Finance For Fun!

bigshort

I just couldn’t wait to finish the book I’m reading to write about it: The Big Short, by Michael Lewis details a perspective on what brought us to the financial crisis that started in 2007 and which continues to plague us to this day. Lewis knows of what he writes, both through personal experience and through thorough research; what he has to say is devastating, detailing the reckless and risky behaviour of the big players on Wall Street and the total lack of oversight by any form of government. The book details the deviousness of the ploys used by players to create masses of credit default swaps, sub-prime mortgage bonds and CDOs to first hide, then slough off DOA investments on investors, institutions, and, eventually, on the general citizenry. The breadth and depth of the scheme is frightening, and the fact that none of these people has ever had to justify any of it in a court of law speaks to the penetration of corruption in high places. For all that the subject matter is depressing, at times esoteric, and rage-provoking doesn’t keep it from being terribly interesting, engaging, and even humorous at times:

“The argument stopper was Lippmann’s one-man quantitative support team. His name was Eugene Xu, but to those who’d heard Lippman’s pitch, he was generally spoklen of as ‘Lippman’s Chinese quant’. Xu was an analyst employed by Deutshce Bank, but Lipmann gave everyone the idea he kept him tied up to his Bloomberg terminal like a pet. A real Chinese guy–not even a Chinese-American–who apparently spoke no English, just numbers. China had this national math competition, Lippmann told people, in which Eugene had finished second. In all of China. Eugene Xu was responsible for every peice of hard data in Lippmann’s presentation. Once Eugene was introduced into the equation, no one bothered Lippmann about his math or his data. As Lippmann put it:’How can a guy who can’t speak English lie?’ ”

 

Lewis sis also responsible for Liar’s Poker, Moneyball, and The Blind Side, all fine books and worthy of a read.

A Different Life

Winter-Veggies

 

As I start to think of preparing supper tonight, it’s nice to go down to the garage to retrieve an onion, some garlic and a pumpkin, then to tend to the compost in the yard and bring back fresh chard, beet and leeks, reaping the reward of last year’s labour and the covers I put over several of the garden beds to preserve some plantings from frost. This way, I know that there is unlikely to be chemical residue or genetic modification in our food and that it will have lost less nutrient value by making such a short trip from harvest to table. I’m sure that it costs us more to eat our own produce, exclusive of any illusory labour costs that we might factor into the equation, but it also means that the cost of the transport of seed was the only fuel that was burned to put these calories on the table.

Keep on Truckin’

 

 

WebDTRan across this interview on YouTube the other day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwaau9mMQ-M

 

It parallels to some extent some things Derek said in discussions contained on his Songlines DVD about reaching out across musical barriers and about honest music. He comes across in the interview like a very sincere, straightforward and hardworking man who is dedicated to his craft and his family. The music is not in the most popular of genres, and several of my closest associates really don’t like the brashness of some of his playing, but I like it when influences from Duane Allman to John Coltrane to Ali Akbar Khan, to King Curtis can somehow come together in a fairly harmonious whole. I go through these musings every time I hear about another musical awards show, or hear that this celebrity or than sang at an inauguration or some other significant occasion, reflecting on how much our taste is influenced, not only  by glitz and popularity, but also by the selling of the music and the self-promotion of the business of music. It’s reassuring that there are people who have achieved a measure of success while maintaining some personal and musical integrity and managing to eschew to fanaticism of the purist.

Cakewalk To Bamako

Over at the Globe and Mail, we have this clever fellow Jeffrey Simpson who’s keen to tell us that those French should be careful about undertaking foreign adventures from which they may have more trouble extricating themselves than they had in inserting themselves. Perhaps the readership is as short on memory as the French leadership, which all seems a little nonsensical given that the French only recently pulled the last of their troops out of Afghanistan after ten years of what can best be described as futility. We still have people there, though not in combat positions (is there anywhere in Afghanistan that isn’t a combat zone?) and who knows where all the Americans are these days. Given their jag of base building since March of 2003, I find it hard to believe that there aren’t still significant numbers of American military personnel in Iraq, which brings us to the instant parallel that came to mind when I read the headline on Simpson’s discourse:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/entering-mali-is-easy-exiting-not-so-much/article7536744/

This was around the internet just about the time W sent the boys off to finish Saddam Hussein, a sly little ditty from the man who recorded the Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die Rag as the Vietnam War raged, and so had a bit of a perspective on this here-we-go-again routine in 2003.

Cakewalk to Baghdad
Lyrics and music by Bruce Barthol © 2003I remember back, before we whacked Iraq
I was watching the news, were we gonna attack?
A man named Richard Perle came on and talked
He said going to Baghdad would be a cakewalkCakewalk to Baghdad,
Cakewalk to BaghdadIt went real easy,
Took a couple of weeks
Tore down that statue
Set those Saddamites free
The Frogs and the Krauts, they feel real bad,
They missed out cakewalkin’ into Baghdad

Cakewalk to Baghdad,
Cakewalk to Baghdad

Next we’re gonna cakewalk into Teheran,
Gonna cakewalk to Damascus and Pyong-yin-yang
When we strut on in,
Everybody’s gonna cheer
They’ll be wavin’ old glory,
We’ll have kegs of beer, just like that…

Cakewalk to Baghdad,
Cakewalk to Baghdad

Cakewalk to Baghdad,
Cakewalk to Baghdad

Now moms and dads don’t worry ’bout
Your soldier boys and girls
We’re just sending them cakewalkin’
Around the world
When the coffins come home and the flag unfurls
Cheer for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle

Cakewalk to Baghdad,
Cakewalk to Baghdad

Do you think we’ll see those Bush boys patrollin’ the streets
Like our soldiers got to do in Basram and Tikrit?
We gonna see Richard Perle cakewakin’ ’round
The streets and alleys of Baghdad town?

Cakewalk to Baghdad,
Cakewalk to Baghdad

Easy to cakewalk in … not so easy to cakewalk out.

 

http://www.countryjoe.com/cjb.htm#cakewalk

If you go to this page and click on Richard Perle’s face, you can listen to the song (I love it) via Real Player, and there is a version of it available through iTunes.

 

In any case, the French have Vietnam experiences of their own on which to base a certain sense of caution, along with the nastiness of the war in Algeria leading up to the Evian Accords of 1962, along with a bit of a misadventure in Rwanda in 1994 and the recently ended Afghan sortie.

Looking at the multiple recidivism of so many countries when it comes to intervention in foreign countries, we perhaps come to the conclusion that this is part of the scheme to drive the economy based on blowing things up, hopefully someone else’s stuff and in someone else’s yard, but as long as we can call them terrorists, we’re good to go. Meanwhile there are rumblings in the French press that the bigwigs in Bamako, on whose behalf our C-17 is ferrying French stuff to Mali to be blown up, are more concerned about the independence movement among the Tuaregs of the northeast than they are about Al-Quaeda au Maghreb Islamique in the northwest (who knows?) and perhaps the French have their own little agenda relating to gas, oil and uranium resources in the northern desert section of Mali.

Catholics, Come Home (or maybe just hang fire for a bit…)

More of same:

http://www.sfgate.com/local/article/Sources-Cross-dressing-meth-priest-liked-sex-in-4203841.php

Seems that just about any time an organization proposes to direct our spiritual impulses, those impulses get largely misdirected. I’m not sure when exactly this happened to the Christian establishment, but I suspect that the adoption of Christianity as a state-sanctioned religion of the Roman Empire under Constantine and the acceptance of war as part of the Christian orthodoxy (Thous shalt not kill, unless…)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33644.htm

None of this poor, downtrodden, the meek shall inherit the Earth stuff.

So, I think I’ll just stay out in the cold.

Mose Knows

album-the-best-of-mose-allison

When I was in my late teens, I had one of those Proustian moments when someone played Mose Allison’s Parchman Farm on a local FM station and I was immediately transported back to the livingroom floor of our house in Tiburon where I would hang out with pencils and paper and draw whole dogfights on the vast expanse of the reverse of a discarded blueprint. I suspect that it was KPFA on the tuner, else it would have been an unlikely selection for radio, and likely still is. Allison (bio at:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mose_Allison )

has done covers of some folks, and had many of his tunes covered by other folks, a lot of which missed the spirit of the original works, but, then, Allison is angular and understated, not attributes of the Who, John Mayall and others who’ve been inspired by Allison, thought I thought Bonnie Raitt’s cover of “Everybody’s Cryin’ Mercy” worked really well. I saw Allison a number of times, mostly in pretty relaxed and informal settings, in a club, with drinks, and while the experience was never astounding, it was always satisfying. Allison turned out to be a minor chronicler of American music, in somewhat the same way of Ry Cooder, Jerry Garcia and Bob Dylan, though in a much lesser scope. And the best thing is his wit, often tart and cutting, and as pointed today as it was when it was penned, reminding me of the experience of listening to the satire of Tom Lehrer from the ’50s and ’60s that still rings true today, perhaps moreso than ever.

A sprinkling of little gems:

-Stop this world, let me off. There’s just too many pigs at the same trough.

-I don’t worry about a thing ’cause I know nothin’s gonna work out right.

-A young man ain’t nothin’ in the world today: the old men got all the money.

-If silence was golden, you couldn’t raise a dime. Your mind is on vacation and your mouth is workin’ overtime.

-A bad enough situation is sure enough gettin’ worse. Everybody’s cryin’ justice, just as long as there’s business first.

All of this is just a bit of Friday inspiration, keeping all the vitriol in perspective.

The Dance Of The Film Crews

There was a bit of a flurry of comment over the weekend about how the Premier’s staff deleted some Facebook material posted by folks in the film and television industry about how other jurisdictions were offering tax breaks and subsidies better than what was available through the Province of BC, with the consequence, seemingly inevitable, that the work was moving to the lower tax jurisdictions. That the comments were removed is deplorable, and typical of how our current government handles anything that doesn’t present their case in a totally favourable light. There will be no real debate, and all dissenting opinion will the ruthlessly squelched.

However, the question should not be whether we should offer better hothouse conditions for the industry, but whether there should be anything like a tax break or a subsidy for any of this, ever. This is not a fledgling industry. If I understand correctly, much of the work undertaken in “remote” locations is Hollywood through and through, contracted out as it may be. This is an industry that has had decades of support, and yet seems not to be able to stand on its own in our “free market” economy.

Perhaps it’s a bit off the central theme here, but it’s worth considering the kind of content that our money spawns: reality shows, talk shows, fishing shows, cooking shows, in short, all manner of drivel of no intellectually enhancing value or lasting benefit to society, other than perhaps acting as a distraction from all the depressing actions of the governing bodies of society.

The last point brings back to the main theme: I don’t really care that much if people want to watch that kind of entertainment (as long as they are willing to counterbalance that aspect of their lives with more enlightening content), but I don’t want to pay for it, which is exactly what happens when production companies get lower taxes (meaning that I have to pay more) or are given funding (same beef). Everyone pays for this dreck and gets no say in what they fund, while they do get to see an inordinate amount of bandwidth sucked up by pap, soft-core porn, propaganda and humourless silliness.

I was a one-time fan of the Montreal Expos. They left town largely because the taxpayers of the city and province refused to pony up millions for a new stadium for them. Off they hied to DC, where the taxpayers coughed up $600 million so that the boys of summer could ply their trade in a more lucrative market. Good riddance. The same phenomenon is rearing its head in Edmonton right now, with Oilers’ owner Darryl Gates hinting that Seattle might like an NHL team if city council can’t see its way clear to parting with hundreds of millions of public dollars to support his glory habit. We are still subsidizing the fossil fuel industry, the arms industry and who knows what else while schools, libraries, roads, water systems and other public infrastructure languishes in various states of disrepair. The funding equation is upside down: the producers should be funding the public projects rather than the public funding private schemes to sequester wealth in the hands of the few, the greedy, the undeserving.

Simpson, Reality and Idle No More

Jeffrey Simpson seemed to be a reasonable guy at one time, but he seems to think that no one should have a dream, a set of goals not entirely rooted in the world of the way things are done these days. Perhaps Mr. Simpson has been cloistered too long in the comfortable confines of Toronto Journalism and has become an insider looking out on a reality too foreign for him to encompass.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/too-many-first-nations-people-live-in-a-dream-palace/article6929035/

 

Most of us try to run our affairs within the parameters laid out for us, but we also hold some vision of a reality that might be better, perhaps for us alone, perhaps for a broader swathe of humanity. This might be at the root of Idle No More, where a people beset with the worst woes of contemporary society says that they’ve had enough of being kept down and pushed around. It’s something akin to what the Trilateral Commission decided in the late ’60s when they perceived that there was too much democracy developing in the Western World and they were going to take a firm long-term stand to see that society went as far back to the Middle Ages as they could send it. First Nations have no monopoly on a sense that they’re not getting a fair shake, they just happen to be the latest group to make some noise. Should First nations be conforming to the economic models in vogue right now? A look at the specific piece of legislation in their sights shows that their fight is a fight for anyone who wants to see Canada do its part to protect what remains of our living environment and perhaps, why not?, improve it. The current government in Ottawa is serving the fossil fuel industry’s quest for profits at the expense of the rights and consultations that, by decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, rightly belong to Canada’s First Nations.

Is FN quarrel not the quarrel of all those disrespected, disaffected, disenfranchised and dispossessed by the rapacity of the global corporate dominance?

Hope Might Be Slim For Participation In The Processes of Society

Was having another of those discussions about the ills that confront us and about how we don’t seem to be capable of electing a government that will strive for the best long-term outcomes for the general citizenry and I was reminded of those on-line questionnaires in which you place yourself on a quadrant with one axis representing the progressive/conservative dichotomy, the other representing the continuum from authoritarian to libertarian. I’m proposing a version of that same quadrant-type visualization that would help to frame the problems that confront us in working within our current social parameters. Basically, where there is a system of governance based on the implementation of ethical principles, and where the people charged with the implementation of those principles are themselves imbued with a deep sense of ethical obligation, there is also likely to be a government that will represent an informed constituency and consider a large part of its mandate to be the informing and ongoing education of its electorate in all aspects of its mission. A huge problem arises when an ethical system gets compromised by people who do not possess the ethical foundation to fulfill the mission confided to them, where they stray into narrower self-interest and to supporting the accumulation of wealth and power for groups to whom they are sympathetic, either by emotional attachment or by dint of deriving a benefit from those groups. Conversely, a system that is built on a weak or ineffectual ethical foundation will tend to thwart even the most ethical of people who find themselves trying to right a skewed government. From my standpoint, the worst case is where unethical people are able, through an unethical system of governance, not only to enrich and empower themselves and their friends, but also to perpetuate that situation and to cloak their activities behind a smokescreen of omissions, half-truths, misdirections, propaganda and outright lies.

 

Quadrant of Govts

 

The exercise now is to think of the various régimes under which we have the privilege of living and to place them on this graphic.

A Few Guesses

A Few Guesses

It’s an interesting exercise to plot positions on the quadrant for leaders of all stripes, but there are a couple of ticklish questions that arise, not the least of which is any judgment of ethics and what is, or is not, for the greater good.

Over the last several decades, a host of people in positions of authority have subscribed to the notion of trickle-down economics as expounded by Hayek and Friedman. The hegemony of this doctrine is still largely in place along with the notion of the infallibility of markets, though there seems, thankfully, to be a counter current that seeks to recognize that, while the theory may have stemmed from the purest of motives, the practice has largely devolved into a greed fest. Where I would put, for instance Saint Ronald Reagan in the picture would differ considerably from where many others might put him.

Note also that I have put Nelson Mandela on the quadrant in a spot not overly populated, based on my knowledge of the man and his achievements, and I feel reasonably confident in doing so, particularly when he had the courage to lead from outside after one term in office when it was clear that he could have stayed on for longer. However, most public figures are a mash-up of motivations and actions and it often seems clear that we don’t have the necessary information to make an accurate assessment. Some figures, also, tend to be weighed on the basis of their pronouncements rather than on their actions. Public figures are often capable of grandiloquent pronouncements that bear little or no relation to the policies they implement. Thoughtful people often need to engage in internal debate (hopefully not in supermarket aisles) before engaging fellow citizens on matters of personalities and policies.

 

The second part of the discussion dealt with the indifference and frustration of a large part of the electorate, specifically here in Canada and B.C., an indifference built on lack of real choice. For most of recent history, there was a choice of Liberal or Conservative at the Federal level, with no other party having a realistic chance to form government. Even now with an Official Opposition of New Democrats, the choices have narrowed as the NDP has attempted to make itself more electable by moving to a “mer too” centre. In BC the same situation exists where a Socred/Liberal choice is arrayed against a New Democrat alternative that has failed to capitalize on a couple of stints in government to make a dent in the damage done by their opponents. There is also considerable frustration with legislators being unable to distinguish between governance and politics, between getting the work of government done and getting re-elected. Voters are throwing up their hands and throwing in the towel in increasing numbers as voting increasingly seems a mugs’ choice and the only option that citizens have to participate in running their own social business.

Often, a good part of the electorate has little or no notion of what is being done for them and to them, both because the entire succession of governments in recent history has done a great job of letting out as little information as possible about what they are doing, about how they are doing it and about the possible consequences of their actions. In addition, the press generally has tended to serve the interests of a certain set of groups, largely represented by the BC Liberals and the Federal Conservatives/Liberals, ensuring that the flow of information and analysis is restricted to as great an extent as possible. Further, there are many easier and more entertaining activities available to a large part of the electorate, creating a cocoon fantasy world of “reality” shows, “news”, films, concerts and parties that help us forget what our real obligations might be. Some citizens are so busy scrambling to feed, house and clothe themselves that they literally have no time to think about the ethical considerations relating to participation in the business of government: governing (and reflection) becomes an activity reserved for the leisured classes.

Perplexity over the Fiscal Cliff

Here we have a manufactured crisis whose downstream effects are likely being blown all out of proportion in aid of the expedited dismantling of social programs and the preservation of the legalized larceny produced by preferential treatment for the wealthy. The rhetoric is everywhere in the media and the same reliable sources trot out the same sham justifications, including a few gratuitous statements from Jordan Bateman of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation who is quick to assure us that any further load on either the wealthy or their corporations will impede the recovery, preclude job creation and stall a return to economic growth. Leaving the tangent growth discussion for the moment, it is clear that increased revenue for the wealthy and corporations does not equal job creation, that any job that can be outsourced will be outsourced, that the lowest price is the law in terms of the labour component of production. Much of this crisis was brought on by a series of tax cuts instituted during the Bush presidency, cuts that were of exclusive benefit to top income earners. Their puppets in the House of Representatives are fighting any return to a tax policy that would spread the load in a more equitable manner, holding onto that their greed generated and utterly unwilling to concede that they should surrender any of the economic privilege they’ve managed to build up. They also wish to cut entitlement programs, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, to privatize whatever they can so that the vast pools of taxpayer capital get turned over to the Wall Street bankers while at the same time further marginalizing the most vulnerable in society and all those who have paid relatively large amounts of their life earnings into these programs. The really sad part is where all the newspaper, radio, television and web networks continue to sow dread and uncertainty without explaining anything about the source of the potential upset: the same greedy folks who pillaged and plundered their way through the Bush years, the financial crisis (ongoing), TARP and subsequent bailouts, quantitative easing and the ongoing war dividend. The picture is clear enough: we can’t continue to take out more than we put in, and it’s the usual suspects that continue to be the embodiment of Dave Mason’s admonition in the title of a song: “You Shouldn’t Have Took More Than You Gave”.

Update: Lo! a more scholarly and in-depth analysis can be found at:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/28/americas-deceptive-2012-fiscal-cliff/