The Capital Crisis

While the G20 worship the generation of false wealth we are forced to accept Governments that defer the costs of progress in favour of far more false wealth as a solution. The holy grail of a system that has cheated itself to the Nth degree is becoming a groaning machine capable of blowing gargantuan bubbles to solve the crises of accumulating need of the many to sponsor the largess of the very few.

These huge mountains of debt – what did they buy exactly? Where are the assets? Consumption is not an asset but it is seen as the path to salvation. Growth is not growth when it is only capital expansion in the face of long term poverty. It is the system itself that is out of control, the way in which the steam valves we call markets are manipulated and political decisions that flow from the rationale of a committee of naked emperors.

Producing exponential movements in capital exchange is seen as a solution. UBS recently learned the hard way the equation that for every winner there is going to be many losers can be reversed. What sucked Lehman dry was bad mathematics and a total disregard for consequences, an aggressive form of global gambling is simply not going to solve the actual dilemma the markets face. What we are measuring is not real economic growth, it is a deferment of responsibility.

As the markets fall capital moves away from reality and into assets that are deemed safe. The market mechanism is a great tool that has been badly abused by greed to the power of political expedience.


Regardless if it was Al Qaeda, or a cover-up conspiracy that seems both rather plausible and extremely unlikely at the same time, the buildings came down and America went to war.

The idea that 9/11 was a self inflicted conspiracy may be attractive as a fiction. But in reality it serves to inflame the wrong side of patriotic feeling. Simply put, 99% or more of Americans felt a sense of great loss as the towers collapsed into the ground. It may have looked like controlled demolitions but that does not necessarily prove that they were controlled demolitions.

Great loss that translated into a terrible anger that been the main news story of the past 10 years. More distracting than the Japanese Tsunami. Not to mention the greatest disaster in history – the 2004 Tsunami and wars in Sudan each involved far greater loss of human life and dignity than either the events of 9/11 or the wars that followed them. And we stopped talking about those events. 9/11 is better “news”.

It is factual that the invasions, especially Iraq, were not what prevented other attacks being planned or being successful. It is also true that they may have made matters more dangerous for a time in terms of both threat and economically.

There is more than one way to conquer a disease. You can kill it with some kind of poison, or you can strengthen the body’s natural defences. The first course of action, typically with antibiotics – seems a valid course until disease evolves that penicillin can no longer touch. Making the immune system more able to cope with disease is a better long term solution.

It is quite true that some attacks were prevented by military intervention, it is true, but when people like Richard Reid (the shoe bomber) were stopped it was mainly due to public awareness as well as less effective planning and execution by Al Qaeda.

A misconception is that the Government protects its citizens, it is probably more true to say that citizens protect their government.

9/11 tapes

The 9/11 tapes have been published in the NY Times. This is the Air Traffic Contollers interactions with the air hostess, the hijackers and the military, the shoot down order given after the four hijacked planes crashed.

It is compelling and a frightening revelation of how people may react to circumstances that are beyond the terms of training they have received, how the military are ready to respond but helpless in the face of inadequate information. And a window into 90 minutes of extreme drama.

Rutgers Law Review has more complete information, including the full audio transcript.

Ron Paul

The most conservative politician in America is not a Tea Party irrationally motivated soccer mum.

It is a rationalist who argued against the Iraq war, who predicted the Global credit meltdown. He also opposes welfare and taxation. In other words he may be the only actual conservative candidate. The others invest in foreign adventurism, inflation of the economy and fundamentalist Christian values. Although Ron Paul opposes abortion, he does frame his argument as a personal opinion. There is no hell and damnation diatribe to inflate his argument that he considers life is sacred.

He may be the most conservative, but he also appears to be sane. Judge for yourself. If the Republicans were to select him, America will have a genuine choice between the manufactured consent that has produced governments since the 1960s and a profound shift back to core values that may have extreme consequences, not all of them good, but ultimately medicinal in that what is left of the patient will survive the operation.

I do not want to criticise the Obama administration against the crop of Tea Party candidates. If Rick Perry and Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann get a mandate, it could wreak the genuine side of freedom and liberty that is the spirit of America. If it proceeds along the path that Iran has chosen, a theocracy or fear led fascism – it could be terrifying to the rest of the world.

If America were to chose between Ron Paul vs Obama – then there would be a choice of the best that each side has to offer.

Political Evolution

Politics needs evolution too.

The US were way ahead of the game before GW Bush made the biblical error of declaring war on Iraq despite the evidence and spent the American economy into extraordinary debt compounded by fraud and banking fantasy-land mathematics. It was a stampede into insolvency that left the economy etherised on the table hooked up to the life support of QE.

Did we evolve better politics? It seems to be a long-term-only option. After Bush, the Democrats fielded two viable candidates but then the elected House of Representatives failed to pass laws when it could and then handed Congress back to the Republicans.

Political evolution seems to be the underlying problem in Western economies. Why do our democracies become increasingly more corrupt? As the pie gets bigger the shared slices get smaller.

Politics is not evolving, it is collecting a cloud of believers and faith healers.

posted as a comment on a Paul Krugman article in The Guardian


The ex head of MI5 opposes the term “War on Terror”, decries the invasion of Iraq and believes it is time to talk with Al Qaeda. Interesting. Pretty much what Disturbing Trends has been saying for years, that 9/11 was a terrible crime but it was not war, it was a terrible crime. The Bush led American response has nearly bankrupted the USA. Invading Iraq created a breeding ground and a cause for terrorist recruitment.

What would have been a better strategy than invasion after the devastating events of Sept 11, 2001? The arrest of Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network. And that is what GW Bush first asked for, and the Taliban leader said no, he would not hand over his Muslim brother. So the US declared war on Afghanistan. More correctly the acts of Al Qaeda broke the logic of coexistence driving the US government into a frenzy. Nothing felt safe and therefore the public welcomed the new improved and sometimes intrusive security measures that made terms like human rights seem like ironic luxuries from another era. GW Bush continued the madness by then inventing reasons to invade Iraq.

The Guardian