Category Archives: World Hellhole Report

The US Default: Whose Fault?

It’s simple to figure this out. The Democrats are making deep concessions. The Republican leadership is working to find a way, but hasn’t made concessions as deep as the Democrats have offered. The Tea Party crowd is refusing to make any kind of deal at all. If August 3 shows up and the USG can’t mail out checks that day, blame the Tea Party.

Yes, I want fiscal responsibility in my government. Now is not the time to rip the entitlements completely apart. Tea Party talking heads say that raising taxes in a recession is a Bad Thing for the economy. This is true. But removing government spending is a Catastrophic Thing. We’re not ready for that level of drastic measure. If the Tea Party is serious about fiscal reform, they’ll have to do it gradually and make concessions.

Cutting government spending all at once would remove a bigger chunk of GDP than raising taxes by the amounts suggested. To keep the economy going the way the bankers would like, the Treasury and Fed will have to do QE3 in a highly flagrant way. The Tea Partiers break out in a rash when they hear “inflation”, but that’s what they’ll have if spending is cut. If they somehow got their wish and kept the money supply where it is, we’d have a complete crash, thanks to a liquidity collapse.

It’s basic economics, but ideology blinds the Tea Party the same way it blinded the Communist Part of China when it started the Great Leap Forward. Ideology ruined a nation before, and it can ruin one again. When the US defaults, I’ll blame the blind ideologues in the Tea Party.

Apple’s Exploiting Example

Apple makes the iPod, right? Sure they do, but where? Try overseas. Apple employs 27,250 overseas employees at an average salary of $11,743. Sure, the company is making great profits, but that’s because it’s both exploiting overseas labor and refusing to give jobs to Americans. Most of its US jobs are low-paying, to be fair. No, wait, that’s unfair!

7789 of Apple’s US jobs pay an average of $28,244, about 2.5 times what the Chinese and Filipinos are paid, but still hardly anything relative to what it costs to live here. And before someone brings up the “it’s cheaper to live in Asia” argument, there’s a reason why it’s cheaper there: they don’t have access to lots of things that are necessary for getting around in the USA. They still face massively more expensive food prices, crowded living conditions, and poor access to health care – kind of like the poor in the USA, but without cars.

6101 professionals and engineers working for Apple’s iPod division made an average of $86,051. They can afford the stuff the rest of the workers made. This is a pattern common across US-based firms and firms that were formerly based in the US, but which moved their HQs to Switzerland to avoid paying taxes to support the nation that gave them their start.

While my own salary is just above the nation’s per capita income, I don’t earn enough for my household of 5 to have a total income equal to that per capita number times 5. I don’t have health care, it’s kinda crowded in this house, and food and fuel are part of my inflationary worries, even if the USG doesn’t want me to think about them. I’m not part of the world of the Apple engineers and the rest of the iPod users. I’m constantly asked to “do more with less”, which is a codephrase for “you’re going to be exploited more.” The whole world has to do more with less so that those who have more can get more still.

Africa and the Myths of the Free Market

Emergent promises a great return on their African funds. The Oakland Institute would like you to know that, yes, the great returns exist, but that you might not like the way in which the returns are attained.

Basically, the people of Africa targeted by Emergent’s investors are stripped of their lands and left to starve as their subsistence farms are plowed under to make way for plantation economies. Lands that supported 50,000 people are bulldozed to “create over 2000 jobs” that support no-one. To throw a wrench into the minds of ultra-conservative Christian free-market boosters, the bulldozing included the largest Christian church in East Africa. Seriously, people… Jesus wasn’t kidding when he said between God and money, you can serve only one. You either have unfettered free marked capitalism OR you have Christianity (or any other religion, for that matter), but you can’t have both. But I digress, even if it is with a purpose.

The “job creation” is a mask for paying basement-level wages that are just enough to avoid laws against chattel slavery. It was the same in Juarez when the maquiladoras went up there. Should workers ask for more money, the labor organizers are fired or murdered and the rest are told that the factory jobs will go elsewhere if wages go up, so shut up and get back to work if you want to earn enough so 75% of your family can have enough to eat. Maybe.

It’s outright plundering disguised as a solid, sane retirement plan. Free market cheerleaders will say that the people are better off with those jobs: that’s an outright lie. What they had was subsistence, which I admit is a harsh existence. What they get is unemployment, starvation, marginalization, wage slavery, and a industry-government partnership we used to call “fascism.”

More Mess for the Euro

Looks like the EU finance ministers are asking a basic question… IE, “Anyone with ideas?”

By requiring Greece to implement additional austerity measures (such as hiring the proper accountants Edinburgh to rake up proper numbers), the EU finance ministers have pulled a Pontius Pilate move. If Greece doesn’t implement the measures, it’s not their fault. Technically, their hands are clean.

Greece won’t implement the measures and it will have to default. After defaulting, it will have to pull out of the euro if it wants any hope of recovery, and the EU ministers will need to recognize that. The euro is a political currency that’s supposed to tie Germany economically to every nation on the continent so it won’t start another war, sort of the opposite of the idea after WW1… Now, though, the rest of Europe doesn’t necessarily want a tie with Germany if it means hampering the local economy. The political will to hold the euro together seems woefully lacking.

I’m not going to provide timing signals, but you can bet the number of currency trading newsletters that will advise readers to short the euro is going to increase with each passing week. It’s going to lead to a speculative run on the euro, which will last until the involved governments defend it no more and impose financial tyranny on the speculators. Those that get in at the start will make some tidy sums, those that run the game in the middle will get big rewards, and those at the very end will make all or nothing, depending on how good their internet connections are at the time the EU pulls the plug on it.

I recall the currency runs of 1997. Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan… all the little tigers fell, one by one. Then the raiding funds targeted Hong Kong and lost big when the PRC said it would defend the HK dollar. Back then, it had the means to do just that. Now, in 2011, we have a set of governments that are ready to defend the euro. They say, “whatever the cost!”, but we all know their financial systems are weak from the fallout of the 2007-8 crisis. The euro will fall, they will prop it up, it will fall some more, they will prop it some more, all the while with the euro losing value over time. Once the EU banks can defend it no more, there will be a time period where the euro falls mercilessly and everyone shorting it will laugh all the way to the US-owned bank… I suppose the last laugh will be Europe’s, though, after the US banks collapse because of they way the US financial system was insuring European assets.

Cancer Babies

I used to work with a great guy, Cali Ruchala, who ran the online ‘zine Sobaka, which isn’t online anymore. Cali isn’t online anymore, but I’m pretty sure he’s happy where he is. Or, at least where he said he was going to be… but that’s not my point. I want to bring him up to cite the origin of the idea of a “cancer baby” and how it applies to authoritarian dictatorships everywhere.

Ruchala defined a cancer baby as the ineffective son of a ruthless dictator. The only reason the son rises to power is because he’s the son of a ruthless dictator. Said son is nowhere nearly as ruthless or politically sharp as his father, who usually dies from cancer, and proceeds to lose control of his nation. Bashar al-Assad in Syria is one such cancer baby, and his grip on power there is as bloody as it is slipping. Mubarak’s son in Egypt and Ben Ali’s boy in Tunisia were two cancer babies that lost power even before their dads died: the ruling cliques did not want to have them running things and thought it best to take care of the arrangements as the public rose up in rebellion. Had the ruling cliques in Tunisia or Egypt been more strongly allied to the authoritarian dynasty, the blood in both those nations would be on the level of at least Libya or Syria.

Speaking of Libya, there’s another place where the cancer baby won’t be able to take the stage, it seems. Qaddafi the Elder will fight to the death, but his son lacks the ability to rally people behind him. When the dad dies, the son won’t be far behind.

Monarchies are different, in that they can handle successions with existing institutions. They don’t suffer as badly from the cancer baby phenomenon. But wherever a strongman has taken over and ruled by the sheer force of his personality, his nation is forever one tumor away from collapse.

Now take a look at North Korea. That is an interesting place in this discussion, as one must ask if that nation is ruled by its Communist Party and the military, or if the dominant force there is still Kim Il-Sung, who is still named as North Korea’s head of state. He’s dead, but he’s the head of state and enjoys godlike status in North Korea. Kim Jong-Il, the cancer baby, has ruled over an erratic North Korea of late, and one wonders aloud if he’ll successfully transfer power to his son. If not, then what is happening in the Arab world could suddenly unleash itself in North Korea. One slip of the iron hand in that nation, and the power players in North Korea may find that they have a popular uprising they can ride to to the top with – but will it sustain them there?

Moreover, what happens if North Korea goes the way of Libya, with an actual civil war in and around the nuclear warheads? Have the nations of China, Japan, South Korea, and the USA discussed what they would do if a desperate regime opened fire on its own people? The law of the cancer baby says something is bound to happen, and I can guarantee it won’t be a minor event.

Hardly a Defense…

As Moody’s rating service placed the three largest French banks under review for a possible downgrade due to their exposure to Greek debt, they attempted to make their situation seem not all that bad by pointing out how Germany’s banks were way more exposed than they were…

In other news, Greece’s largest private bank has started to sell all of its Greek government bonds. Greece’s prime minister might be forced to resign and in between riots, Greek citizens are shopping for forks to stick into their country, because it’s done.

There are rumours that Elton John is considering re-re-recording a version of “Candle in the Wind” to commemorate Greece’s brief flirtation with the euro. Other rumours say he’s holding off to see if he has to re-re-record it to commemorate Europe’s brief flirtation with the euro.

On Crisis

Reinhart and Rogoff are looking at historical evidence of defaults and make a strong case about what prerequisites will allow for a crisis to precipitate. Right now, Greece, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland are in the most precipitous situation and stand ready to create a replay of the crisis that followed in the wake of German default in the late 20s.

Is this a stretch? I don’t think so.

Zimbabwe, Argentina, and others went bust either singly or as part of a regional financial crisis. We’re looking today at a global situation, with much more going on in more countries than in any other crisis since 1927-1933. Look at Spain’s recent election results: the Socialists that advocated austerity were swept aside in favor of populist parties. Greece isn’t likely to accept a surrender of fiscal independence to a band of German bankers, so look for a political trump there of any possible economic solution involving staying in the Euro with austerity. Italy’s and Belgium’s debt outlooks have both been lowered, and Italy is one of the G7/G8 nations: they’re a whale to the minnow of Greece.

The outcome of a crisis is never certain: one only knows that a crisis will precipitate an outcome that is in many ways significantly different from the set of conditions that existed prior to the crisis. While hindsight is also clearer than what people see at the time events are happening, it’s also insulting to those that experienced the events. By that, I mean we need to take a look at how people react in the midst of a crisis and what causes them to realize what will happen down the road. What danger signs do people consider? What events do they consider significant?

In Nazi Germany at the time of WW2, roughly half the Jews there had fled, while roughly half remained. While there were likely many Jews that could not afford to travel, there were those who could afford to do so that felt things would be all right in the long run. For those who fled, different things acted as triggers to their decision to depart. As the events became more obvious, escape became more difficult to accomplish, but remained possible. From a man who wrote “Mein Kampf” leading a coalition government to the Reichstag fire to the Enabling Act to Kristallnacht to the Nuremberg Laws to Rhineland occupation to Anschluss to Sudetenland to the Danzig crisis, events mounted in seriousness and yet war and its consequences still came as a surprise to many observers. Such will happen again in the current crisis.

This is not to say that we’re going to see, specifically, Nazism, World War, and a Holocaust. But I do believe we will see more political extremism and populism, increased tensions that will lead to more conflicts, increased opportunities for small nations to wage war as the bigger nations are preoccupied with internal troubles, and increased opportunities for ethnic-based conflict as the peacekeepers turn inward. We’re already witnessing the various Arab states dealing with their outbreaks of democracy in their own ways, and none of them are finished with their internal turmoil.

A huge question mark in my mind is China. It recently had to declare martial law in Inner Mongolia, adding that region to its list of ethnic hotspots. Couple that with increasing unemployment and inflation, and the necessary preconditions exist for a potential violent regime change in China – political infighting within the CPC at the very least and open warlordism with a breakdown of central authority as a real possibility.

Now back to Europe. 45% of Spain’s under-25s are unemployed. Massive anti-government protests have happened across the nation. This is on the level of what took place in Tunisia and elsewhere, this time in Europe. Greece had similar protests, and those are sure to worsen as the economy there worsens. Italy could be next. On the strategic side, the Visegrad nations of Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, and Slovakia have agreed to form a battlegroup under Polish command. This is significant because they would not feel compelled to do so if both Russian power were not on the ascendant and protection guarantees from NATO were credible. The Visegrad nations are seeking to extend their alliance to Romania and Bulgaria, to formalize a vision of Pilsudski’s to create an “intermarium” alliance between nations that were traditionally in the orbit of either Russia or Germany, or both.

When was the sign that got me thinking along these lines? When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008 and the rich world watched on, impotently.

Change the Government?

Said the message board poster to me: “If government debt only benefits the wealthy then clearly society should get rid of it.”

Easier said than done. Government benefits the wealthy largely because the wealthy benefit the government. It’s a two-way street, to boot.

It’s not all doe-eyed politicians falling under the sway of evil Big Money. I’ve heard a good number of anecdotes about how politicians can’t take your calls because they’re too busy speed-dialing every multi-millionaire in the country. Then there was the story related by a former president of Standard Oil when he went to Congress to see why it was passing so much legislation against his company.

He went to the head of one committee, who flatly stated that the laws against Standard Oil would stop as soon as that company dumped its current legal representation and signed a contract with the committee chair’s legal partners back in New York. The representative was basically demanding a huge bribe for himself and his partners, and the president of Standard Oil refused to play ball that way… but I think we all know that it continues.

Because of the two national parties and their primary systems, we only get to choose leaders that are pre-approved by some segment of the powers that be. We don’t get to draft our own local heroes and have them battle it out for the political mindshare of the nation: we get Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dumber. We’re free to think that Tweedle-Dumber is the other party’s man, but there really isn’t enough difference between the two – except on social issues and in personal style – to truly make a difference.

The level of institutional change necessary to effect a change in the way the USA is governed is sufficient to be described as revolutionary at the very least and cataclysmic in only slightly more extreme scenarios.

George Friedman of Stratfor has said that the struggle in the USA between empire and the republic is very real. I’ve read a set of books from the turn of the previous century to indicate that the struggle was already finished by 1919 and the forces of empire emerged victorious. Even then, authors complained of media concentration in the hands of the elites and the use of propaganda to distract people from actual goings-on. Every thing said in these books from 1902, 1919, and 1921 resonates today, but even more strongly because not one condition they decried 100 years ago has done anything but increase in intensity.

Many consider Eisenhower’s speech about the military-industrial complex to have been a warning back in the 1950s: It was only an echo of sentiments voiced by Wilson in 1912, in his “The New Freedom.” The problems we worry over today were already intractable a century ago.

The Flipside of the Monroe Doctrine

Whenever I heard about the Monroe Doctrine in school, it was always about how the USA put it forward to protect the Latin American republics from European interference. Never once was it mentioned that the Monroe Doctrine also effectively meant the USA could exercise a veto power on any Latin American relationship with the rest of the world. The new republics never asked for the doctrine in the first place and it was useless whenever the British navy didn’t feel like blockading France… until 1898.

After 1898, the USA could use the Monroe Doctrine to extend a condition of empire over the whole of Latin America. Rather than incorporate the lands politically and then have to deal later on with questions of citizenship and rights, as did the Roman Empire, the USA allowed for political separation to exist in legal terms, but managed to nevertheless control Latin American nations through forced treaty obligations and military interventions. This, in turn, meant that US corporations could use the puppet governments propped up by US forces and US-trained forces to create unfair economic arrangements to suck natural resources out of Latin America to make cheaper goods for US citizens. Slavery existed, just not in a jurisdiction where it was both illegal and where law enforcement would act to put an end to it.

Non-Muslim Mercenaries in the UAE

Why isn’t this stuff in the major media? It’s because advertisers don’t want it. Therefore, you need to start getting news from ad-free sources. The story about the UAE contracting with Blackwater’s founder to provide specifically non-Muslim mercenaries to provide crowd control is absolutely sickening.

The upshot of this is that the UAE anticipates pro-democracy rallies and has chosen to put them down with brutality. The USA supports this move. Many of the mercenaries for the 800-man unit are from Colombia and South Africa, areas with a history of extralegal killings and rogue paramilitary forces. The guys the UAE is bringing in are mass-murdering thugs that will be ready and willing to pour hot lead into rioting crowds of enslaved foreign workers – and the USA is ready to smile on that sort of thing.