Forming a big picture

Although this site is divided up into very specific posts, there is also a single big picture, the one I saw which allowed me to put each new and past event into it, and almost instantly know who went where and how each new event fitted into it. I will take some earlier points and put some of them together to see how it is built up.

Low interest rates
Politicians are not our friends
Use your own discretion

These are two connected issues and a general one which applies to both them and all similar situations. Low interest rates are proven to benefit less than 25% of British people, proving beyond any doubt the politicians (all parties, and in America) are helping the bankers, brokers and themselves at our expense. This cannot be in doubt, as some people paying less on their mortgages are the lucky fallout of such policies but so few in comparison with savers and pensioners who have absolutely no safe form of investment open to them make absolutely no difference, especially when the time comes to sell their house and they lose the entire amount saved buying the new one as they are buying and selling on the same market inflated by said rates. And using your own discretion applies every time two politicians tell you the exact opposite thing is right. Only you can decide which is right, and as a result you never needed them to tell you in the first place as anyone can learn the issues and work it out already.

Ponzi and pyramid schemes
Electric cars
Hutchison Rabbit
Wind and solar power
Costs and benefits

These again are all aspects of the same thing, the useless product marketed to collect other people's investments and run. And of course using your own discretion when you see a product which doesn't look quite up to scratch for its purpose usually reveals its true nature as well. Rather than think of a good business idea, take a risk and put money into it, a pyramid scheme and the like simply collects money at one end and hands it out at the other until it runs out and they piss off with it. Very few even dress up as anything else, pyramid schemes are unable to, even with products, as if you need to pay membership of anything up to £5000, and are paid more for bringing in new members then it can't be anything else, and despite now being illegal they still run and are as crowded as they ever were, despite many TV programmes secretly (and openly) filming them. Some people understand what they are, meaning they also know if they get in early they still could win, and it's easier than working for it. Wind turbines are the same. Think about it. When does the wind blow? Whenever it wants. How fast? Ditto. What do you do to store the power? Nothing.

Just like with low interest rates, you can look up monthly contribution from wind turbines, and then the costs involved. Once you take the meagre wattage produced, often in single figures per unit, you must then factor in the fixed and variable costs as with all accounting. Generally speaking they use power from the grid they are connected to for starting up, slowing down, heating and turning to the wind. That comes off the power output. Then they need a permanent power station as backup, which produces constant power as they all must. That could do the job on its own anyhow so you don't even need the turbines as they waste all the power the turbines produce unless it's needed at that specific time.

Basically wind turbines fulfil absolutely no useful benefit at all. Take away the backup and they barely add any power, much is wasted when they do, so the net power actually used is so little compared to the costs they are, like the Hutchison Rabbit or shares in a Ponzi company, totally worthless. And I haven't even factored in the subsidies paid to land owners, including 'idle time' which can be 40 times more than for the power itself. Offshore maintenance is also rather costly. As is building an entirely new grid to do precisely nothing for the total power supplied.

If there is basically any product or investment offered that looks a bit funny, do your research (the internet allows a thorough search of any of them nowadays), and once you learn to rely on your discretion you will be as repelled from these as much as a turd in the street.

Running an economy backwards

This is borrowed over, as anything relevant can be here including guest posts if anyone wants to send me anything themselves. I read this yesterday, maybe by Max Keiser but not relevant, that explained the British economic policy clearer than anyone else could.

Imagine pulling a piece of string. It will follow you everywhere and move as far as you do if you do, but if you then turn and push it then you will move and it will hardly go anywhere. Stay in the same spot and keep pushing harder and harder and it can and will never go any further as physics dictates what you are doing is impossible.

The economy works the same way. I have already written about growth, and in week one economics they explain the size of an economy is the total assets. I know using accounting tricks you can cheat and include debt, but that does not really mean it has grown, it just means they want to hide bad performance. So using official criteria, not government puff, an economy grows based on physical added value. This includes natural resources like North Sea gas or oil, manufacturing and added working hours as they earn more through, as Marx put it, the sweat of their brows which was all the working class had to offer. You don't really create growth through debt, any more than unpaid profits, however likely they may or may not be, as technically they are liabilities not assets. Unlike Enron's version, which is fraudulent and not meant to be taken on by their prosecutors as they realised it was a good idea for them to use.

Pulling the piece of string is the only way to move it directly, so are the genuine means to economic growth. There are no other means to grow an economy as the accounts must get a higher bottom line or it's just rearranging slices of the same cake endlessly without making new ones. Therefore the British growth model, based on borrowing and spending, is the same household model which caused the credit crash and left many people with five and six figure personal debts as well as any mortgages. Yes, they spent a lot of that money, but it wasn't theirs, they just took it from somewhere else, spent it, and at best replaced it if they managed to pay it back. The money supply grew as the interest was paid, in other words, it caused inflation as more money had been put into the economy with no additional production. A proper economic model is to create more so people earn more and spend more. That, like pulling a piece of string, is the only way to move an economy upwards, anything else is just moving it around in the same place, and the only reason Britain is growing now is through debt and inflation, which caused the second world war when it happened in Germany. That is the way we are going, and no other direction till off a cliff, the only known destination of running an economy backwards. It is the same as pushing the brake to move a car, or cut a cake into a hundred pieces and spend the rest of your life rearranging it hoping one way will do it. The only difference here being it's harder to see what they're doing and they can throw smoke and mirrors up in front of it to divert your attention, like using inflation as growth. No way Jose, that's fraud, nothing else.

An open climate goal

I always knew this was the case but didn't have any special quotes in particular, but this one has just been sent to me, from the godfather of warming himself, who convinced Bill Clinton to tell the UN it was a serious issue, James Hansen.

"Although I’ve spent decades working on [climate models], I think there probably will remain for a long time major uncertainties, because you just don’t know if you have all of the physics in there. Some of it, like about clouds and aerosols, is just so hard that you can’t have very firm confidence."

 
Anyone not familiar with climate and related models, think of accounts. You need everything to balance, including management account budgets (I passed an exam in it, so I do know), where you do a year's projection, ie a model. If you for some reason don't have the sales box (back then it was still in books or boxes) you have to find it, or you can't get audited. What Hansen has said here, which I knew to be 100% certain, was models cannot factor the two main coolants, clouds and aerosols (dirt and dust) into their projections, so without the two major coolants (from the same source as positive feedback, oceanic evaporation, and from volcanoes and burnt fuel etc) the result is guaranteed to be too warm as you've simply ignored the coolants. That is like Enron adding profits from the future they'd never made to balance the books, or a firm needing a tax loss 'forgetting' most of its sales. Either way it's false accounting, and wherever you go in the world is a crime. What difference is there in leaving out two sales accounts in a climate model, getting a false positive, and then people wonder why 20 years later all the models (there were over 70) ran many times too hot? This is a direct and open confession it is physically impossible to model ahead properly as they simply can't factor in around half the data. As the entire world's climate policy is based totally on these failed and inadequate models, which have demonstrated themselves useless after 20 years as they all assumed positive feedback despite water evaporating being equally able to form clouds as vapour, which current findings from the present show exactly that. Whatever else is or isn't known, this alone is enough to kill the entire global warming proposition. Within all the material, its very founder also slipped the truth in, they can't forecast the effects in models. Add the twenty years of demonstrable proof, and the game is over.

 I will add a comment made today by an engineer. He could make a 150mm steel bridge across the Thames as long as no one actually tried to use it. This is the same as the models, they only work when not tested by reality. And how could anyone test their models without a tardis in 2100?

The one guarantee, you have been heard

Continuing from the earlier entry, I think one point, the actual moral of the story, requires its own to stand out. The lone voice which sees the emperor's naked is either ignored (99% of the time) or not, but they are always noted.

This means, if nothing else, if you know something others do not, they will slate you, call you a murderer or worse (yes, I've heard worse), and may even avoid you entirely as a result, but if you know you are right at least you have told them. This means, like the credit crash and other little but definitely predicted disasters destined to happen, the handful who spoke out could not divert the entirely voluntary storm, but they would teach the sheep and idiots a lesson.

They are so full of hubris in either not believing there is nothing wrong, or there is something wrong when there is not, nothing besides the actual event happening can ever change their minds. If it was possible for bankers to lend people 10X or more of their income, and do it at a 40X plus leverage rate (as opposed to what used to be a tightly regulated 3 and 7), on top of excessive offers for personal debt which was then sold off in anonymous packages of structured AAA rated (faked) financial instruments, normally anyone with a three digit IQ would have worked out if you simply break the rules of a society the system will unravel.

About three people did (Vince Cable, a sacked broker and me, to my knowledge), and I as a result now earn around a third as much as I would have otherwise, as do all my family including the ones who have since died. I have lost many thousands of pounds directly due to the utter stupidity of the public standing back and accepting an economy normally associated with a pisshole like Zimbabwe or Gaza, the same acceptance of sky high energy and travel bills to protect them from global warming after they're dead.

This mentality is lethal, as it allowed concentration camps, Enron, Bernie Madoff, the South Sea Bubble, Church Indulgences, years of Libor fixing, and those are just the ones which got busted we now know about. It ignores every warning and assumes the crooks are the good guys and vice versa. I can't change that, all we can do is tell them, make a note to record it, and crow when they find we got it right.

The fact is, much of the time, the consensus usually means they are wrong, just like today's record low interest rates skimming billions from the economy as long as they stay in place. And no one does a thing about it.

Hoaxes, proof how easy it is

Yesterday a TV station interviewed random people in the street about a non-existent news story they invented, and filmed them accepting every single word without question. I'm sure with a representative sample a varying degree of plausible and less plausible stories could be invented, and then record the number of people who wouldn't believe them. It's gone on from day one, the South Sea Bubble, War of the Worlds, even the April fool story about the spaghetti tree. The thing they all had in common was most people blindly accepted them all, and the government and business know this. Most people are either too dim or programmed to accept what they are told by the media and governments, or too busy to care.

Having demonstrated the phenomenon, which is hardly a surprise to anyone, why not exploit it for money, power and worse knowing the few not drunk at the party can never communicate to the others, only the publican can tell them there was no alcohol in the drink and they are really sober, and they never do. Right now two banks have just been fined for collusion in interest rate fixing for many years in the Libor scandal. Fraud, obtaining financial benefit by deception, is a serious crime and they are known to have gained millions- I don't even know if the fine was smaller, in which case they even profited from their crime. Except it was not a crime as the government changed the law somehow to excuse them. What's more, as in yesterday's lesson, who gets that fine? Not the people who lost it, or you and me either. It goes the same way as all taxes, into a black hole and never seen or traced again.

Even when there is evidence to the contrary, growing by the year, no one shifts. The evidence will eventually build up until so great it outweighs the illusion, but by then it's usually too late and the money is gone. After 17 years of no global warming, many official sources have now said it may not warm for another 30, but this does not mean it is not warming. That is a level above Martians landing, or fake investments- it is a lie we could just work out given the hard effort put in, but now when the evidence is failing them, they lie again against both the existing new evidence but falsifying the future against the rules of logic. That is literally saying black is white, and not only did the people believe lie one as it was admittedly damn hard to figure it out as such, when they provide lie two to delay the ending of lie one, which breaks every rule of life itself (check out doublethink from 1984, holding two opposing opinions at the same time) no one even thinks to question it.

Forget Boris Johnson's IQ and other's he speaks about, they have proved beyond every possible fail mark the public are far, far stupider than even the toughest estimates have demonstrated. The simple hoax, the formula being a plausible lie plus the authority to accept it- even at a level of 'my wife was killed in South America' by Nasty Nick Bateman in the first Big Brother, plausible as his authority was he was a family member, and there is never a sensible reason people should make these sort of things up, to anything the media publish or politicians claim. This is known since biblical times and is described as the lies of Satan, but when the shine comes off the original story (as it never existed it must eventually), adding a new coat of paint on top which is beyond plausible, and the sheep still flock in acceptance the people are so stupid they deserve every treatment they get. But not the minority of innocent victims who saw through it all the time, and were summarily dismissed by the sheep and called murderers on top.

Like the Germans who passively accepted the concentration camps, the willing slaves are as guilty as the masters who programme them. Unless and until the masses can realise the authorities want to destroy our lives, or more accurately, don't care if they destroy our lives in getting what they want, our lives will be destroyed further and further, and each new story will arise as the old one runs out of steam and be just as plausible and accepted as the last. Ad infinitum. Latest example

They don't get it, literally

I just read yet another pathetic leftist post on Facebook which called to attack the wealth of the rich as it was the only way to bring about equality, or whatever other reasons for interfering even more with a free society, and as I have said already, this is an entirely false view of economics, as each person earns independently of others, and as such their wealth is not 'taken' out of the economy, but is simply part of it, each added pound is an addition to the economy, the only genuine cause of growth (unlike debt and quantitative easing propping up our disastrous current economy as if moving the decimal point cures the patient), added value.

So, by taking more and more taxation from the rich, like quantitative easing, it is not simply redistributed, as the socialists claim, but it is spent. Yes, all those billions in extra tax above 40%, which arguably is quite enough to take from any hard working individuals does not get donated, like a charity, to the poor, but spent, however the government wants to. Of this, only a tiny fraction goes back to the poor on means tested benefits while the rest (minus public sector salaries, which are earned by the individuals, not given) goes on:

Defence- automatic benefits to the unemployed and unfit to work- pensions (which used to be earnings related, giving more to the richer as they paid more into it in tax)- infrastructure projects like railways and roads- subsidies- climate projects, and basically whatever they want to spend it on, but mostly not the poor. Only means tested benefits, tax credits and housing subsidies go to the poor from richer people's taxes, but all the rest goes on both essential services as described, and optional projects, like the possible new estuary airport and vastly expensive new London buses. In the end a small fraction goes back to the poor, but would be unlikely to get even more however high the tax take as they spend it as they wish for any excess above the basic essentials, and whoever is in power, even if communist, cannot be forced to return your hard earned money to any good cause, as it is in their hands to decide.

Stating the bloody obvious, or am I?

Only in the last couple of years has the term 'printing money' come into use, probably the first time since post 1st world war Germany, and we know what happened there as the almost inevitable result. And where else did the result happen with other causes? Zimbabwe. That example of taking a thriving and successful country and turning it into a nuclear waste without the radiation. I must sneak in a small dig at Obama who is doing the same to America as Mugabe did to Zimbabwe simply as I will now demonstrate its veracity, but that is just an aside.

I will add debasing currency is still part of the long list of how to commit treason, and if anyone chooses to try as a result I welcome the result. Let's sort out some specifics on what is poetically called 'quantitative easing' and remove all the preconceptions.

First and most, they are not putting real money into the economy.

How can they? Where would it come from and what would it represent in capital terms? As a failed accountant (I still took the foundation year so know a bit) the assets column must balance with the cash. Fail. QE simply pumps up the cash without changing the assets. Not just pointless but normally criminal. Exactly what Enron did and look at the results.

Had they been actually putting cash in the economy it would be from tax revenues and the like (I passed economics!). Alaska is the only current example of this, every person gets a cut of the oil share as the company is state owned and every resident who qualifies gets an annual dividend. This is real money as it relates directly to the annual company earnings. QE however is adding numbers without any new earnings.

The proof: If QE grew an economy (as does Alaskan state enterprise) then the money could be paid directly into the citizen's bank accounts. It is not. Where does it go? Back to the state of course. This got Bernie Madoff in jail as unlike Enron's creative accounting, where future profits got dragged into the present, although they never existed, Madoff ran a pure Ponzi scheme which simply moved around money in a cake which never changed size. This is a Ponzi scheme as all the government is doing is shifting exactly the same money around different accounts and telling us it's giving us a donation. Imagine a government really could create unlimited months of billions of pounds or dollars as a donation? We wouldn't need oil or gas revenue, or even taxes, they could just create all the money we needed, as could the third would, who wouldn't need to borrow real money but just print it.

Of course they bloody well can't.

So QE is not real a) as it adds nothing to the economy b) if it was they could pay it to us directly

Since 2013 this coin has grown another side. Although technically all governments can, like the Co-op (until now anyway) share their profits and return them to the citizens, no others have. Just because only Alaska does doesn't stop any state or country in the world, after all, it is our money anyway. But they don't. But now, for the first time ever, they can take it out. Yes, when the country is in debt, they can now take it from the bank accounts directly, as Cyprus has, but they are not putting it back anywhere. Since Cyprus the EU has made this law for every member of the Euro, while New Zealand quickly followed and wrote it into their law. I am pretty sure this precedent will be followed very quickly, while Alaska's is only having its first vote elsewhere for a citizen's bonus this winter in Switzerland, around 40 years since Alaska created it.

I have already explained why QE happens, as it is to reduce the debts of the banks and governments as it forces the interest rates they pay (not us, Britain currently has rates up to over 5000%) to almost zero, and means they can borrow and speculate and make so little profit to make it a success compared to if they made 0.7% and paid even as little as 1%. On a few million a day that is a huge difference. But QE does not help you or me, it only helps the government and bankers as no one else can borrow at base rates and carry such risks to profit from it.

The rest of us are shafted to allow them to do so. This is not a helpful policy, it is burglary.