazz in later life as seen above with her award winning albums.

Here the lovely Nancy is singing The Very Thought of You in 1964:



Another of her early hits, in fact the biggest one (You Don’t Know) How Glad I Am:



At Newport Jazz Festival 1987  “I Was Telling Him About You”:



This is with Adderley in ‘61 “Save Your Love For Me”, for many their favorite Nancy Wilson song:



Sorry about the lack of videos but I am sure the music makes amends.

“Here’s That Rainy Day”:



Another ‘made for Nancy’ number, “Don’t Let ME Be Lonely Tonight”:



This was always such an emotional number, love this one - “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You”:



Whilst suffering a lot of ill health in later years Nancy was always the ultimate pro, her immaculate appearance never wavered, always a very smart lady. She will be sadly missed as the generation she and others represented are nearly all gone now.

To finish with, the Diva Orchestra in 2001:

Weekend Wonders: The Outer Limits (Of Space)

Here is a diagram of the universe sorted by distance from us.
An expandable image is available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

By Pablo Carlos Budassi - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=74584660

Light takes time to get to us, so the farther away an object us, the farther back in time we can see. 

The very earliest stage of the universe is invisible - photons could not get through the dense fog of subatomic particles. After c. 370,000 years, atoms began to form, so creating empty spaces that let photons start their long journey. We are still able to observe the radiation emitted at that time, because it has taken billions of years to reach us.

More on the early universe and cosmic background microwave radiation in these two short clips by Professor David Butler:

Is the Universe gradually disappearing?

Yes - and no.

The fabric of the Universe is expanding, so that the farther away an object is, the faster it will seem to be receding. (This is "on the whole" - some objects, such as the Andromeda galaxy, happen to be moving in our direction. But an otherwise "stationary" object will still be carried away by space-time expansion.)

The logic of this seems to be that with enough of this stretching, the farthest parts of the Universe will be going faster than the speed of light and so information from them can never reach us. In a sense, they will have torn free of our observable Universe and will cease to exist as far as we are concerned. An August 2018 article in Forbes magazine appears to be thinking on these lines:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/08/17/the-universe-is-disappearing-and-theres-nothing-we-can-do-to-stop-it/#35b81132560e

But if Einstein is right, then no matter is rushing away from us at or above light-speed.

This is because of the way you add two speeds together.

For everyday purposes, two cars approaching each other, each travelling at 30 mph, are closing the gap at 60 mph...

... very, very nearly, but not quite! For in reality, there is a microscopic reduction in the total, which becomes much more significant as velocities get closer to light-speed. The formula is this:

$$
{\displaystyle u={v+u' \over 1+(vu'/c^{2})}.}

u is the combined speed, as seen from our point of view
v is the speed of the first object
u' is the speed of the second object, as seen from v
c is the speed of light (and c2 is the speed of light times itself) 

So if we see a galaxy moving away from us at 60% of the speed of light (i.e. 0.6 C), and there is a quasar moving away from the galaxy in the same direction, also at 0.6 C (as seen from the galaxy), then (if you can do the math) Einstein's formula says the quasar is receding from ourselves not at a total of 1.2 C (20% faster than light) but at 15/17ths of C - i.e. lower than light-speed.

Therefore, a graph of celestial objects plotting distance against velocity would appear to be very nearly straight-line to start with (as per Hubble) but curving as the velocities approached C.

So information from the most distant reaches of the Universe can never be completely lost, but the frequencies will ultimately be lengthened to the point where we would have no means to detect them.

Like old soldiers, the remotest bits of the Universe don't die (leave us altogether); they just fade away.

FRIDAY MUSIC: Fripp-ery, by JD

Something to start the year in style and wake us all up from our post festivities slumber, the Mad Genius known as Robert Fripp!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fripp

Founder member of the rock group King Crimson and the only one to be in all of its various incarnations, he describes himself as 'the glue holding it together'. But in the past fifty years he has explored the world of music and sound and has recorded many 'unusual' styles and types of music. What it all shares is that attention must be paid, it is not background music or music while you work; listen and enjoy something which is, dare I say it, transcendental!

Some International New Year's Eve Celebrations, by JD

GERMANY

"Dinner For One" (1963) - Freddie Frinton's manservant heroically lifts a glass for each of May Warden's absent friends, for every course...

This comedy masterpiece has been shown on German TV for the last 55 years - we put it up last NYE but think it's a worthy tradition for Broad Oak Magazine, too:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinner_for_One


SWEDEN/NORWAY/DENMARK

Not exactly New Year's Eve but a midwinter celebration of Lucia, the return of the light after the winter solstice. The origins of the Lucia Tradition are explained in this first video:



- and here is how Jonna Jinton commemorates it:




CHILE

This one is bizarre when you see the picture in the first link but it is explained in the second link. The twelve grapes is inherited from the Spanish tradition but the others look like mad inventions.

Still, I suppose every tradition has to start somewhere. Who would have thought that the Germans would fall in love with Freddie Frinton and make it an annual ritual!

More about Chilean NYE here: http://www.southamerica.me/new-years-eve-traditions-chile/

- and here: http://www.chile-attractions.com/chile-new-years.html


SPAIN

Some Spanish practices: https://www.eyeonspain.com/spain-magazine/new-year-in-spain.aspx

Anne Igartiburu has become a fixture on Spanish TV every New Year's Eve (not sure which year this is). Paradoxically, she commands a big audience but hasn't got much coverage...




SCOTLAND

And for Caledonian Hogmaniacs, this is the first TV broadcast of Hogmanay in 1957-into-1958:


Oidhche mhath!

The Trump Wall, In Context

In January 2018 President Trump requested $25 billion to build a wall along the border with Mexico.

In August, the Government Accountability Office warned that the project could cost more than estimated; but didn't quantify this, so we'll have to go with the figure given.

The US Federal Budget for 2018/19 is $4,407 billion. This is more than expected income so requires a deficit of $985 billion to make up the difference.

The US has a National Debt of $21,600 billion, implying $363 billion in interest charges in 2018/19.

 This chart is to visualise the relative size of the Wall's cost. The Wall is equivalent to 0.57% of the annual budget, or 2.5% of the deficit, or 6.9% of the annual interest on the National Debt.

Cancelling the Wall would make very little difference to the national finances. [UPDATE, 6.1.19: even less, if the current demand for $5.6 billion is agreed.]

The costs and benefits of unauthorised Mexico to US migration seem hard to establish. There are something like 10 - 12 million such migrants [correction: not all Mexican - see comment below] now residing in the US. If many of these represent cheap labour, then that is a benefit to employers; but the cheap labour force will pay little in income tax and may be entitled to supplementary in-work benefits, which is a cost to the State and in effect a subsidy to the employer. Also, wealthy Americans have many clever ways to keep down their tax contributions and are more likely than the average wage earner to put spare money into investments rather than personal expenditure. 

Whereas if restricting migration and foreign imports increases labour wages, then the American working class may be more self-sufficient in income, pay more in taxes and also be more likely to spend spare cash, stimulating demand. Perhaps this could help bring the budget into balance.

If allowed to proceed, the Wall would be one useful test of that theory.

Proportional Representation: Paralysis and Parasites

"I am a great enthusiast for a couple of almost unique pillars of US and UK democracy:  the first past the post principle in designating the winners of elections and the winner takes all notion of governance following the elections.  To anyone who finds these principles unexceptional, I must explain that they run directly against the operative principles of many if not most nations on the Continent, where progressive political theories stressing consensus and inclusiveness have given us executives and legislatures which are utterly incapable of being disruptive. What we get here in Old Europe tends to be coalition governments or power-sharing in which parliamentary majorities are hobbled together by distributing the spoils of office, assigning ministerial portfolios with utter disregard for policy coherence or the competence of the appointees. The stasis in policy results in voter apathy and works directly against the vibrancy of democracy."

- Gilbert Doctorow
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2018/12/20/donald-trump-orders-full-withdrawal-of-us-ground-forces-from-syria-the-establishment-howls-it-disapproval/

"Proportional representation - instead of voting for an MP, like we do in Britain, Weimar Germans voted for a party. Each party was then allocated seats in the Reichstag exactly reflecting (proportional to) the number of people who had voted for it. This sounds fair, but in practice it was a disaster it resulted in dozens of tiny parties, with no party strong enough to get a majority, and, therefore, no government to get its laws passed in the Reichstag. This was a major weakness of the Republic."

- BBC History
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/weimarstrengthweakrev_print.shtml

But the Alternative Vote, whose adoption in the UK the Labour and Conservative parties colluded to block, is not the same thing, and if we are to have a second referendum on anything, this might be one to consider:

https://theylaughedatnoah.blogspot.com/2011/04/voting-reform-av-first-past-post.html

- I'd be interested to know of any simulations that might help us see the likely outcomes of an AV system. I don't think it would necessarily boost the LibDems - it depends on how they and other parties might reposition themselves and also what new parties might arise.

And after decades of Punch and Judy politics a more focused struggle for the centre might be beneficial.

Weekend Wonders: Amber

A tick grasping a dinosaur feather inside 99 million-year-old Burmese amber. (Image: Peñalver et al., 2017)
https://gizmodo.com/new-evidence-from-ancient-amber-shows-dinosaurs-were-pl-1821213048

When we look at amber we wonder at the creatures often caught up inside, changeless in their warm-coloured, luminous prison. It is the fossilised resin exuded by some plants to protect themselves, and first became abundant around 150 million years ago (mya), though the oldest animals found trapped in amber are some mites dating from 230 mya. In the science fiction film "Jurassic Park" the blood-meal of mosquitoes preserved in ancient amber is used to re-breed dinosaurs. (Insects generally are far more ancient than dinos - anything from 412-479 mya.)

Amber is still being produced today, but it takes millions of years to mutate from a sticky sap, through a hardened stage called copal, to the transparent-stone-like final condition.

The very earliest amber found so far dates from around 320 million years ago (mya) and was found in 2008 in an Illinois coal deposit. This was from the Carboniferous period (359 - 299 mya), long before the the age of dinosaurs (previously said to be 220 - 65 mya - though in 2012 another dinosaur fossil was found dating to 243 mya.)

The Illinois amber discovery is something of a mystery as modern trees and flowering plants came later, in fact many millions of years after dinosaurs first appeared. Until recently, the ancestors of flowering plants that produce seeds in protective ovaries (angiosperms) were believed to date from perhaps 160 mya. But before angiosperms there were gymnosperms (plants carrying seed without covers) such as conifers and ginkos, which started in the late Carboniferous period and so it may be one of them that produced that earliest amber.

Having said that, the emergence of flowering plants and angiosperms is being redated too: last year a scientific team produced a model of the earliest flower, from 140 mya; yet in 2013 fossil plant pollen was found from 240 mya and so angiosperms may have developed in the "Early Triassic (between 252 to 247 million years ago) or even earlier."

The Natural History Museum says that dinosaurs evolved in the Triassic (252-201 mya) when all the world's land mass was clumped together (Pangea); lived though the split in Pangea that created the North Atlantic Ocean; survived the still-mysterious mass extinctions at the end of the Triassic and became far more numerous and various in the Jurassic (201-145 mya); and saw the further splitting of landmasses in the Cretaceous period, and diversification in plants and insects (including the appearance of bees).

So we're still finding out when dinosaurs first saw (and presumably ate from) modern trees and flowering plants. Scientists used to think that dinosaurs never even got to munch grass - but thanks to analysis of fossilised dinosaur poo the origin of grass has been pushed back from 55 mya to 66 mya, and some of its cousins may be much older.

There they are, these specimens, frozen in time; yet our understanding of the past keeps changing.

________________________________________________________________________________
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amber#Geological_record
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/08/pictures/120828-oldest-amber-animals-science-proceedings-arthropod-triassic/
https://www.livescience.com/48663-insect-family-tree-evolution.html
http://www.brost.se/eng/education/facts.html
https://www.dnr.illinois.gov/OI/Documents/March10Amber.pdf
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/carboniferous/
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-discover-oldest-known-dinosaur-152807497/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowering_plant
https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j24_2/j24_2_16.pdf
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131001191811.htm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-40780491
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/when-did-dinosaurs-live.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poaceae#Evolutionary_history

FRIDAY MUSIC: Creature Comforts, by JD

The brief lull between the Christmas festivities and the Hogmanay celebration merits a slightly unusual and different musical offering!

Never Mind The EU, Can The UK Parliament Be Reformed?

In yesterday's post, Dr North referred to a 1973 Newsweek article by Milton Friedman on "barking cats"; the link he gives is now "404: not found", but another copy can be seen here:

https://miltonfriedman.hoover.org/friedman_images/Collections/2016c21/NW_02_19_1973.pdf

- and one paragraph stood out, for me:

"The error of supposing that the behavior of social organisms can be shaped at will is widespread. It is the fundamental error of most so-called reformers. It explains why they so often believe that the fault lies in the man, not the “system,” that the way to solve problems is to “throw the rascals out” and put well-meaning people in charge. It explains why their reforms, when ostensibly achieved, so often go astray."

The phrase "throw the rascals out" is often used in connection with the British electoral system, compared favourably with the EU where the electorate cannot dismiss a bad or incompetent Commission.

But does Friedman throw light on a problem we have with the UK Parliament, too?

When the overwhelming majority of MPs are Remainers, most of whom representing constituencies that voted clearly for Leave; and when many of those MPs in their several political parties are doing their best to oppose and subvert the results of a referendum which they repeatedly assured us would be decisive; and when they are visibly upset and angry if reprimanded by impertinent members of Question Time audiences who seem to think that this is a democracy; then should we adapt Mrs Thatcher's judgment* and say:

"The British Parliamentary system as a whole is fundamentally unreformable"?

For if their subversion (and the complex public relations assault they are using to scare, distract and confuse the voters) succeeds, they will call into question the legitimacy of their own power. This is not merely theoretical quibbling. To quote the Scottish play:

"Thoughts speculative their unsure hopes relate,
But certain issue strokes must arbitrate."

Even if it manages to put down revolt - and Government has such powerful tools these days - the relations between rulers and ruled will be deeply tainted.

This is now about more than the EU.

___________________________________________________
*"Statecraft" (2003), p. 321 - "Europe" in the original, not "The British Parliamentary system"

The Cure!

Repeat as required:

                                                                                                             Sackerson, 26.12.2018

Resisting our own creations

"In my broader study of the EU, two apparently unrelated tracts were of huge value to me. The first is one I have used many times, the Milton Friedman article on "barking cats", and the second is the study of the Tennessee Valley Authority by Philip Selznick, which led to the concept of "self-maintenance", the idea that institutions would always act in their own self-interests, even if this meant acting against the reasons for which they were established."

- Dr Richard North (http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87096)

And this is a problem for reification generally.

Once a human function - educating the young, caring for the sick, supporting the weaker and less fortunate - has been turned into an organisation, the thing has a life of its own and a desire to survive. It is a multicellular organism, composed of individual humans who each have their incomes and career prospects to consider. Attempts to steer it back onto its proper course are seen as threats, and can be opposed with the wealth and power of a great collective enterprise.

This is why liberty matters. In Britain, though not in many other countries, the citizen can teach his own children, and manage many legal aspects of his affairs without a solicitor, even representing himself in a court of law if he so wishes. The State may not like it, but it has to justify itself to the common man and keep its own behaviour within bounds, so long as judges maintain their independence.

That is the little flame that must be kept alight. Even if we ourselves may be cells in the body of the monster.

Wiggia's Winter Warning

A road safety message..............

A very Merry Christmas to all our readers, may you enjoy the fruits of your labours whether it be good food, good company, the best of wines and everything you have wished over the festive season, but just one word of warning whatever else you do , do NOT drink and drive......................

Toy Car Crash GIF from Toycar GIFs

Sackerson adds:

... and watch for ice...

Goldman Sachs: Can You Spare A Squid?

They've started with the radio adverts. You can open an online savings account with as little as £1.

"Marcus" (GS was founded by Marcus Goldman in 1869) was launched in September 2018 and will take deposits up to a maximum £250,000, paying 1.5% p.a.

With British bank accounts, deposits are protected up to no more than £85,000 per person (per financial institution). This matters, as a legal case in 1848 established that money left with a bank is not held in trust for the customer, who is merely a creditor (and not the most senior) with a claim on the bank's assets should it fail.

In fact even that £85,000 (€100,000) is an arbitrary figure not an absolute guarantee; it was reduced to £75,000 in January 2015 and re-raised in January 2017 to the fanfare of "people have more financial protection for their deposits from today." Potentially, you could end up with merely a slice of the equity of a shrunk and wobbly bank.

Goldman Sachs' new-found enthusiasm for curating the cash of the "little people who pay taxes" may or may not be connected to the 1MDB scandal that has led to multibillion-dollar claims on behalf of Abu Dhabi and Malaysia. So the pennies of the poor man's savings may help clear the blockage in the vampire squid's blood funnel.

The fraud allegations involve the former Prime Minister of Malaysia (Najib Razak) and a Malay businessman called Jho Low. Singapore is extending its criminal investigation to GS, but please don't worry about the bank execs: for people at their level, the very worst outcome is a spell improving their golf handicaps in a five-star open prison. No bunking with Bubba in a 10 x 8 for them.

You may remember the MP who, some years ago, proposed the introduction of completely safe deposit accounts - ones where the bank is only the custodian of your cash and must keep it safe for you: Douglas Carswell, 2010. (He tried again in 2016, as a tabled amendment to the Bank Of England Bill.) Even if he had succeeded, you would only be entitled to your money back - not necessarily its purchasing power.

How can you store value in a world of made-up money, inflated values, fairy guarantees and swindling? When you know, do please tell me.

___________________________________________

https://www.marcus.co.uk/uk/en/savings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs#Founding_and_establishment
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2018/09/new-online-bank-makes-its-marcus-with-top-savings-rate/
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/prudential-regulation/authorisations/financial-services-compensation-scheme
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foley_v_Hill
https://www.globalresearch.ca/financial-meltdown-and-the-confiscation-of-bank-savings-the-uk-eu-bank-depositor-bail-in-scheme/5475934
https://www.fscs.org.uk/news/2017/january/new-85000-deposit-limit-from-today/
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Leona_Helmsley
https://www.barrons.com/articles/abu-dhabi-fund-sues-goldman-sachs-over-1mdb-1542821292
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/malaysia-seeks-7-5-billion-reparations-goldman-sachs-071652236--sector.html
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/singapore-to-expand-1mdb-criminal-probe-to-include-goldman-sachs
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/25/1mdb-scandal-explained-a-tale-of-malaysias-missing-billions
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/457478
https://positivemoney.org/2010/09/douglas-carswell-mp-introduces-bill-to-stop-fractional-reserve-banking/
https://positivemoney.org/2016/04/23871/

Bonus track - Matt Taibbi's famous 2010 article on GS in "Rolling Stone" magazine:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-195229/

Weekend Wonders: the White Blood Cell

FRIDAY MUSIC: Christmas (Part 2), by JD

As with last week, more music you may not have heard anywhere else.

Merry Christmas!

Does The Welfare State Kill?

Scrooge would probably have welcomed the notion that charitable generosity is misguided. But in the mouse experiment described here, it wasn't because of overpopulation:

"Great care was taken to ensure the mice were taken care of, food and water was unlimited allowing mice to eat or drink whenever they pleased and there was always space and clean bedding available so females could rear young in peace and safety.

"Despite this, Calhoun noticed that after day 315 of the experiment, things started to go wrong. First of all there was a noticeable drop in population growth. While initially the population of mouse heaven had doubled every 55 days, after day 315 it doubled, according to Calhoun’s notes, approximately every 145 days. This made little sense as there was still at this time ample space to house an additional 3000 mice.

"In addition to a drop in population growth, Calhoun also noticed an abrupt change in behaviour in both males and females. Social bonds effectively broke down and male mice, without a reason to defend their territory or food source (since both were plentiful) became dejected, forming cliques that randomly attacked one another for seemingly no reason. Females similarly began abandoning young or even attacking them and slowly but surely, both males and females simply stopped breeding...

"... what’s often lost in Calhoun’s work is what came after, in which he continued to research and tweak environmental variables to try to find ways to keep the mice from going down the extinction path even as the population density grew. And, in fact, he had some success at this, for instance in one case via simply encouraging creativity in certain mice by various means. Giving them a sort of purpose here actually worked, with the “creative” mice continuing to thrive well beyond what would have otherwise been expected from the previous experiments."

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2018/12/that-time-a-guy-tried-to-build-a-utopia-for-mice-and-it-all-went-to-hell/

Conclusions?