EU Spectacle
The word spectacle is carefully chosen, since this is what the current drama of which Greece is the symptom, not the cause, has become. It no longer bears any relationship to coherent democratic leadership or process of governance in a workable political and currency union. The cancellation at a moment’s notice of a summit of all EU leaders is extraordinary.
There is a problem with Greece, but it is not that difficult to solve. Indeed this blog working alone would be able to negotiate a workable solution. What is proving impossible is to find an acceptable solution, because the institutions normally established to process decision making at national and international levels are not there, or there in such abundance nobody can detect who is in charge. And to make matters worse the structure of the currency itself is unsustainable as it lacks a treasury and a finance minister answering to an elected government. A committee of finance ministers at loggerheads, elected by only one member state in each case, on conflicting mandates and to differing electoral timetables will work only in the good times and becomes dysfunctional under pressure.
So all we know at this moment is that Greece may or may not go bust tomorrow, the euro looks more like an impediment to growth than an engine of it, and the reputation of the EU as a coherent political union is severely damaged. Beneath that a big gap is developing between the north and the south of Europe, between the politicians and their electors everywhere and between those in the eurozone who want to stand firm to high principle even if it brings the whole thing down, led by the Germans, and by those who feel pragmatic reality demands compromise, led by France and Italy.
At the heart of of this crisis now engulfing the whole EU are three violated principles. You cannot have a democratic political union without an elected forum from which all authority flows. You cannot have a currency which cannot be printed. You cannot have capitalism which does not permit debtors to go bust. The first is violated because the whole EU is wrongly configured. The last two are rescinded because Germany says No.
message 501:
by
Linda
(new)
Nov 26, 2015 07:58AM
I took a course in college on the history of modern China. The Duke professor said that China was never “communist”. They were never anything like Russia. They merely reverted to old forms of autocracy. Mao was deified as a near emperor though he wasn’t a noble. That’s all the Chinese understand. They will probably convert democracy into the same sort of ancient Chinese government.
reply
|
flag
John Kennedy was a jackass. My father kept telling me that years later. He didn't know what he was talking about or doing. The Russians would NEVER have struck us with a nuclear weapon. The whole Cuban Missile Crisis was a meaningless fiasco. That's why Jack Kennedy should never have been President.
As far as the professor goes, we are going to send you the link to his lecture. Part of it is based on interviews with scientists from Los Alamos years after the fact. We are just slow because it is Thanksgiving. And I have to make breakfast now. Lunch will be turkey.
I agree that China is not out for military conquest and is mainly interested in deterring attack, so its military arm is not where its strength lies, although its is quite significant and it is spending on upgrading its forces more than anybody except America. America spends 3x more than China and China spends 3x more than Russia. China's strength is its money.
There's all this stuff about China being the sleeping giant. But how are they going to be a sleeping giant except in population? You say money. But historically speaking I don't think there has ever been an example of a country that was in charge without being the top military power. And just spending money on the military doesn't cut it. You have to know what you are doing.You have to have the top scientists. You also have to have a population that is united behind you (something China has never had). Remember the saying, "Loose lips sink ships?" During WW2 the populations in both England and America were warned to keep their mouths shut because of spies. This would never work in China.
By the way, China has gotten itself in a lot of demographic trouble, too. They had a one child policy for years. Now they don't have enough women. They have switched to a two child policy. A country with demographic problems doesn't sound like a world leader either.
By the way, how do you know how much "money" China has? How do you know how much money they spend on their military? Who has compiled the statistics? If any of these answers is China itself, the statistics could be false. China likes to conceal things. It's a national custom. They pretend, lie, and exaggerate. It's the Eastern way.I suppose there must be Chinese jets. Do they build their own? If they do, would you ride on one? I associate China with shoddy construction and poor quality. I would be afraid I would crash. I remember when I was in Europe as a kid my mother staunchly refused to ride on Air India or Air Pakistan. She certainly would not want to ride on Air China.
Linda wrote: "By the way, how do you know how much "money" China has? How do you know how much money they spend on their military? Who has compiled the statistics? If any of these answers is China itself, the st..."This is an interesting post and I can answer all your questions, but over the weekend. i have had a busy day with family etc and am too tired to concentrate properly!
Russia would be better off as the long arm of Europe than as a state that tries to be a world power by itself. It doesn't do well with its military. Europe is now in a craze for being pacifists. So Russia should follow along. It doesn't do well trying to do things like be the big bad guy who opposes the US. The US isn't a tradition Russian enemy. Russia attacking the US is the subject only of satiric movies. (Of course the most humorous subject I can think of is Britain and the US going to war again as during the War of 1812. How about one where Britain conquers the US once more and sets up a government in Washington. Sounds like a BBC series).
If I flew I would ride on British Airways. Air France has always been known in a joke as Air Chance. What do you think of them? Have you flown on Air France? I certainly would fly on Lufthansa. When I was a kid I remember flying on Alitalia. The crew was always on strike and wouldn't give you so much as a glass of water let alone a Coke unless you tipped them. Hilarious!
Linda wrote: "Russia would be better off as the long arm of Europe than as a state that tries to be a world power by itself. It doesn't do well with its military. Europe is now in a craze for being pacifists. So..."I argued for years after the end of the Cold War that Russia should be groomed to join the EU and that NATO should either be wound up or Russia become a member of it. Russia is Europe's eastern gateway and Britain is the western. The present set up is ridiculous with a lot of contrived rivalries and concocted crises.Kissinger thinks it ridiculous.
As for your war, that would not be the British way. This would. The UK joins the United States with Wales, England and Scotland as separate States and Ireland as two states like Virginia. England becomes the most powerful state and one of its own becomes President. England is back in charge. This combination becomes the world's first Mega Power.
You should write it. It's right up your street. I will be your editor.
Linda wrote: "If I flew I would ride on British Airways. Air France has always been known in a joke as Air Chance. What do you think of them? Have you flown on Air France? I certainly would fly on Lufthansa. Whe..."I flew Air France once and never again.It's awful and their accidents are always due to maintenance issues.BA is very reliable. Virgin Atlantic is also good. I flew by them to Washington in 2009.
I remember flying Alitalia in the sixties.It was okay, but in those days each European country had one state owned airline so there was no competition, just rivalry between countries. I think Air France is the only state owned one left.
Linda wrote: "By the way, how do you know how much "money" China has? How do you know how much money they spend on their military? Who has compiled the statistics? If any of these answers is China itself, the st..."I get the military info either from the CIA Factfbook, or the Institute for Strategic Studies or The Stockholm IPRI. The figures vary slightly because they have slightly different methodology but the rankings are much the same. These are very reliable, not cooked. I have found a Wikipedia page for you which gives the ISS and SIPRI figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...
Linda wrote: "By the way, how do you know how much "money" China has? How do you know how much money they spend on their military? Who has compiled the statistics? If any of these answers is China itself, the st..."Here are some financial statistics. I usually use either the World Bank figures or the IMF, but here is a Wiki table which is, I think, the world bank figures. They are all very similar. This is the list of external debt. It means the total value of all the money owed to foreign countries by the combined business, state and private borrowing of a country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...
ernal_debt
This next list is from the World Bank. It is each country's gold and dollar reserves combined. It is alphabetical not ranked but you can see China has the most running to 13 digits.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/F...
Hope this is helpful
You could have all sorts of scenarios about England vs. the US. All of them sound like a BBC TV series. It would never occur to anybody in the US. All of them sound very humorous and satiric. I don't remember writing satire in the past. Two novels of mine approached it but still were historical. One was called The Golden Race. It was written when I was on my Roman kick. It was about the Julio-Claudians and Livia and Augustus in particular. The other novel I've told you about. It has been variously called The Dunkirk Plot and Hitler in New York. The second proposed title indicates the scene that approaches satire. This is the alternative history thriller where Hitler wins the Battle of Dunkirk and Churchill and Edward flee with the British Navy to America to meet with Roosevelt. All sorts of maneuvers go on. Near the end Hitler actually shows up in the US to speak at the Republican convention of 1940 in Philadelphia when Wendell Wilkie is nominated. The press in the US is always making fun of the Republican Party and they would think it was great and enormously satiric that Hitler shows up to speak at their convention. I realized this after I wrote the first draft. That is the only aspect of the novel that could be seen as satiric, though I must say that when you are playing around with alternative history you have to always be pulling in the reins on your writing. It can easily get away from you. I wanted it to be something that could actually have happened and not a fantasy novel.
Of course if Russia joined the EU, isn't it rather large? In some respects it isn't, you know. Most of the population lives in either Moscow or St. Petersburg. They don't live in the hinterlands.
I don't know about Virgin Atlantic. But then I haven't flown since before I got married. The last flight I took was between the Raleigh Durham Airport and Pittsburgh. I was flying back after taking my MA Oral Exam in August. I was getting married in October. I actually flew quite a bit when I was in college. During the first semester of my junior year, I flew every Friday to visit Gary at Duke University in Durham, N.C. I came back on Sundays. I made friends with a lady named Maria who was doing the exact same thing to visit her husband at Duke. He was going to Duke. She was going to the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania. But I've always hated flying since I was a little girl and flew to Florida to visit my great-grandmother. I finally gave it up and haven't flown since. If I could persuade myself to fly now it would make things much easier and would save me lots of money. But so be it.
Thanks for all the statistics. But still where do they come from? Does the US go over to China and examine their books? Don't they have to accept the figures that China gives them? Even if Chinese funds are kept in other banks, isn't that private? In other words, don't Westerners just assume they are telling the truth?Also even if they are telling the truth, what difference does it make? For instance, Putin is reputed to be the wealthiest man in the world simply because just like a Russian Czar of old he can personally control and use all of Russia's assets, something no British PM or American President would ever dare to do because he would be caught red-handed by the press, etc. Also Putin's cronies divided up the wealth of the previous Soviet Union and semi-privatized the Soviet Union's state industries, immediately creating the world's biggest group of billionaires. They weren't captains of industry. They didn't create anything or invent anything or discover anything. They just took state money. What world influence do Russian billionaires have? None!
Linda wrote: "Thanks for all the statistics. But still where do they come from? Does the US go over to China and examine their books? Don't they have to accept the figures that China gives them? Even if Chinese ..."Linda, the IMF, World Bank, etc do not produce fake figures. Without accurate figures capitalism collapses, so you just have to accept the facts. Up until about the time you stopped following the news the American economy drove the world economy. Now it is one of two drivers.China is the other.Just learn to live with it.
Linda wrote: "Of course if Russia joined the EU, isn't it rather large? In some respects it isn't, you know. Most of the population lives in either Moscow or St. Petersburg. They don't live in the hinterlands."Well although Russia is the guardian of Asia in many ways it is also a European power and Europe cannot be complete without it. Before the Cold War ended it was Western Europe. But now it is one Europe and of course one Germany. The four European powers are Britain France,Germany and Russia. Britain and Russia are the gateways and the other two are the inner core.
You are saying that you have to accept China's statistics as accurate. They are not accurate. We have a video to send you about this subject, too. You say we have to accept figures for capitalism to work. No, that's not true. Figures for other entities can be affirmed by accurate measures and accounting practices. China may be a large market. It may be a place where lots of things are produced by western companies the way India was once used by the British during colonial times. "Prime driver of capitalism" is a term that could be applied to all sorts of countries for all sorts of reasons. Every country has one role or the other since the whole world is capitalistic. But I wouldn't call China a "leader" in world capitalism.
I can give you another example. During the Soviet Union they have five year plans, etc. They doctored their books to show they were meeting their targets. Finally the whole thing collapsed. In past centuries China has collapsed many times. Then the new emperor comes to the throne. Nothing is stable. It could happen again.
What about my other point --- the distribution of wealth in China? If a few people own everything as in Russia or Saudi Arabia, it's not really capitalism at all.
One of the best indicators of your importance in capitalism, one of the most objective, is your rank on the stock market. Four countries have dominated the stock market for two hundred years: the United States, Great Britain, Germany, and Japan. Nothing has changed. That shows you that China has not advanced to number two at all.
Linda wrote: "One of the best indicators of your importance in capitalism, one of the most objective, is your rank on the stock market. Four countries have dominated the stock market for two hundred years: the U..."I cannot go on with this debate because you simply refuse to accept the facts and when they do not fit your argument you say the figures are made up. You are completely out of touch with the modern world because you simply have no idea what is going on.
This is the last piece of information I am going to give you and after that I will not comment on further posts in this subject. It is the list of the top stock exchanges in the world for Jan 2015 by capitalisation of companies listed
1 New York USA
2 NASDAQ USA
3 London GB
4 Tokyo Japan
5 Shanghai China
6 Hong Kong China
Germany comes out at number 10. If you combine Shanghai and Hong Kong, the total exceeds everybody but New York.
As for your comment that China is not the second largest economy, it is frankly childish. You are making a fool of yourself over this. Do not engage in current affairs when you have not watched the news for eight years. It is unfair to you. Sorry, but I have too much to do to conduct pointless arguments.
Linda wrote: "One of the best indicators of your importance in capitalism, one of the most objective, is your rank on the stock market. Four countries have dominated the stock market for two hundred years: the U..."Well we are never going to agree. You are living in a make believe world were America is always best and if any rivals appear they are cheats or whatever.
I can tell you that there is not a single investment manager in the world who now makes a decision which does not factor China in the process.
I didn't say that China did not figure in the process of making decisions if you are a stock broker. That's not the point. But they are not one of the premier leading stock markets. They are considered a risky investment, not a stable one. I guess I could quote Fidelity. We have accounts there. I will look up their investment advice for foreign stock markets. England and Germany are stable. China and Russia are not stable. There is political risk.
We are going to send you the lecture about how you can't trust China's "books". There is also an article from the Wall Street Journal. They may be a BIG country in land area and in population. They may be important on the world scene as a giant factory where all sorts of goods are produced. But they don't set trends. They are unstable and represent a lot of risk. The whole thing could fall apart any time. Have you ever read the novel The Good Earth by Pearl Buck? She talks a lot about the cycle of Chinese history where dynasties come to power and fall. I think it is called the Mandate of Heaven.
China is hardly a rival to the US. The US is a premier western country. The West has set the trends that China is following, not visa versa. The Chinese are learning English. The Americans and British are not learning Chinese in massive numbers. It's not as important by the way as Japanese or even Korean. Ask a translator. Japanese commands the highest rates.P.S. By the way when we were crossing the country we saw a lot of freight trains. Most of the cars were either from South Korea or Hamburg, Germany.
I got my statistic about the four leading stock markets for the past 200 years from Jeremy J. Siegel's book Stocks for the Long Run. He is a professor of finance at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania. I didn't invent it all by myself. It is sort of like the more things change, the more they remain the same.
I think the technical term for China is “emerging markets”. I looked up Fidelity's Emerging Asia Fund. They say:Risk:
Stock markets, especially foreign markets, are volatile and can decline significantly in response to adverse issuer, political, regulatory, market, or economic developments. Foreign securities are subject to interest rate, currency exchange rate, economic, and political risks, all of which are magnified in emerging markets. The risks are particularly significant for funds that focus on a single country or region.
You see, that's where the stability factor comes in. The stocks of the US, Britain, Germany, and Japan have normal stock risk but not the risk of emerging markets and not political risk. They are the "definition" of stability for the whole world market. P.S. I remember Siegel making the remark about how curious Germany was. Their whole stock market was the only one of the four to collapse in 1923. But the Germans carried on, and they regained stability in the stock market. Stocks that Germans held during WW2 if they continued to hold them did not lose their value because of the Nazi interlude. Their political situation did not harm their stock market. That's a rare exception to the general rule.
Linda wrote: "I think the technical term for China is “emerging markets”. I looked up Fidelity's Emerging Asia Fund. They say:Risk:
Stock markets, especially foreign markets, are volatile and can decline sig..."
Linda I am not talking about risk. I am talking about volume. And that piece of marketing blurb is designed for an American audience which is distrustful of foreigners and knows next to nothing about international investment.
Of course there is risk in investing in emerging markets, but there are also profits and emerging markets mature. America was once an emerging market.China is obviously an emerging market but it is so big it affects all the other markets especially in the East.
This year China has started to re-balance its economy towards home consumption rather than exports and that has slowed its growth. The effect was to reduce the demand for oil and commodities and the world price of oil has more than halved. That has impacted every economy that sells it. That is an example of what I mean by the China factor.
As you know America runs big budget and trade deficits. The biggest holder of US government debt is China.
Here are some figures which will gladden your heart. As you know I believe that the links between the UK and the USA are much closer than anyone admits to and the biggest driver of the UK economy is the US. Everything that happens in New York is mirrored in London, everything in the Pentagon is followed in the MoD(defense) etc. Well how about this.If you put together both countries, the GDP is not only the biggest in the world but more than twice the size as the next in line (China) and even bigger than the whole EU which includes Britain.
If you add together both military budgets the total is 5 times the nearest next, China.
If you add New York and London stock exchanges the combination is 6 times greater than the next biggest,Tokyo.
I think it is the recognition that we are all family that makes Brits anti-EU. What we need is a free trade deal between Britain and the US.
Also such is the cooperation between the two defense depts. that we actually interchange Trident missiles. After servicing some US ones go into British Submarines and some previously in the Brit boats go on the US vessels. The warheads are changed because Britain prefers her own, but the missiles are leased from the US like car rental.
Are you saying that the stock brokers and investment advisers at Fidelity know nothing about international investment? About investing in emerging markets? I bet you they know how to turn a profit by investing in a diversified portfolio. But they would advise you to limit risk in your portfolio by balancing investments in risky stocks like China and India with investments in stable countries. Then of course there are the super stable stocks that you use to spit out dividends and income such as General Electric or General Mills, Kraft, etc. These stocks don't go up or down very much. They are as stable as you can get.
On a totally different subject my novel Dark 3 just came out on Amazon yesterday on Kindle. It's the first Dora Benley novel and is listed on Amazon under her name. But as far as nobody knowing about me, forget it! The way Amazon has it organized the Giveaway I'm doing to promote the book is a Linda Cargill giveaway for Dark 3. I'm giving away a bluetooth speaker. Have you ever done anything like this with Amazon Giveaways?
America is now close to being energy independent again, the first time I think since the early 1960's.I drove through the oil patch in West Texas twice this summer. I saw it myself. Oil workers were everywhere. Hotels and restaurants were catering to them and not tourists like tus especially places like Midland and Pecos. All I would have to do to complete the picture is to drive through North Dakota where I have never been. So what if China buys America's bonds? So do lots of nations. That just shows what I mean. They wouldn't want to buy their own bonds or Russian bonds. Russians have almost all their investments abroad. They don't like their own currency. That's what I mean by political risk.
You are right. I like your statistic about the US and the UK. It proves the dominance of the English speaking peoples. That would gladden the hearts of Queen Victoria and Winston Churchill not to mention others. Right now that dominance seems so obvious that it is politically incorrect and rarely spoken about by the press. Again just think of the dominance of the English language world wide.No one is learning Mandarin Chinese or Hindi. P.S. I've got a relative who comes from India, remember? I'm going to give you some details about people from India in Pittsburgh and why they are there.
Think of the dominance of the Brits and the US in the entertainment industry.
Linda wrote: "Are you saying that the stock brokers and investment advisers at Fidelity know nothing about international investment? About investing in emerging markets? I bet you they know how to turn a profit ..."No not at all. Fidelity is one of the biggest in the world. What I was saying that the text you sent was marketing blurb designed for an audience not used to managing its own investments. They prefer to employ a manager like Fidelity.
I listen to the world market report every morning on the radio which gives investment news from all the world markets with sophisticated comment from leading investment managers. Two of my sons run their own quite significant investment portfolios and both manage their own investments. They invest directly in companies, not through funds.
Linda wrote: "On a totally different subject my novel Dark 3 just came out on Amazon yesterday on Kindle. It's the first Dora Benley novel and is listed on Amazon under her name. But as far as nobody knowing abo..."Oh well done! I will download a copy and do a bit of YA reading as soon as I have time. I have not tried give always etc. I never spend money but I do think the free downloads which I do from time to time stimulate sales as long as I promote them on my Wordpress blog.
Linda wrote: "America is now close to being energy independent again, the first time I think since the early 1960's.I drove through the oil patch in West Texas twice this summer. I saw it myself. Oil workers wer..."America's strength is that it is energy independent and also has a very strong industrial and technological base.
You are supposed to invest in funds, not individual stocks, unless you have enough money to create your own mutual fund in effect. The reason is the costs associated with buying and selling individual stocks. I don't think that quote from Fidelity is an advertising blurb. For one thing they aren't allowed to engage in that sort of advertising. They are regulated. I could quote other books, such as Jeremy Siegel's book, about investing. They all say the same thing including the classic book by Graham that everybody else quotes including Warren Buffet.
So you think that your Wordpress blog has an influence on sales? I wish my blog on my website did. I get the idea that nobody looks at anything except what I put on Facebook. And though I sometimes can get an audience there, they don't buy books. My book sales on Amazon, which is the only place I am selling anything, are at an all time low. For the past three years they have done nothing but decline. I don't really know why except that during that time period Amazon stopped using tags and they started letting people read a lot of books for free. Interesting that you think free book reading stimulates sales. That's the way Amazon says it is supposed to work. But for me it seems to have no influence on sales. When I have done free promotions I have frequently gotten a lot of free downloads. But after the promotion ends there are no sales that people have to pay for. And I've got lots of books up there for sale. P.S. Does Wordpress make a difference? I have a Weebly blog and website.
I saw legions of oil workers everywhere. It was amazing. It's not exactly the type of company I like to keep. I wish there was another way to get from Tucson to the East Coast. It's hard to get around Texas. It's too big. But when you are making one of those cross country trips you see either oil workers or truck drivers. I remember being in a line with truck drivers at a truck stop. I was buying postcards. They were waiting for their number to be called to take a shower. This is especially true in Tennessee on I-40, which is the land of truck stops every few miles.
Linda wrote: "You are supposed to invest in funds, not individual stocks, unless you have enough money to create your own mutual fund in effect. The reason is the costs associated with buying and selling individ..."You only use a fund manager if you do not have your own investment skills. There are lots of small investors with up to the equivalent of a million dollars who buy their own shares direct and equally there are billionaires who prefer funds. It is not an either or and it is such a vast area that all sorts of people have individual skills which work for them in some niche way. But as you say most people would be much wiser to use a reputable fund manager.
My family prefers to self invest.
Linda wrote: "So you think that your Wordpress blog has an influence on sales? I wish my blog on my website did. I get the idea that nobody looks at anything except what I put on Facebook. And though I sometimes..."Well I think it works for me because I work hard on my current affairs/ political blog which is linked to twitter and if I post regularly and confront gritty problems I get about a thousand hits a month. That is tiny compared to mega bloggers but it is enough to sell a few books. I have about 7000 true followers on twitter. I had more spammy ones but I got rid of them. They just wanted to sell me stuff all the time.
As I say it is just a hobby to keep my brain cells working.
Yours is more a travel/history/promotional blog which perhaps needs a niche platform to which the content relates, to get you followers. Facebook is almost certainly the best place for you.
Linda wrote: "I saw legions of oil workers everywhere. It was amazing. It's not exactly the type of company I like to keep. I wish there was another way to get from Tucson to the East Coast. It's hard to get aro..."Very interesting. I have never been close to big oil rigs, although we do have a small facility in the woods not far from here. Apparently there is potentially a lot of shale gas/oil under the ground in the south.
No, you don't use a fund manager if you don't have investment skills. You use one if you don't have lots of money to invest even if you do have investment skills. Otherwise -- unless you just buy and never sell and you happen to buy stocks like GE and General Electric or you are very lucky to pick a growth stock that keeps on growing and then becomes stable --- you are far better off to invest in funds and then spend your time rebalancing those investments about once per year. Even that is time-consuming enough and complicated enough. Just the costs of buying and selling individual stocks all the time eats up too much money. It's supposed to be a popular thing to do these days. Fidelity has brokerage accounts. In fact I have several but I never use them that way. Even unraveling a bunch of individual stocks years later if you buy and hold can become a mess. Ask Gary. He just got done doing this last year when he was given some stocks that had been held for decades without ever selling them. The stock brokers took quite a commission to sell some of them, and it took weeks. They said it would have been much easier to deal with funds.
If you've come up with some system to buy and sell individual stocks successfully this is certainly what you should write a book about. That would sell for sure.
