Churchill & The Irish

My parents immigrated to the U.S. from Ireland.  It is typical of smaller nation states that its citizenry have unqualified grasp of their own history.  I’ve noticed it in the Balkans, and throughout eastern Europe.  The Irish, perhaps better than any people have a unique understanding of the British.  

The genocidal conflict of the 100 Years War is northern Ireland.  It is also Elizabethan foreign policy; England being an island feared encirclement of Papist Spain and France, so London sought permanent refuge in securing its rear.  Preventing any nation from flanking her, London forcibly removed Dutch and Scottish into Irelands northern corridor, then watched as these Scotch Irish willingly became a proxy for foreign interests.  Interests that would become so archaic it solicited a fascist Fenian response.

Winston Churchill is part of this drama, perhaps the only man with the temerity to openly seek conciliation with Dublin.  But that was after he initiated brutal, near genocidal reprisals in Ireland.  The truth isn’t so straight forward here, but its main tenets can be openly discerned.  Winston, after having openly supported the Crown in the violent suppression of civilians in Ireland, retuned home to England ashamed.

Churchill’s earliest memories are of Ireland.  In 1876, Winston’s grandfather, the Duke of Marlborough received a royal appointment in Dublin, taking his son (Randolph, Winston’s father) as his private secretary introduced Winston to Ireland.  Winston’s first memory of Dublin was witnessing radical armed Fenian separatists in Phoenix Park.

Why is this important?

It fell to Abraham Lincoln to say that Reconstruction was the greatest question ever presented to practical statesmanship, but he never tried reconciling Irish rural Catholic nationalism to the stalwart unionism of the Union Jack.  So central was the Irish question in British politics throughout the early 20th century, it lambasted and damaged many prominent British foreign secretaries.  Gladstone, Disraeli, even Wellington, Salisbury, Palmerston, Canning, and Castlereigh all cut their teeth on Fenian separatism.  

The Act of Union in 1801 abolished Irish parliament, but the Home Rule party began growing under the leadership of Charles Stewart Parnell, with more than one hundred seats in English Parliament and favorable positioning by William Gladstone, the Home Rule Bill passed in 1893, only to be vetoed by the House of Lords.  The stumbling block was Ulster, and these Scottish besieged farmers believed that “Home rule was Rome rule“.

Elected to Parliament as a Tory in 1900, he cast aside his father’s public admonition to Home Rule, publicly stating that “Ulster will fight, and Ulster will be right“.  Casting aside his fathers fervent Unionism, Winston crossed over to the liberal side in 1904 and became a passionate supporter of Home Rule.  In 1914 British parliamentarians passed a redundant bill advocating for Irish Home Rule, irreconcilable Unionists in northern Ireland began arming themselves.  The Irish Civil War was coming.

Events in Dublin were eclipsed by the emergence of World War I.  The Balkans fiasco permitted London to suspend Home Rule; 200,000 Unionist men joined the fight against Germany, while trench war besieged nation states throughout western Europe, Irish separatists launched the East Rising in 1916.  Tory encirclement was nearly complete.

With the Dardanelles disaster nearly finishing Winston’s career, he rode out the 1918 elections only to watch new radical separatists called Sinn Fein (translated as for ourselves alone).  Sinn Fein never arrived in London for Parliament, they instead set up an Irish parliament and executive in Dublin.  The Irish War for Independence began.   Churchill returned to government as minister of war only to be given the northern Ireland portfolio. He dispatched illegal irregulars known as Black & Tans, men taken from the British Army in India and South Africa and given orders to kill civilians.

It was Churchill who overtly sought political accommodation by both carrot and stick. London gave partial independence to Dublin while advocating that Sinn Fein leadership Michael Collins crush separatist irreconcilables led by Eamon de Valera.  Collins was murdered, but the Irish Free State party defeated de Valera’s faction and consolidated Irish Independence.  By 1932, Eamon de Valera re-wrote an Irish Constitution while Winston fumed as a civilian that a nascent Republic was emerging in the Tory rear.  By 1938, it was Chamberlain who gave away three Irish treaty ports of Berehaven, Queenstown, and Lough Swilly to Irish nationalists.  Winston’s fear was imminent.

Churchill’s only ploy was to solicit for the end of partition, IF de Valera ended neutrality and backed London.  Winston has openly sought what he most feared and hated:  an Irish Republic.

What specifically could Winston never understand about British foreign policy in Ireland.

Winston was an imperialist at heart and could never properly access the strength of anti-British sentiment in Irish nationalism.  The Irish simply never had any interest in Winston’s grand vision of a union of English speaking people.

Even still, the man’s magnanimity outlasted his ambivalence for a free Ireland.



Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

That Sharp Useless Look. . .GDP & Digital Mediums

Anyone remotely familiar with the work of Marshall McLuhan would make easy work of dismantling much that underwrites the work of Robert J. Gordon.  Dr. Gordon is an economist at Northwestern whose work is primarily used to justify institutionalized opacity that has become the canard of secular stagnation.  According to Gordon and the legion of bean counters working at govmint, the arrival of digital technology is to blame for sluggish growth.  He’s only partially true, for the real answer rests politically.

Anyone over the age of 50 remembers how members of the Carter administration sought refuge in a determinist frame of mind, citing limits to growth.  For Carter, the U.S. had become too big to govern, we simply had to live with the malaise that underwrote stagflation.

Reagan thought differently.  And because of it, we’er better off today.  Reagan and his team of advisers thought of a policy framework whose sources drew from the moral foundations of liberty.

For Gordon and the technocrats at the FED, intensive growth is that of output per unit of input.  This is called productivity.  Extensive growth refers to total output.  A standard productivity measure that encompasses all inputs is called total factor productivity or TFP.

Why is this important?

When a nation states political economy is no longer characterized as a center-margin based framework, then the commanding heights of the center lose the ability to measure. The U.S. economy isn’t a steal and wheat economy anymore, we’re a service based economy whose center is dispersed.  This means GDP isn’t measuring objects anymore but velocities, magnitudes, even relations whose components aren’t alloyed from a commanding center.  What digital technology confers upon us is a new sphere of autonomy that hinders traditional methodologies of econometrics.

Previous administrations had it harder than we do.  Reagan and Robert Bartley of the Wall Street Journal implicitly knew that U.S. stagnation had multiple sources, chiefly Nixon’s closing of the gold window and OPEC.  The former had to be fixed politically, sourced to an engaged executive who anchored the new regime of floating exchange rates.  The latter was geopolitical even though it masked the former.  Nevertheless, rising energy costs, growing regulatory burdens and structural shifts out from manufacturing did hamper U.S. growth for decades.

For Gordon, the input components of GDP underestimate growth in that real income is understated in flawed price indexes.  The price indexes used to convert dollars of output into inflation corrected ‘real’ output underestimates ‘real’ output growth.  Also, GDP omits economic activity that cannot be measured nor captured in market transactions.

All of this serves to obscure the reality that economic policy matters.

For Gordon and his cohort of Keynesians, there remain two variants of secular stagnation. The first emphasizes a demand side saving glut in China with low inflation leading to weak aggregate demand in high income regions.  Never mind that this Chinese savings glut occurs in a nation state without a social safety net!

The second variant views stagnation as occurring from a supply side dynamics.  For this group of economists, first world political economies possess a dearth of productivity and persistent weaknesses caused by the business cycle, high unemployment and almost neo-Malthusian group think that current policy remains optimal and therefore non subject to change.

Both variants are incapable of thinking about the social, political even revolutionary technological advances embodied in digital nano-technology and other variants of emerging miniature technologies.

My monies on the hard working stiff cut off from D.C. enjoying the miraculous gifts of secular life.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Financialization of U.S. Economy & An Emerging Ideological Civil War Brewing

It isn’t difficult to discern the dominant trends that have emerged from Obama’s interventionist central bank policies.  The surging debt, fictional (politicized) unemployment rates, currency interventions etc. . . Everyone familiar with business indices is familiarized with the growth of the top 1%.  What hasn’t been well told is the impact financial engineering has had on the U.S. outside highly dependent capital markets.  Our economy has become so dependent on financial engineering that we no longer perform research and development.  The U.S. isn’t doing manufacturing or serious capital intensive innovation.  How is this turned around?

To reverse the dominant trends toward financialization and the bumping of leveraged balance sheets, broad capital market reform indicative of both fiscal and monetary reform would be required.  Wall Street must be reintegrated back into main street.  If we fail at this during our post 2016 election, then the divisions of our political economy will become permanent.

This entire reality is embodied in the moribund state of U.S. IPO’s.  We simply don’t do them anymore.

The public knows a thing or two that Congress could consider, namely that employment and tax reform is required.  Why?  Because growth alone cannot come from government. If civil society is to grow, productive members of our society must be permitted to enjoy capital/equity formation.  The U.S. citizenry is ready to be a breakout nation, but the formal institutions of governance continue to confiscate the very capital required to succeed.

The post 2016 election gamble has begun.  And its contours run against the very monolithic institutions that sustained previous growth.  A new ideologically driven civil war is emerging.  Place your monies on those few brave, bold citizens moving against the grain.

A Convention of the States is off and running.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Allan Meltzer Nails It: The FED & Reform Agenda

Allan Meltzer was there for Margaret Thatcher.  When she was accosted by the entire British establishment for pursuing monetary, fiscal reform she called Allan Meltzer for advice.  He quietly assured her that reform was an absolute priority.  Thatcher calmly moved ahead with an Austrian school supply side reform that created a sustained 25 year boom.  He never took the credit for that advice.  Now currently serving at the Hoover Institution, his multi-volume work History of the Federal Reserve still proves that titanic efforts in academia happen, even if there seldom read.

He continues to advise Congress on monetary reform.  He’s a lone wolf in a denizen of groupthink, but the turn of mind is deeply attuned to the needs of our Republic.

He continues to serve the publics interest in admonishing how the board of the Federal Reserve operates.  In his mind, the entire framework underwriting Federal Reserve policy is deeply flawed.  For Meltzer and a few others, the FED needs a broader reform agenda, not new inflation targets.

This is significant.  Why?

A new inflation target would only serve the interests of multinational companies and over leveraged banks.  It would permanently undermine the FED’s already weakened policy positioning.  The FED is exhausted and over-extended; we’re simply at the end of unconventional monetary exertion.  We need an executive engaged to a policy mix dominated chiefly by fiscal policy, tax/supply side reform.  Any further adherence to inflation targets would only institutionalize the obscurantist tendencies of contemporary policy craft.  We continually hear rationalized excuses of headwinds and other canards that serve to perpetuate zero growth.  Shifting blame to something, anything outside of political control isn’t policy.  It’s exhaustion.

A change in the numeric inflation target isn’t reform.  What’s needed is a legislative agenda informed from recent policy errors; a review of the Fed’s tools, communicative policies and strategic governance.  A new monetary framework would dump Humphrey-Hawkins.  It would conceed that money is no longer strictly government policy, but a measuring tool and a repository for sustained value.  To achieve this insight the FED and its academic cohorts must confront their own institutionalized reluctance.  They must end the hubris that underwrites the authority of positivist science.  The groupthink dominating this cohort could begin by quietly incorporating Hayek’s thought of dispersed knowledge and its relation to fatal conceits.

Any new framework would have to concede that monetary policy since the great recession has had one goal, to perform the work of a dominant political class.  It succeeded in doing that.  But it failed as a functioning institution of this great Republic.  The new dogmas of data dependency have kept the FED adhered to artificially high asset prices.

We know from John Taylor that central banks throughout the globe cannot fix interest rates and control exchange rate regimes in an age of globalization (the free movement of capital).  But the FED seeks to do just that while licensing ambiguity in the name of forward guidance.  The grave concern here is that we’re witnessing a formidable institution treat markets with contempt; as if western civilization doesn’t have independent components constituting  civil society.  This totalitarian mien of hand and outlook is deeply troubling.  It validates hindsight that the foundation of contemporary liberalism is tyrannical.

The U.S. Federal Reserve is now an adjunct to secular militant thought.  Because of this turn, the Federal Reserve is poorly positioned to manage new shocks emerging from emerging social, political paradigms of liberty that seek autonomy.  The central bank cannot respond with efficacy to new challenges with any credibility.  It is an archaic institution that seeks to perpetuate imprimaturs unalloyed from the extended order.  It is vulnerable.  With its vision inward and weak, it will no longer be able to properly discern how best to rescue the Republic from the wiles of the collective. 3s

Radio Interview John Batchelor Show Begins Minute 19:00

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Sons of Perdition, Lenin: Teutonic Spycraft, Calamity & Lurch Towards WWI

The Gotterdammerung ushered in by the cripple of Hyde Park was a longtime coming.  It still reverberates today in German consciousness; even still, the social, political, strategic impact of the reformation upon German consciousness is best studied in the political calculus of Germany’s dominant social-political elite right up to World War I.

No one, absolutely nobody can comprehend Teutonic hindsight without the advantage of two components:  the suicidal mindset of German consciousness from the impact of geography and Weimar.

German self-consciousness is deftly aware of one primordial fear.  Encirclement.  It was the fear of encirclement that drove German calculus in the lead-up to WWI and its replay in WWII.  It is the driving satanic animus of Hitler’s gamble, his mien, the gasping rhetoric and turn of mind.  But it was Weimar’s hyperinflation and its social impact that utterly destroyed Germany from within.  The “stab in the back” trope actually had its etiology in fixed exchange rates; nonetheless, it encapsulates the why and how Germany’s fixation on Jews encapsulated the lark of international socialism.  For German consciousness, the rear toward Moscow beckoned with satanic urgency.  And they answered. . . It reverberates today.

The conspiratorial background of WWI is really legendary.  Kaiser Wilhelm, being overwhelmed with brinkmanship on his western front, sought to soften up Germany’s border with Russia.  It was his thought that German strength lie in a permanently weakened Russia.  His gamble was simple, call upon the sons of perdition to wreck havoc on the last standing bulwark of Christendom.  Find Lenin and we win.

Lenin on the Train tell of how Germanic ruthlessness lead to the creation of the world’s worst totalitarian state:  Mother  Russia and the destruction of Christendom.

Catherine Merridale’s  book combines diplomatic intrigue, spy-craft, bureaucratic bungling, military history, rancid ideology with towering personalities to reveal how that bacillus on a train fomented a lasting turn into the 20th century.

Mining the German Federal Archives proves what Edmond Taylor and Barbara Tuchman knew all along, the source for contemporary militant secularism is discerned with German propensity for division.  A division that openly sought the destruction of Christendom.

Marx and his cohorts had progeny in Lenin and the goal of eliminating monarchy.

It says with us. . . even today.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Modi Finds His Footing in Kashmir

The British can safely be blamed for the partitioning of Ireland and India, if not to mention  Israel; but only with New Delhi did the calculus have overt geo-strategic calculation.  It fell to England’s nemesis Maulana Azad to extrapolate Mountbatten’s plan of partition.  In his memoirs India Wins Freedom he gapes agog at British perfidity at partition, Azad would finally admonish the British for seeking to contain India’s industrial growth by positioning two large Muslim majorities on India’s northwest and northeast corridor, effectively suffocating India’s inward bound consciousness.  The British sought to impose hard geo-strategic thinking upon India, the consequences are the irreconcilable princely states of Jammu and Kashmir along the LoC (line of control) with nearly one million men stationed manned with nuclear missiles.  A deadly trip wire.

September’s Pakistani policy of attrition has wrought deep policy changes in New Delhi.

In reality, Pakistani Islamic militants have long been the asymmetrical policy threat of Islamabad’s calculus.  Pakistan’s Punjabi class of militants seek street credibility while serving the short sighted domestic consensus of “The Citadel”, the pejorative term for institutionalized opacity in Islamabad civil-military relations.  Pakistan remains an army with a country, but even that is under review since India’s incursion across the LoC into Kashmir.

The Hindu-nationalist party of Modi has long since been viewed as fascist by northern Muslims aligned to Pakistan along India’s northern interior.  This irreconcilable culture war has fielded militant proxies on both sides.  India’s attempt to flank Islamabad in Balochistan deep inside Pakistani territory has yielded poor results while Islamabad remains tethered to jihadi’s throughout Waziristan seeking to flank New Delhi as evidenced in the 2008 Mumbai massacre.  Few then admitted it, but Pakistan’s attempt to flush out jihadi’s deep in Waziristan was working.  The jihadi calculus was right, to relieve pressure, they attacked India, flanking their dominant patrons in Islamabad.  Pakistan today is surrounded, weak, poor and irreconcilable to western norms of governance.  India isn’t.

Modi’s October incursion through the LoC to kill off Islamic militants is paying off.  India’s government has opened new strategic initiatives in viewing the LoC not as an official border but as disputed territory.  Pakistan has responded deftly seeking accommodation to relieve isolation.  The risks of brinkmanship initiated by India are paying dividends.

Historically, Indian belligerence only strengthened Pakistani asymmetry.  For now, it has subsided due to Pakistan’s domestic fiscal situation.  Its new patron in Beijing hasn’t shown any interest in serving Pakistani ambitions.  Even the U.S. has sought new relations with New Delhi given our failed pivot to Asia.  India’s deeper problems with power projection are structural.    American blue-water strategy is to develop redundancies throughout the Pacific to encircle Beijing.

As of now, India is forging ahead with a win.  Pakistan is beleaguered, weak and prostrate.

The stasis will not last.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why Aleppo Is Russian Revenge

The west seems hopelessly lost in how our political leadership views expressions of power; in a word realpolitik.  Aleppo is an example of how myopic western strategic vision remains.  This town in Syria is being ruthlessly bombed by Russia.  Why?  Because Putin’s kleptocracy is damaged by U.S. Treasury policy of sanctions.  For Moscow to shake free of this coercive policy it must rattle any member of the U.S. alliance system.  It has chosen western Europe, especially Italy, France and Germany.  Moscow believes that western sanctions against its coercive taking of Crimea and Ukraine must be revenged.  It has chosen Aleppo.  In so doing, we should anticipate how best to unravel Putin’s criminal oligarchy.

Here’s a newsflash from Reuters:  Moscow’s attempts to cajole the European Union into easing economic sanctions imposed after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea in 2014 don’t appear to be working. And the indiscriminate bombing campaign in Aleppo is to blame.

“It’s clear that the assault on Aleppo has changed the mindset of some,” one EU foreign minister tells Reuters. “It will be impossible to back an easing of sanctions on Ukraine in the current context.” A French diploma adds, “The prospect of the Russian sanctions over Ukraine being lifted are practically nil after Aleppo.” The new resolve among some of the EU’s larger members may halt what was a growing campaign led by countries like Italy and Hungary to ease the sanctions. While new sanctions appear unlikely, EU leaders will discuss Russia during a meeting in Brussels Oct. 20-21.

The key here is triangulation.  Putin’s regime isn’t a reserve currency, he’s dependent on export of petroleum, given the fall in demand Putin has turned inward, slashed budgets, and called upon militant nationalism.  The inflation and deprivation are real.  So is the blood lust that the American’s are to blame.  Putin’s mastery of propaganda is typical of Eurasian despots who cannot, will not compete in a market based political economy.

And so Aleppo is chosen as the graveyard of empires.  Russia is backing Iran, China, and Syrian monsters to punish an international order he will not participate in, nor understands.

Let’s Roll.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Beijing’s Naval Weaknesses

The pivot to Asia failed.  Underwriting it were two distinct features, alliance maintenance and TPP (trans pacific partnership).  Both failed. Diplomatically, team Obama’s posture throughout the Pacific resembles Syria in that diplomacy fails when it isn’t backed up by credible deterrents.  Reassuring regional allies of your staying power meant coalescing Pacific nation states in the aggregate, that the U.S. Navy would prevail in an open confrontation with Beijing in the South China Sea.  As of this writing, State has lost out to Navy, but we failed in making TPP a litmus test of American credibility.  We may get in right post 2016 but the damage is done.

China’s geopolitical initiative of “One Belt, One Road” seeks to build on having China’s currency become a reserve asset, permitting Beijing fiscal and monetary privileges that only Atlantic nation states have preserved.  By funding infrastructure projects tying the Eurasian landmass closer to China by land and sea with linchpin support for east African and Arabian littoral regions, China hopes to preserve a predominance of power favorable to the Han.

State led investments cannot suture nor replace what Beijing struggles to achieve, namely the cultural, diplomatic and political gravitas, the alchemy of benevolent power characteristic of American hegemony.  Beijing is far less adept abroad, especially under adverse conditions.  These blue navy geo-strategic conditions are cultural, they remain dependent derivatives of our Judaeo-Christian framework and cannot be replicated without having the host nation state identify with the moral foundation supporting our political framework.

What China seeks is fealty throughout the Pacific interior and periphery.  Beijing seeks to make it very difficult for Asian nations who draw upon American sovereignty.  It has yet to play out how adroit Beijing remains in its diplomacy toward smaller nation states throughout the Pacific.

Currently, the Han masters in Beijing continue to demonstrate blinding hubris in its fielding on One Belt-One Road initiative, downplaying the historical agency of smaller nations while undermining its own efforts by reflexively pursuing policy through aggressive behavior.

The weaknesses of the Han masters in Beijing are legion.  As they begin to forcibly build an ever growing concentric circle of influence throughout the Pacific, they may want to study up on Clausewitz, who admonished those forging power in a vacuum.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How we got here. . .

Forget covered interest parity, the real debate consuming economics and its role in policy craft is how weak central bank policy instruments remain.  The biggest debate in a generation isn’t over interest rate policy, for monetarists never thought interest rates mattered.  The grapple over fiscal policies instrumental role in governing civil society has taken center stage.  Why?  Absolutely no central bank has hit its inflation target and ultra low monetary policy remains the final bulwark propping up essentially weak economies. Unless your a Keynesian, you now know why the Austrian school never thought Keynes settled anything.

Yes, central banks matter more than markets do in deciding how capital is allocated.  That matters until it doesn’t.  Evidenced in moribund economies around the globe, the maestros of Keynesian kraft cannot publicly claim exhaustion, but they’re done.

Real long term interest rates have been declining for decades, mostly driven by fundamentals like aging populations and the partial integration of savings-rich China into the world economy.  Velocity is subpar, yet distortions remain even as diminishing returns remains stalwart; both banks and pension funds suffer, yet the world’s central bankers continue to service their political paymasters.  The question is, for how long?

The task is to move beyond reliance on central banks, the political priority is to enlist fiscal policy without entrenching government.  The Reaganite policy mix would be the first place to start.  Yet its a non-starter.  The preeminence of the collective is to blame, but they’ve received cover by major media.  Infrastructure is the old canard used in seeking a multiplier, even still, to be effective as a countercyclical tool, timing matters as does debt structure and salesmanship.

Instead, leadership governing central banking sought cover in secular stagnation, weather or a Chinese savings glut to blame for the U.S. current account deficit.  Chronic shortfall in demand was justified in circular logic that sought to discern centers of impact outside political control.

In reality, the historical relationship between growth and real short-term interest rates was always poor.  Aging populations, demography, debt hangovers, real and imagined canards are no match for the reality these diversions seek to cover.  The American economy, for decades, has only sought growth through neo-liberal models of active governance of credit/debt cycles, taxation and depreciation.  Its over.  And no one has yet devised a way to replace that political cypher.

What has our central bank done?  Its monetized the debt to seek velocity.  Its bailed out a dominant political class through asset purchases only to push investors into riskier assets.  Mull that one over for a minute.

The promise of continuous central bank action is over.  Its done.

Time for a supply side revolution.  Get ready, for the Keynesians and collectivists who benefited from an ascendant neoliberal model will be lost to acclimate themselves to the wiles of a growing regional based economy launched from an article 5 convention of the States.

Dust off your Hayek, you’re gonna need it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Deutsche Bank & Unintended Consequences of Intervention: the return of collectivist thought

Its becoming quite clear to realists throughout the monetarist camp that overt accommodation as formal central bank policy has failed.  Without possessing overt prescriptive policy resolutions to ‘clean up’ insolvent banks, the dominant political classes are left with moribund institutions, permanently weak balance sheets and political anxiety reminiscent of the 1930’s.  Talk of secular stagnation remains a canard, for Keynesians and collectivists of all colors seek to ameliorate conditions they thought were under their control.  Turns out the sphere of autonomy underwriting civil society can’t be shoved under a positivist procrustean bed.  The question lingers, why can’t central bankers and their elk throughout the social sciences drop the harbinger of non-euclidean math and face political facts.  1989 happened.  The collectivist’s lost.

What has this to do with Deutsche Bank?

Turns out, quite a lot.

Two points to ponder.  Why did Deutsche Bank buy U.S. Federal Reserve toxic securitized assets and what justification served to ameliorate Merkel’s resolve that Syrian refugees in Germania would never see a reckoning.

What Merkel has done is trade one crisis for another.  Now she’s got both and no possible resolution in sight.  This is why statesmen demonstrate leadership.  Deutsche Bank’s ability to revive moribund assets isn’t realistic, and governments no longer possess leverage to “paper-over” dysfunctional policy.  What we’re witnessing with central banks across the globe is political suicide.  We’re witnessing an entire proprietary class kill themselves in service to defunct political ideals.  Germania indeed. 

The lower bound policy bench marks set by central banks renders them unable to meet stringent capital standards.  Entire portfolios aren’t performing and public animus is rising.  We’re one incident away from an enveloping crisis that has no resolution:  insolvency.

Here’s an idea: end the rent-seeking subsidies, drop the regulatory/financial repression in service to collectivist ideals.  Allow working people to get to equity, capital formation. Drop the pretension in the superiority of a neoliberalism shot through with collectivist pay schemes that only service the dominant political class enforcing them.

Try the moral superiority of Capitalism.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment