I seem to be hitting a nerve with my American friends regarding the upcoming Presidential election. It’s not like we share some special knowledge, but perhaps simply because we are looking at these issues from a slightly different, British angle.
In Britain we remember when Margaret Thatcher was first standing as the leader of the Conservative Party. They were fast approaching their first opportunity in government for quite some time. All the polls indicated that Maggie was going to win but as the date for the election approached her supporters were becoming extremely nervous. Remember that the economic situation in the UK at the time was so hopeless that the country was thought to be ungovernable. Many were emigrating, and my family and I had moved to the States to avoid the 3 days work week, punitive taxation and power black outs.
Would the people who said they were going to vote for a woman actually going to do so in the privacy of the voting booth? Would it have meant that the country was misogynistic if it did not?
Luckily for Mrs. Thatcher, and many say for the UK, they overwhelmingly did so, with the result that the UK had its iron lady as its Prime Minister. The secondary result was the renaissance of the British economy that, from that time only knew growth and prosperity over 44 successive quarters, until now!
The same type of hypothesis applies to Barack Obama. Will the American people really vote for a black man just like they say they will do? Is the country racist if it does not?
The truth is that the world really would prefer America to choose Obama, not because they especially love him, but due to the fact that they believe he represents a new beginning, a hope that there might be a step change in the way America behaves abroad as the remaining superpower.
Personally I don’t share the common perception that McCain is such a bad choice, or that Obama will be such a great one. I am highly nervous about both their choices for running mate. Joe Biden is simply a windbag, probably just about suited for the non-job of being number 2 to Obama. But it is much more likely that whoever is the back up to McCain has a better than even choice of being promoted to President. Palin in that role is more than scary.
Whoever wins will have to sort out some livable arrangements for an acceptable pull out from Iraq in the kind of time frame the Iraqi political leaders are talking about, over the next 18 to 36 months. Most of the slack will unfortunately be taken up by some kind of troop surge against the Taliban in Afghanistan to achieve the same type of result. Whatever our liberal hearts might wish for, there is no way to avoid the confrontation with the exporters of terrorism. Remember they were bombing you long before you thought of defending your country.
The real big elephant in the room for whoever leads America is how good are they going to be when dealing with the economy. That needs an alchemist who has a great deal of luck, because the job might be more about timing and long term planning in a global context than it is simply turning the US economic taps on and off. So far neither Obama nor McCain has offered any meaningful answers for these problems, and it could be that so far, there are no answers available for anyone to give.
Friday, October 31, 2008
ObamaQuestions
I seem to be hitting a nerve with my American friends regarding the upcoming Presidential election. It’s not like we share some special knowledge, but perhaps simply because we are looking at these issues from a slightly different, British angle.
In Britain we remember when Margaret Thatcher was first standing as the leader of the Conservative Party. They were fast approaching their first opportunity in government for quite some time. All the polls indicated that Maggie was going to win but as the date for the election approached her supporters were becoming extremely nervous. Remember that the economic situation in the UK at the time was so hopeless that the country was thought to be ungovernable. Many were emigrating, and my family and I had moved to the States to avoid the 3 days work week, punitive taxation and power black outs.
Would the people who said they were going to vote for a woman actually going to do so in the privacy of the voting booth? Would it have meant that the country was misogynistic if it did not?
Luckily for Mrs. Thatcher, and many say for the UK, they overwhelmingly did so, with the result that the UK had its iron lady as its Prime Minister. The secondary result was the renaissance of the British economy that, from that time only knew growth and prosperity over 44 successive quarters, until now!
The same type of hypothesis applies to Barack Obama. Will the American people really vote for a black man just like they say they will do? Is the country racist if it does not?
The truth is that the world really would prefer America to choose Obama, not because they especially love him, but due to the fact that they believe he represents a new beginning, a hope that there might be a step change in the way America behaves abroad as the remaining superpower.
Personally I don’t share the common perception that McCain is such a bad choice, or that Obama will be such a great one. I am highly nervous about both their choices for running mate. Joe Biden is simply a windbag, probably just about suited for the non-job of being number 2 to Obama. But it is much more likely that whoever is the back up to McCain has a better than even choice of being promoted to President. Palin in that role is more than scary.
Whoever wins will have to sort out some livable arrangements for an acceptable pull out from Iraq in the kind of time frame the Iraqi political leaders are talking about, over the next 18 to 36 months. Most of the slack will unfortunately be taken up by some kind of troop surge against the Taliban in Afghanistan to achieve the same type of result. Whatever our liberal hearts might wish for, there is no way to avoid the confrontation with the exporters of terrorism. Remember they were bombing you long before you thought of defending your country.
The real big elephant in the room for whoever leads America is how good are they going to be when dealing with the economy. That needs an alchemist who has a great deal of luck, because the job might be more about timing and long term planning in a global context than it is simply turning the US economic taps on and off. So far neither Obama nor McCain has offered any meaningful answers for these problems, and it could be that so far, there are no answers available for anyone to give.
In Britain we remember when Margaret Thatcher was first standing as the leader of the Conservative Party. They were fast approaching their first opportunity in government for quite some time. All the polls indicated that Maggie was going to win but as the date for the election approached her supporters were becoming extremely nervous. Remember that the economic situation in the UK at the time was so hopeless that the country was thought to be ungovernable. Many were emigrating, and my family and I had moved to the States to avoid the 3 days work week, punitive taxation and power black outs.
Would the people who said they were going to vote for a woman actually going to do so in the privacy of the voting booth? Would it have meant that the country was misogynistic if it did not?
Luckily for Mrs. Thatcher, and many say for the UK, they overwhelmingly did so, with the result that the UK had its iron lady as its Prime Minister. The secondary result was the renaissance of the British economy that, from that time only knew growth and prosperity over 44 successive quarters, until now!
The same type of hypothesis applies to Barack Obama. Will the American people really vote for a black man just like they say they will do? Is the country racist if it does not?
The truth is that the world really would prefer America to choose Obama, not because they especially love him, but due to the fact that they believe he represents a new beginning, a hope that there might be a step change in the way America behaves abroad as the remaining superpower.
Personally I don’t share the common perception that McCain is such a bad choice, or that Obama will be such a great one. I am highly nervous about both their choices for running mate. Joe Biden is simply a windbag, probably just about suited for the non-job of being number 2 to Obama. But it is much more likely that whoever is the back up to McCain has a better than even choice of being promoted to President. Palin in that role is more than scary.
Whoever wins will have to sort out some livable arrangements for an acceptable pull out from Iraq in the kind of time frame the Iraqi political leaders are talking about, over the next 18 to 36 months. Most of the slack will unfortunately be taken up by some kind of troop surge against the Taliban in Afghanistan to achieve the same type of result. Whatever our liberal hearts might wish for, there is no way to avoid the confrontation with the exporters of terrorism. Remember they were bombing you long before you thought of defending your country.
The real big elephant in the room for whoever leads America is how good are they going to be when dealing with the economy. That needs an alchemist who has a great deal of luck, because the job might be more about timing and long term planning in a global context than it is simply turning the US economic taps on and off. So far neither Obama nor McCain has offered any meaningful answers for these problems, and it could be that so far, there are no answers available for anyone to give.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
AmericanQuestions
Here is an exchange I have had with some American people, regarding the upcoming Presidential election. Salutations and thanks to my correspondents.
Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read, "Vote Obama, I need the money." I laughed.
Once in the restaurant my server had on an "Obama 08" pin, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.
When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to
someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I 've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.
At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized
the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient needed money more.
I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept
than in practical application.
To which I responded;
I am a Brit and live in the UK. We have, since WW2 lived with socialism in all but name, most of the time.
Let me tell you, my American friends, whatever you call it, socialism doesn't work, unless the givers and receivers are happy with the deal, like the tiny proportion of people who live voluntarily in those mini socialist paradises called old style kibbutzim (in Israel).
I don't have a vote in your election and to me Obama reminds me much more of a handsome, darker version of Jimmy Carter, which is very worrying. But he looks like he's decent and trying to do the right thing, whereas McCain looks a really decent guy, who doesn't have a clue about the economy. What would swing me and most of my fellow Brits to vote for Obama is our total terror of Sarah Palin!
By the way, most of us in the UK love your country and are always fascinated by it, and we want good to happen there, particularly me as I have a daughter who lives there and two grandchildren who are American.
Good luck with the election America, you need it!
All the best, Tony Klinger
Which drew another response;
I am a friend . I enjoyed reading your response. I have a question for you. What scares you about Sarah Palin? She was a Governor of a state. This, in my opinion, gives her more experience of being in charge then Obama. He was a Senator. What does a Senator run? Nothing! I do agree with you. Just curious about the Palin thing. According to people in Alaska, she has a very high approval rating. So she must be doing something right. Obama and Biden just remind me of con men.
In return I sent this;
I have done quite a lot of research on Sarah Palin, who, initially I thought a very attractive person and candidate. There have since been a great many personal anecdotes and interviews about her, which I found disturbing. Being a journalist/ documentary filmmaker by original profession, I am trained to triangulate my sources on the basis that one source might lie, two might distort but three means you have a fair chance of some accuracy. I have so far logged about 20 genuinely worrying instances of her behavior that I find of great concern. I think she does mean well, and I am convinced her intent is genuinely good, but I also think she is armed with very little self-correcting political / personal GPS. I'm not saying positive things about Obama, and I think Biden is a wind bag, (please feel free to read some of my blogs on these men!) but I do think we have to consider what might happen if Ms. Palin were to assume power one day, and that is probable if McCain was to win. There are all kinds of problems beginning to surface in Alaska, which she has tended to run like a mom and pop shop rather than as a democratic state.
Personally I hate to think of what Voltaire said, that a country gets the government it deserves, because that means both our countries must have been doing something pretty bad recently. Perhaps there needed to be a major re-adjustment of how things would be run, and we are still in the middle of that seismic shift. Sadly I don't think any of the candidates is anywhere near as outstanding as we need or, I like to think, warrant. I'm advocating a negative vote, Obama, possibly being a damage limitation exercise in an almost impossible situation. However, we should all remember that your country once faced similar impossible odds and came up with FDR who pretty much saved the Western way of life along with a little fellow my country found at just the right moment, what price a Winston Churchill right now?
Obama and especially Biden give me the same feeling they give you, but, unlike McCain and Palin, they also do seem to know, a little bit of what they're supposed to be doing. Not a great choice though.
I received;
Thanks for the comments. I enjoyed reading them.
Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read, "Vote Obama, I need the money." I laughed.
Once in the restaurant my server had on an "Obama 08" pin, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.
When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to
someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I 've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.
At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized
the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient needed money more.
I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept
than in practical application.
To which I responded;
I am a Brit and live in the UK. We have, since WW2 lived with socialism in all but name, most of the time.
Let me tell you, my American friends, whatever you call it, socialism doesn't work, unless the givers and receivers are happy with the deal, like the tiny proportion of people who live voluntarily in those mini socialist paradises called old style kibbutzim (in Israel).
I don't have a vote in your election and to me Obama reminds me much more of a handsome, darker version of Jimmy Carter, which is very worrying. But he looks like he's decent and trying to do the right thing, whereas McCain looks a really decent guy, who doesn't have a clue about the economy. What would swing me and most of my fellow Brits to vote for Obama is our total terror of Sarah Palin!
By the way, most of us in the UK love your country and are always fascinated by it, and we want good to happen there, particularly me as I have a daughter who lives there and two grandchildren who are American.
Good luck with the election America, you need it!
All the best, Tony Klinger
Which drew another response;
I am a friend . I enjoyed reading your response. I have a question for you. What scares you about Sarah Palin? She was a Governor of a state. This, in my opinion, gives her more experience of being in charge then Obama. He was a Senator. What does a Senator run? Nothing! I do agree with you. Just curious about the Palin thing. According to people in Alaska, she has a very high approval rating. So she must be doing something right. Obama and Biden just remind me of con men.
In return I sent this;
I have done quite a lot of research on Sarah Palin, who, initially I thought a very attractive person and candidate. There have since been a great many personal anecdotes and interviews about her, which I found disturbing. Being a journalist/ documentary filmmaker by original profession, I am trained to triangulate my sources on the basis that one source might lie, two might distort but three means you have a fair chance of some accuracy. I have so far logged about 20 genuinely worrying instances of her behavior that I find of great concern. I think she does mean well, and I am convinced her intent is genuinely good, but I also think she is armed with very little self-correcting political / personal GPS. I'm not saying positive things about Obama, and I think Biden is a wind bag, (please feel free to read some of my blogs on these men!) but I do think we have to consider what might happen if Ms. Palin were to assume power one day, and that is probable if McCain was to win. There are all kinds of problems beginning to surface in Alaska, which she has tended to run like a mom and pop shop rather than as a democratic state.
Personally I hate to think of what Voltaire said, that a country gets the government it deserves, because that means both our countries must have been doing something pretty bad recently. Perhaps there needed to be a major re-adjustment of how things would be run, and we are still in the middle of that seismic shift. Sadly I don't think any of the candidates is anywhere near as outstanding as we need or, I like to think, warrant. I'm advocating a negative vote, Obama, possibly being a damage limitation exercise in an almost impossible situation. However, we should all remember that your country once faced similar impossible odds and came up with FDR who pretty much saved the Western way of life along with a little fellow my country found at just the right moment, what price a Winston Churchill right now?
Obama and especially Biden give me the same feeling they give you, but, unlike McCain and Palin, they also do seem to know, a little bit of what they're supposed to be doing. Not a great choice though.
I received;
Thanks for the comments. I enjoyed reading them.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
BrandWavesByeBye
Today in the UK we witnessed the ritual public humiliation of those found to affront the public taste. They are Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross, two very naughty man boys, Russell now in his thirties and Jonathan in his late forties. Their BBC paymasters suspended them, on full pay. They had broadcast a very offensive radio 2 show and it has created a tsunami of a reaction and become an even bigger issue this week than the credit crunch.
Russell Brand said, “I think it was a really, really silly thing to do. It happened in the spirit of the moment, I didn’t want to upset Andrew Sachs, particularly because I really admire him and his work as an actor. I didn’t want to apologize publicly before because it might seem I was apologizing for the reaction rather to the person I had offended. The reason I hadn’t apologized to Georgina, and I do intend to, is because I’m frankly embarrassed to do so.” It’s a great pity that Brand waited until there was a huge public revulsion before he offered a proper and fulsome apology.
Brand then resigned from his radio show. A contrite looking Brand went on to say, “ I was silly enough to speak without thinking, and I shouldn’t have done so. I apologize to Andrew Sachs for any upset I might have caused him.”
Andrew Sachs, the main offended party said, “These are two performers, I’m a performer, sometimes, you get it very wrong, and then you have to do better.” His granddaughter, Georgina, who Brand and Ross had said intimate things about said, “I’m thrilled because justice has been done.”
Ross’s Friday show recording was cancelled tonight. As Ross said, “It was juvenile and a stupid error of judgment.”
Of course something had to be done, and seen to be done. I called for the dismissal of both these men for their outrageous, illegal and obscene phone calls to the actor Andrew Sachs. I won’t recount the whole incident; you can look up my previous blog, and the millions of other articles and blogs that this controversy has generated in the last days.
Suffice it to say that the men have, apparently now realized that they have really screwed up. The BBC went into full grovel mode, with a succession of their middle and finally most senior management issuing total and self abasing apologizes.
Of course this was too little and too late. The BBC has been behind the curve on this issue throughout, which is incredible in these days of emergency preparedness for any and all contingencies. If they had dealt promptly with this unfolding problem would have been diminished to almost no significance.
As it is the number of complaints to the BBC has, so far, topped 27,000 with something like 99.5% apparently against Brand and Ross. There are also some people, almost all younger, and mostly the more youthful demographic of radio 1, who argue that these are just edgy comedians pushing at the limits of what’s acceptable as modern comedy is meant to do.
Now the BBC must hold a very fast enquiry and tell us how this pre-recorded program was allowed on air?
Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross were clearly bouncing off each other, and the safety net is supposed to be the production team.
So how was it then possible that the producer could play this material and then OK it for broadcast?
What kind of training did this producer receive?
How could the producer have made this judgment after telephoning Andrew Sachs to discuss his feelings about what was proposed, and despite Sachs asking the producer not to broadcast it?
Why were there no BBC guidelines for this scenario in place for an obviously inexperienced producer?
It’s bad enough that this kind of show could get on air, let’s make certain it doesn’t happen again. But we don’t want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We still want comedy, and edgy is fine, but that doesn’t mean its open season on those that can’t defend themselves.
Russell Brand said, “I think it was a really, really silly thing to do. It happened in the spirit of the moment, I didn’t want to upset Andrew Sachs, particularly because I really admire him and his work as an actor. I didn’t want to apologize publicly before because it might seem I was apologizing for the reaction rather to the person I had offended. The reason I hadn’t apologized to Georgina, and I do intend to, is because I’m frankly embarrassed to do so.” It’s a great pity that Brand waited until there was a huge public revulsion before he offered a proper and fulsome apology.
Brand then resigned from his radio show. A contrite looking Brand went on to say, “ I was silly enough to speak without thinking, and I shouldn’t have done so. I apologize to Andrew Sachs for any upset I might have caused him.”
Andrew Sachs, the main offended party said, “These are two performers, I’m a performer, sometimes, you get it very wrong, and then you have to do better.” His granddaughter, Georgina, who Brand and Ross had said intimate things about said, “I’m thrilled because justice has been done.”
Ross’s Friday show recording was cancelled tonight. As Ross said, “It was juvenile and a stupid error of judgment.”
Of course something had to be done, and seen to be done. I called for the dismissal of both these men for their outrageous, illegal and obscene phone calls to the actor Andrew Sachs. I won’t recount the whole incident; you can look up my previous blog, and the millions of other articles and blogs that this controversy has generated in the last days.
Suffice it to say that the men have, apparently now realized that they have really screwed up. The BBC went into full grovel mode, with a succession of their middle and finally most senior management issuing total and self abasing apologizes.
Of course this was too little and too late. The BBC has been behind the curve on this issue throughout, which is incredible in these days of emergency preparedness for any and all contingencies. If they had dealt promptly with this unfolding problem would have been diminished to almost no significance.
As it is the number of complaints to the BBC has, so far, topped 27,000 with something like 99.5% apparently against Brand and Ross. There are also some people, almost all younger, and mostly the more youthful demographic of radio 1, who argue that these are just edgy comedians pushing at the limits of what’s acceptable as modern comedy is meant to do.
Now the BBC must hold a very fast enquiry and tell us how this pre-recorded program was allowed on air?
Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross were clearly bouncing off each other, and the safety net is supposed to be the production team.
So how was it then possible that the producer could play this material and then OK it for broadcast?
What kind of training did this producer receive?
How could the producer have made this judgment after telephoning Andrew Sachs to discuss his feelings about what was proposed, and despite Sachs asking the producer not to broadcast it?
Why were there no BBC guidelines for this scenario in place for an obviously inexperienced producer?
It’s bad enough that this kind of show could get on air, let’s make certain it doesn’t happen again. But we don’t want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We still want comedy, and edgy is fine, but that doesn’t mean its open season on those that can’t defend themselves.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
MygrandchildrenTheFish
My American grand kids called me on the phone from their mum’s car. They were excited because they had both made a giant step forward in the Lenny Krayzelburg swim school of Los Angeles.
Krayzelburg was born to Jewish parents in Odessa (then part of the Soviet Union, now the Ukraine). He and his family left the Soviet Union in 1989 for the United States. They settled in Los Angeles.
Krayzelburg's family was dirt poor. He took the bus and then walked 45 minutes each way to his swimming practice, and didn't arrive home until 9:30 each night. In addition, he couldn’t initially speak English, which was vital for him to understand his coaches' instructions. Thankfully he managed to adapt quickly.
Lenny attended Santa Monica College where he won both the 100 and 200-yard backstroke junior college titles. His coach at Santa Monica recognized his talent and recommended him to the University of Southern California, which he transferred to.
In 1995, he became a naturalized citizen of the United States. Four years later, he became the first swimmer since 1986 to sweep the backstroke events, 100 m & 200 m, in the World Championships. Later that same month Krayzelburg broke both the 100 and the 200 m world records respectively and was recognized as the top backstroke swimmer in the world and one of the best in the history of this swimming style. He continued to dominate at the Sydney 2000 Olympics backstroke, shattering the Olympic record .He also played an important role in helping the American team win a gold medal in the 4x100 m relay.
If any story every proved the power of an individual to rise above adversity that would be the story of the man whose swim school now teaches my grandchildren how to do their best.
Soli, my nearly 6-year-old grand son came on the line first, and unusually for him he wasn’t eating, and was actually talking when he was handed the phone. He was hugely proud, having been promoted through the ranks to now be the owner of a blue swim hat, which means he is only a white, silver and gold hat from the competition level. I now call him Soli the fish, but I think he wants to be Soli the shark, but we might compromise on Soli the Dolphin.
Perhaps even more proud was Maya, who will be 8 in December. She has already navigated all those other hats and as she told me, with the lofty knowledge only possessed by the very mature young ladies of California, “I get to try out for the competition team on Monday at 7 in the evening poppa, and I’ve only had a golden swim hat for one month, and the other girl trying out is nearly 12 and she’s been a gold cap for about a year, and she’s really big.”
Of course its obvious knowledge that we shared, poppa to granddaughter, that the entire family is part fish in its history. As she knows from family legend passed down to her from her mummy, I was a competition swimmer. So were many members of our family, and as Mrs. Klinger pointed out somewhat forcefully, so were many members of her family. I said to Maya that it’s no surprise she’s good in the water.
All of which is my long-winded and inelegant way of saying there is nothing more wonderful than families, or listening to the innocent joy of accomplishment of young children. All those who say kids don’t like to compete should listen to those kids who quite clearly enjoy doing their best.
I remember being so proud of winning my swimming races, and the sheer thrill of swimming a couple of miles in the sun blessed pool outside the Pez Espada hotel in southern Spain when I was much the same age as Maya is now. What a gift that was, passed on to me by my wonderful family who understood there is something wonderful, that needs to be treasured in striving for physical excellence, and I am proud that my family was able to pass that pleasure on, in tact, to our children, and now they are doing the same for their children.
I am totally convinced that there are also benefits to people who are stretched to their best physically in that they also thrive to their best mentally. Whatever the reason, its wonderful to see the smiles on small kids faces when they feel fulfilled.
It's also a big deal for all those mums and dads who spend time promoting their children towards excellence, without bullying them, to be the best they can be. Without my daughter Sarah spending time several times a week driving the kids to the swimming pool, and waiting for them as long as its necessary, whatever talent they might have would never be discovered. For all those mums and dads, well done!
In a perfect ending to this particular story I just heard that Maya won her place onto the Royal Swim Team and starts competing in her section in the next month or so. As they say in the States, “you go girl!”
Krayzelburg was born to Jewish parents in Odessa (then part of the Soviet Union, now the Ukraine). He and his family left the Soviet Union in 1989 for the United States. They settled in Los Angeles.
Krayzelburg's family was dirt poor. He took the bus and then walked 45 minutes each way to his swimming practice, and didn't arrive home until 9:30 each night. In addition, he couldn’t initially speak English, which was vital for him to understand his coaches' instructions. Thankfully he managed to adapt quickly.
Lenny attended Santa Monica College where he won both the 100 and 200-yard backstroke junior college titles. His coach at Santa Monica recognized his talent and recommended him to the University of Southern California, which he transferred to.
In 1995, he became a naturalized citizen of the United States. Four years later, he became the first swimmer since 1986 to sweep the backstroke events, 100 m & 200 m, in the World Championships. Later that same month Krayzelburg broke both the 100 and the 200 m world records respectively and was recognized as the top backstroke swimmer in the world and one of the best in the history of this swimming style. He continued to dominate at the Sydney 2000 Olympics backstroke, shattering the Olympic record .He also played an important role in helping the American team win a gold medal in the 4x100 m relay.
If any story every proved the power of an individual to rise above adversity that would be the story of the man whose swim school now teaches my grandchildren how to do their best.
Soli, my nearly 6-year-old grand son came on the line first, and unusually for him he wasn’t eating, and was actually talking when he was handed the phone. He was hugely proud, having been promoted through the ranks to now be the owner of a blue swim hat, which means he is only a white, silver and gold hat from the competition level. I now call him Soli the fish, but I think he wants to be Soli the shark, but we might compromise on Soli the Dolphin.
Perhaps even more proud was Maya, who will be 8 in December. She has already navigated all those other hats and as she told me, with the lofty knowledge only possessed by the very mature young ladies of California, “I get to try out for the competition team on Monday at 7 in the evening poppa, and I’ve only had a golden swim hat for one month, and the other girl trying out is nearly 12 and she’s been a gold cap for about a year, and she’s really big.”
Of course its obvious knowledge that we shared, poppa to granddaughter, that the entire family is part fish in its history. As she knows from family legend passed down to her from her mummy, I was a competition swimmer. So were many members of our family, and as Mrs. Klinger pointed out somewhat forcefully, so were many members of her family. I said to Maya that it’s no surprise she’s good in the water.
All of which is my long-winded and inelegant way of saying there is nothing more wonderful than families, or listening to the innocent joy of accomplishment of young children. All those who say kids don’t like to compete should listen to those kids who quite clearly enjoy doing their best.
I remember being so proud of winning my swimming races, and the sheer thrill of swimming a couple of miles in the sun blessed pool outside the Pez Espada hotel in southern Spain when I was much the same age as Maya is now. What a gift that was, passed on to me by my wonderful family who understood there is something wonderful, that needs to be treasured in striving for physical excellence, and I am proud that my family was able to pass that pleasure on, in tact, to our children, and now they are doing the same for their children.
I am totally convinced that there are also benefits to people who are stretched to their best physically in that they also thrive to their best mentally. Whatever the reason, its wonderful to see the smiles on small kids faces when they feel fulfilled.
It's also a big deal for all those mums and dads who spend time promoting their children towards excellence, without bullying them, to be the best they can be. Without my daughter Sarah spending time several times a week driving the kids to the swimming pool, and waiting for them as long as its necessary, whatever talent they might have would never be discovered. For all those mums and dads, well done!
In a perfect ending to this particular story I just heard that Maya won her place onto the Royal Swim Team and starts competing in her section in the next month or so. As they say in the States, “you go girl!”
Monday, October 27, 2008
40ThingsWeCouldAllDoWithout
This is the list to end all lists, this is the list in which you get to write down all the things you would like to get rid off.
This is not going to be comprehensive, and we might have to revisit it when you’ve all had a look and decided to send me anything you want to add to my list.
So here goes, and I have numbered this list, purely so you can refer to any of the items more easily, to tell me where I’ve gone wrong.
Here is my list of things to remove from our planet.
1. Lists. Yes, I admit that lists are something to lose.
2. I particularly hate those list programs on television.
3. Call centers, this is a no brainer, everyone, even the people in call centers hate them.
4. Banks advertising, when they’re really hiding their money under a blanket in their offices right now.
5. Scotland, when are they going to wake up to the fact that they lose every important time they take the English on?
6. Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross for being such rubbish to Andrew Sachs on BBC radio 2 over the weekend. They deserve sacking.
7. Any more films about climate change that make statements without proof or evidence.
8. Any conspiracy clips on You Tube.
9. Music by James Blunt.
10. People parking on Disabled Parking spaces without reason or the correct stickers.
11. People who jump the line or queue.
12. Unsolicited telephone calls.
13. Drizzle, I don’t mind rain or sunshine or even snow, but drizzle is miserable. No one likes it, so let’s ban it outright!
14. Speed limits on motorways, highways etc.
15. Smoking anything ever. Since I stopped about 20 years ago anyone can, and must.
16. Anyone with a higher IQ than me, unless they’re anything to do with aircraft or other means of making me safe when I travel.
17. Anything and anyone that messes with any of my family or friends.
18. All the political parties in the UK with the exception of that chap in the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable, who actually talks sense.
19. People claiming to be Spartacus when it’s obvious that I am Spartacus!
20. All those boring people that claim that they don’t have any time to watch television before they tell you, in detail, about every program.
21. People you care about dying.
22. Pets getting too old.
23. Long terminal illnesses of loved ones.
24. Short shocking illnesses of loved ones.
25. A lack of time to do all the things you wanted to do.
26. Long winter nights.
27. Angry people.
28. Fundamentalists of every hue, race, religion and creed.
29. Folk with bad memories, they cause so many fights.
30. Ignorance.
31. Lunatic drivers.
32. Green vegetables.
33. Almost all folk singers.
34. Morris dancers who bring shame on our otherwise great country by being the silliest people on the planet.
35. People who justify terrorism when it isn’t aimed in their direction.
36. George W Bush for pausing in, all the, wrong places.
37. Sarah Palin for letting down the possibilities for an elected woman in the highest reaches of American government.
38. All the bankers in the world for being greedy, greasy, inefficient and unapologetic.
39. The politicians for not having the good grace to admit that they are also at fault for our present problems.
That will do for now, please feel free to send me your additions or comments. I aim to use the best ideas in a follow up list.
This is not going to be comprehensive, and we might have to revisit it when you’ve all had a look and decided to send me anything you want to add to my list.
So here goes, and I have numbered this list, purely so you can refer to any of the items more easily, to tell me where I’ve gone wrong.
Here is my list of things to remove from our planet.
1. Lists. Yes, I admit that lists are something to lose.
2. I particularly hate those list programs on television.
3. Call centers, this is a no brainer, everyone, even the people in call centers hate them.
4. Banks advertising, when they’re really hiding their money under a blanket in their offices right now.
5. Scotland, when are they going to wake up to the fact that they lose every important time they take the English on?
6. Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross for being such rubbish to Andrew Sachs on BBC radio 2 over the weekend. They deserve sacking.
7. Any more films about climate change that make statements without proof or evidence.
8. Any conspiracy clips on You Tube.
9. Music by James Blunt.
10. People parking on Disabled Parking spaces without reason or the correct stickers.
11. People who jump the line or queue.
12. Unsolicited telephone calls.
13. Drizzle, I don’t mind rain or sunshine or even snow, but drizzle is miserable. No one likes it, so let’s ban it outright!
14. Speed limits on motorways, highways etc.
15. Smoking anything ever. Since I stopped about 20 years ago anyone can, and must.
16. Anyone with a higher IQ than me, unless they’re anything to do with aircraft or other means of making me safe when I travel.
17. Anything and anyone that messes with any of my family or friends.
18. All the political parties in the UK with the exception of that chap in the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable, who actually talks sense.
19. People claiming to be Spartacus when it’s obvious that I am Spartacus!
20. All those boring people that claim that they don’t have any time to watch television before they tell you, in detail, about every program.
21. People you care about dying.
22. Pets getting too old.
23. Long terminal illnesses of loved ones.
24. Short shocking illnesses of loved ones.
25. A lack of time to do all the things you wanted to do.
26. Long winter nights.
27. Angry people.
28. Fundamentalists of every hue, race, religion and creed.
29. Folk with bad memories, they cause so many fights.
30. Ignorance.
31. Lunatic drivers.
32. Green vegetables.
33. Almost all folk singers.
34. Morris dancers who bring shame on our otherwise great country by being the silliest people on the planet.
35. People who justify terrorism when it isn’t aimed in their direction.
36. George W Bush for pausing in, all the, wrong places.
37. Sarah Palin for letting down the possibilities for an elected woman in the highest reaches of American government.
38. All the bankers in the world for being greedy, greasy, inefficient and unapologetic.
39. The politicians for not having the good grace to admit that they are also at fault for our present problems.
That will do for now, please feel free to send me your additions or comments. I aim to use the best ideas in a follow up list.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Admissions
In my other main blog at http://www.tonyklinger.co.uk/ I admitted to being the person who caused the entire collapse of the British and world economic system in banking, property, and now the exchange rate collapse of sterling against almost every currency except for the yoghurt based money systems of certain, more remote parts of outer Mongolia.
If I had not purchased that toaster in July, forcing the banks, credit cards and various members of my family into meltdown we would have all remained safe and well.
Those of you in Britain will know of the scandal in which our newly ennobled Lord Mandelson did, when he was just a humble Peter Mandelson, meet a Russian oligarch called Oleg on the latter’s super yacht, moored of a nice, but suspiciously Greek, holiday island. His Lordship was at the time the European Union Commissioner for Trade. Some have thought this a fairly high-ranking job, representing, as it does, the most powerful trading block on the planet.
It appears that although his Lordship’s EU office previously did issue a statement admitting that he and Oleg had met in 2006 and 2007 it has now become apparent that they also met before this, in 2004. No terrible thing if one of you is an oligarch and the other is a Trade Commissioner. The interesting thing is that his Lordship didn’t own up in the first place and, some might claim, intentionally appears to have obfuscated the facts of the meeting. Why would he have done such a thing do you think?
Coincidentally, and these things couldn’t possibly be linked, Oleg, it is claimed, has various business interests in the republic of Montenegro, part of the former Yugoslavia. The EU granting favorable trading conditions to that new country could be worth a couple of billion dollars to the right people at the right time.
Of course, without evidence, no one would make such a claim, particularly when Oleg is clearly a fair minded, democratic oligarch with the highest business and ethical standards.
Needless to say, neither would his Lordship be sullied in any such connection. After all this was all investigated by the EU men in dark suits who check such allegations and he was, we are happy to report, blameless. As was the venerable Lordship the two times he resigned from the British government in the past for other, we imagine, totally baseless allegations of corruption.
Now in addition to questions about his Lordship there are the equally unsavory connections of the on shore host, Nat Rothschild, and one of the other guests, the Conservative Party’s Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne. According to Nat, George asked the oligarch for some cash fro the party. This is vigorously denied by George, who says he absolutely did not do so. What appears to be the case was more like; have you Mister Oligarch, got a company who could channel some money to the party? Of course nothing so vulgar as money actually changed hands, but people are seemingly forgetting that it is a crime under British law to ask a foreign national for money in this regard.
So, the time has come for my admission. I was also on a boat in the sunshine a few weeks ago and the gutter press might well have confused my friends and myself for the odd billionaire or two. I now officially admit that we were on a narrow boat on the River Lea with some boy scouts, not a euphemism, and business matters were discussed. Once again I’ve been tumbled. We were discussing the financial possibilities of shopping at Costco and, it has to be said, the price of fuel. We called for a decrease in the cost of petrol. The results was instant and obvious, fuel is now costing considerably less, and as a direct follow on OPEC immediately cut production by 1.5 million barrels a day. This clearly demonstrates how we can all affect the economy.
The UK’s Prime Minister supported Peter when he elevated the man to be a Lord, and to serve the country for the third time, on this occasion as the Minister for Business. How could anyone be churlish enough to question such dynamic decisions? Have you ever heard the old Mafia contention? If it smells like a fish, tastes like a fish, looks like a fish, it’s a fish, that’s how.
Now do you know anyone who could introduce me to Oleg the oligarch?
If I had not purchased that toaster in July, forcing the banks, credit cards and various members of my family into meltdown we would have all remained safe and well.
Those of you in Britain will know of the scandal in which our newly ennobled Lord Mandelson did, when he was just a humble Peter Mandelson, meet a Russian oligarch called Oleg on the latter’s super yacht, moored of a nice, but suspiciously Greek, holiday island. His Lordship was at the time the European Union Commissioner for Trade. Some have thought this a fairly high-ranking job, representing, as it does, the most powerful trading block on the planet.
It appears that although his Lordship’s EU office previously did issue a statement admitting that he and Oleg had met in 2006 and 2007 it has now become apparent that they also met before this, in 2004. No terrible thing if one of you is an oligarch and the other is a Trade Commissioner. The interesting thing is that his Lordship didn’t own up in the first place and, some might claim, intentionally appears to have obfuscated the facts of the meeting. Why would he have done such a thing do you think?
Coincidentally, and these things couldn’t possibly be linked, Oleg, it is claimed, has various business interests in the republic of Montenegro, part of the former Yugoslavia. The EU granting favorable trading conditions to that new country could be worth a couple of billion dollars to the right people at the right time.
Of course, without evidence, no one would make such a claim, particularly when Oleg is clearly a fair minded, democratic oligarch with the highest business and ethical standards.
Needless to say, neither would his Lordship be sullied in any such connection. After all this was all investigated by the EU men in dark suits who check such allegations and he was, we are happy to report, blameless. As was the venerable Lordship the two times he resigned from the British government in the past for other, we imagine, totally baseless allegations of corruption.
Now in addition to questions about his Lordship there are the equally unsavory connections of the on shore host, Nat Rothschild, and one of the other guests, the Conservative Party’s Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne. According to Nat, George asked the oligarch for some cash fro the party. This is vigorously denied by George, who says he absolutely did not do so. What appears to be the case was more like; have you Mister Oligarch, got a company who could channel some money to the party? Of course nothing so vulgar as money actually changed hands, but people are seemingly forgetting that it is a crime under British law to ask a foreign national for money in this regard.
So, the time has come for my admission. I was also on a boat in the sunshine a few weeks ago and the gutter press might well have confused my friends and myself for the odd billionaire or two. I now officially admit that we were on a narrow boat on the River Lea with some boy scouts, not a euphemism, and business matters were discussed. Once again I’ve been tumbled. We were discussing the financial possibilities of shopping at Costco and, it has to be said, the price of fuel. We called for a decrease in the cost of petrol. The results was instant and obvious, fuel is now costing considerably less, and as a direct follow on OPEC immediately cut production by 1.5 million barrels a day. This clearly demonstrates how we can all affect the economy.
The UK’s Prime Minister supported Peter when he elevated the man to be a Lord, and to serve the country for the third time, on this occasion as the Minister for Business. How could anyone be churlish enough to question such dynamic decisions? Have you ever heard the old Mafia contention? If it smells like a fish, tastes like a fish, looks like a fish, it’s a fish, that’s how.
Now do you know anyone who could introduce me to Oleg the oligarch?
Friday, October 24, 2008
LyingAsAPolicy
One of the first casualties of decreasing democracy and the rising probability of a dictatorship is the degeneration of the language. This was noticeable during the time when Spiro Agnew was Vice President of the USA during the later stages of the Vietnam War. Then, when someone in the military decided to murder one of their officers they named it “fragging”, which was a euphemism for slinging a fragmentation grenade into the officer’s tent. The results were obvious, but the slang somehow decreased the obscenity of the action.
Many of you will have noticed that this trend has continued and flowered with a whole selection of Big Brother type re-naming that has legitimized a million small cuts into the democratic fabric of our evolved societies.
Now we don’t have terrorists as the media have re-branded them freedom fighters if they find their views acceptable politically and morally, this despite the fact that they might behead some kidnap victims, now recast as prisoners as if this were a legitimate action, or blow up some children as if a 4 or 5 year old is a combatant.
The list of such anomalies is virtually endless and angers so many with rival views that there are many of us, myself included, who have simply stopped watching certain television stations or reading certain newspapers or magazines. Of course this devalues legitimate debate because we no longer put out trust in factual statements put out by the opposition’s media depending on our view.
I was having a fairly important economic debate with an economist yesterday and I quoted some statistics I had gathered the previous day from the fairly left of center Guardian newspaper. Their reaction was to reach for what they considered the more authorative Economist magazine to double check these “facts”. This is a very dangerous trend that shows itself in many ways.
Yesterday it was revealed that certain UK police authorities had mis-reported various crime statistics. Their contention was that they had got the total crime figures correct, but had under estimated the total number in the serious crime column as required by their statistical analysis. However, they went on, the figures they had given did tally with the method used by the courts to calculate these figures, Therefore, in an age where we are already very worried by the seeming rise in crime figures in this country we are told, on the one hand, that the figures were actually considerably worse than those previously listed, but don’t worry, the number of actual crimes committed has really decreased; really?
In the same time frame we were authoritively informed by the government that they have education at the very top of their agenda, and that this is an area of growing achievement. At the same time they abandoned almost their entire testing methodology after insisting it was adopted for the last years of their administration.
We all know of similar financial, health and defense issues to add to our litany of woe. And, instead of addressing the issues and trying to fix them, our government simply finds another piece of spin to re-label the problems and make them appear victories so that they can have a chance in future elections.
Right now the British government is committed to spending its way out of the present economic disasters and there is probably a good deal of sense in this as a general principle. However, wouldn’t it be great if just for once the money was spent on the infrastructure projects the country so desperately needs and deserves.
What a shambles of misleading liars this government is, and what a pity that their opposition is shaping up to be equally incompetent.
Many of you will have noticed that this trend has continued and flowered with a whole selection of Big Brother type re-naming that has legitimized a million small cuts into the democratic fabric of our evolved societies.
Now we don’t have terrorists as the media have re-branded them freedom fighters if they find their views acceptable politically and morally, this despite the fact that they might behead some kidnap victims, now recast as prisoners as if this were a legitimate action, or blow up some children as if a 4 or 5 year old is a combatant.
The list of such anomalies is virtually endless and angers so many with rival views that there are many of us, myself included, who have simply stopped watching certain television stations or reading certain newspapers or magazines. Of course this devalues legitimate debate because we no longer put out trust in factual statements put out by the opposition’s media depending on our view.
I was having a fairly important economic debate with an economist yesterday and I quoted some statistics I had gathered the previous day from the fairly left of center Guardian newspaper. Their reaction was to reach for what they considered the more authorative Economist magazine to double check these “facts”. This is a very dangerous trend that shows itself in many ways.
Yesterday it was revealed that certain UK police authorities had mis-reported various crime statistics. Their contention was that they had got the total crime figures correct, but had under estimated the total number in the serious crime column as required by their statistical analysis. However, they went on, the figures they had given did tally with the method used by the courts to calculate these figures, Therefore, in an age where we are already very worried by the seeming rise in crime figures in this country we are told, on the one hand, that the figures were actually considerably worse than those previously listed, but don’t worry, the number of actual crimes committed has really decreased; really?
In the same time frame we were authoritively informed by the government that they have education at the very top of their agenda, and that this is an area of growing achievement. At the same time they abandoned almost their entire testing methodology after insisting it was adopted for the last years of their administration.
We all know of similar financial, health and defense issues to add to our litany of woe. And, instead of addressing the issues and trying to fix them, our government simply finds another piece of spin to re-label the problems and make them appear victories so that they can have a chance in future elections.
Right now the British government is committed to spending its way out of the present economic disasters and there is probably a good deal of sense in this as a general principle. However, wouldn’t it be great if just for once the money was spent on the infrastructure projects the country so desperately needs and deserves.
What a shambles of misleading liars this government is, and what a pity that their opposition is shaping up to be equally incompetent.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
BloggingForTheRepossessed
I had a bad feeling about the property market long before it became fashionable to do so. This was because I saw the beginnings of the collapse of the sub prime mortgage business in the States at first hand.
Yesterday I checked out the local property market by popping my head into the door of a couple of estate agents (realtors) and they confirmed what we all know. There’s virtually nothing good to report, with sales now a pathetic percentage of last year’s size and prices tumbling.
More scary was the news one of them shared in which he told me that the lenders are repossessing the defaulting properties much faster than previously. He felt these repossessions are, in some instances, a first rather than last resort. In his small local agency he had been given 4 repossessed homes to sell this week, whereas he used to get, perhaps 1 per month last year. This is an alarming rise, made more so by the fact that the agent told me he and the lenders know he has no realistic chance of selling these properties in the present market conditions. Ask yourself the question, so if you repossess the property but can’t sell it, who is benefiting?
This morning I had the opportunity to listen to BBC radio 4 at breakfast. The discussion revolved around the various views as to whether there was a purpose for blogging, now, or in the future.
The usual arguments were trotted out which I shall précis by stating the obvious, we write because we have to, its in our bloodstreams, and the upshot should be that in doing so we communicate to others our personal views.
Sometimes, like yesterday, a writer, using this medium just wants to share a mood, in that case, joy and happiness to lighten the general gloom, and sometimes, like today, to warn of some impending peril, and to make sure my audience is aware of the danger.
One of the major catastrophes of modern times is coming to pass, and its being misunderstood and relatively relegated in importance on our news among the welter of horrible economic news. I am addressing the issue of home repossessions. Let’s examine that sentence again, we are talking about taking away people’s homes, not a few, not hundreds, not thousands, but if this slide continues it could be hundreds of thousands.
We cannot let this tragedy happen, we must not allow it!
The main reason I make this statement so emphatically is not because I care any more than any of you about the individuals and families affected, because no one wants to see people suffer arbitrarily. No, although this is terrible, more awful will be the ramifications to our societies and countries if we allow a new underclass to develop. This will be the inevitable result if hundreds of thousands of people are to be effectively made homeless.
The same people will, to a very large extent feel disaffected and disenfranchised, cheated and abused. They will be angry, and a great many of their number will suffer social and educational disadvantage from this starting point. An increased and growing number of the dispossessed to support, nurture and assist would thus burden the remainder of the population.
Ironically the property market collapse has come at the precise moment when we require more housing to meet the growing population needs. Whereas we should be finding ways to encourage house building start ups we find ourselves with some of the lowest ever recorded numbers.
The government has again made the right noises about keeping people in their homes as much as possible and has issued a directive to the courts to make sure they point the mortgage companies towards this end. In practical terms this means that they are now going to be compelled to write a couple of letters to the people in arrears and make a phone call or two. It doesn’t mean directing the courts to put a stop to all repossessions for a hiatus period, of let’s say 6 months. That is what this situation demands.
Many of my readers will be reaching for their electronic pens to send me a message condemning me for not pointing out that a great many defaulters got themselves into this situation and therefore, being responsible for their own actions they should have to deal with the consequences. There are, obviously, some people that fall into that category. While protecting the innocent victims of global economic catastrophe some of the indolent and crafty will, by definition crawl through the cracks like such people generally do. But right now there is a greater good that must be served, even if it means some of these social cockroaches surviving to be found out another day.
However, and we must not lose sight of this, the population did not suddenly sprout a tail and become indolent and devilish. The lenders encouraged, in fact enticed borrowers to take up their totally irresponsible offers of funds that could never be repaid if any of the economic circumstances prevalent at the time changed. And they changed big time! People are beginning to lose their jobs, loans are no longer available, and property values have plummeted. As a result you have the iniquitous situation in which, in many instances, as low cost, fixed rate interest mortgages fall due they can only be replaced by variable rated principal and interest mortgages. This can mean an increase in cost of double at exactly the same moment when the property in question goes into negative equity! That is an insupportable conundrum for any homeowner and the natural inclination will be for them to simply give their keys to the mortgagor and walk away.
If you take a moral stance on irresponsible borrowing how about taking an equally moral position on irresponsible lending that created the situation. And, following this logical yellow brick road, how about blaming the government and FSA for failing to stop it, in fact encouraging this lunacy?
Again I repeat, we cannot let this property eviction campaign of rampant repossessions to happen or we will all suffer a terrible a whole series of long-term consequences.
It would be to our huge advantage to find ways to keep all these families in their homes over the next two to three years and stop these hugely damaging outcomes before they begin. It’s vital that we act now to prevent total property market disintegration fracturing the cohesion of our societies long term. If we take a longer, more enlightened view it will benefit everyone, not least all the families who will otherwise be out on our streets this winter.
Yesterday I checked out the local property market by popping my head into the door of a couple of estate agents (realtors) and they confirmed what we all know. There’s virtually nothing good to report, with sales now a pathetic percentage of last year’s size and prices tumbling.
More scary was the news one of them shared in which he told me that the lenders are repossessing the defaulting properties much faster than previously. He felt these repossessions are, in some instances, a first rather than last resort. In his small local agency he had been given 4 repossessed homes to sell this week, whereas he used to get, perhaps 1 per month last year. This is an alarming rise, made more so by the fact that the agent told me he and the lenders know he has no realistic chance of selling these properties in the present market conditions. Ask yourself the question, so if you repossess the property but can’t sell it, who is benefiting?
This morning I had the opportunity to listen to BBC radio 4 at breakfast. The discussion revolved around the various views as to whether there was a purpose for blogging, now, or in the future.
The usual arguments were trotted out which I shall précis by stating the obvious, we write because we have to, its in our bloodstreams, and the upshot should be that in doing so we communicate to others our personal views.
Sometimes, like yesterday, a writer, using this medium just wants to share a mood, in that case, joy and happiness to lighten the general gloom, and sometimes, like today, to warn of some impending peril, and to make sure my audience is aware of the danger.
One of the major catastrophes of modern times is coming to pass, and its being misunderstood and relatively relegated in importance on our news among the welter of horrible economic news. I am addressing the issue of home repossessions. Let’s examine that sentence again, we are talking about taking away people’s homes, not a few, not hundreds, not thousands, but if this slide continues it could be hundreds of thousands.
We cannot let this tragedy happen, we must not allow it!
The main reason I make this statement so emphatically is not because I care any more than any of you about the individuals and families affected, because no one wants to see people suffer arbitrarily. No, although this is terrible, more awful will be the ramifications to our societies and countries if we allow a new underclass to develop. This will be the inevitable result if hundreds of thousands of people are to be effectively made homeless.
The same people will, to a very large extent feel disaffected and disenfranchised, cheated and abused. They will be angry, and a great many of their number will suffer social and educational disadvantage from this starting point. An increased and growing number of the dispossessed to support, nurture and assist would thus burden the remainder of the population.
Ironically the property market collapse has come at the precise moment when we require more housing to meet the growing population needs. Whereas we should be finding ways to encourage house building start ups we find ourselves with some of the lowest ever recorded numbers.
The government has again made the right noises about keeping people in their homes as much as possible and has issued a directive to the courts to make sure they point the mortgage companies towards this end. In practical terms this means that they are now going to be compelled to write a couple of letters to the people in arrears and make a phone call or two. It doesn’t mean directing the courts to put a stop to all repossessions for a hiatus period, of let’s say 6 months. That is what this situation demands.
Many of my readers will be reaching for their electronic pens to send me a message condemning me for not pointing out that a great many defaulters got themselves into this situation and therefore, being responsible for their own actions they should have to deal with the consequences. There are, obviously, some people that fall into that category. While protecting the innocent victims of global economic catastrophe some of the indolent and crafty will, by definition crawl through the cracks like such people generally do. But right now there is a greater good that must be served, even if it means some of these social cockroaches surviving to be found out another day.
However, and we must not lose sight of this, the population did not suddenly sprout a tail and become indolent and devilish. The lenders encouraged, in fact enticed borrowers to take up their totally irresponsible offers of funds that could never be repaid if any of the economic circumstances prevalent at the time changed. And they changed big time! People are beginning to lose their jobs, loans are no longer available, and property values have plummeted. As a result you have the iniquitous situation in which, in many instances, as low cost, fixed rate interest mortgages fall due they can only be replaced by variable rated principal and interest mortgages. This can mean an increase in cost of double at exactly the same moment when the property in question goes into negative equity! That is an insupportable conundrum for any homeowner and the natural inclination will be for them to simply give their keys to the mortgagor and walk away.
If you take a moral stance on irresponsible borrowing how about taking an equally moral position on irresponsible lending that created the situation. And, following this logical yellow brick road, how about blaming the government and FSA for failing to stop it, in fact encouraging this lunacy?
Again I repeat, we cannot let this property eviction campaign of rampant repossessions to happen or we will all suffer a terrible a whole series of long-term consequences.
It would be to our huge advantage to find ways to keep all these families in their homes over the next two to three years and stop these hugely damaging outcomes before they begin. It’s vital that we act now to prevent total property market disintegration fracturing the cohesion of our societies long term. If we take a longer, more enlightened view it will benefit everyone, not least all the families who will otherwise be out on our streets this winter.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
JustJoking
In this world, where property prices are slumping, jobless rates increasing and banks being bailed out it sometimes takes a joke to remind us that the world is basically funny and its people special. I’m very fortunate that a great many people send me jokes regularly, for which many thanks. I decided today, instead of our discussing our common trials and tribulations to share a joke I was recently sent.
One day the Israelis and Arabs finally realized that if they continued fighting, they would someday end up destroying the world. So they sat down and decided that the fairest and least destructive way to settle the whole dispute was with a dogfight.
The negotiators agreed that each country could take five years to develop the best fighting dog they could. The dog that won the fight would earn its country the right to rule the disputed areas. The losing side would have to lay down its arms.
The Arabs found the biggest, meanest Dobermans and Rottweilers in the world. They bred them together and then crossed their offspring with the meanest Siberian wolves. They selected only the biggest, strongest puppy from each litter, killed all the other puppies and fed them the best food. They used steroids and trainers in their vital quest for the perfect killing machine.
After the five years were up, they had a dog that needed iron prison bars on its cage. Only their trainers, using extreme caution, could handle this ferocious beast.
When the day of the big fight arrived, the Israelis showed up with a strange animal. It was a nine-foot-long Dachshund.
Everyone felt sorry for the Israelis. No one else thought this weird animal stood a chance against the growling voracious beast chained up in the Arab camp.
The bookies predicted the Arab dog would win in less than a minute. The cages were opened. The Dachshund waddled slowly, and seemingly unconcerned toward the center of the ring.
The Arab dog leapt from his cage and charged the giant wiener-dog. As he got to within an inch of the Israeli dog, the Dachshund opened its jaws and swallowed the Arab beast in one bite. There was nothing left but a small bit of fur from the killer dog's tail.
The Arabs approached the Israelis, shaking their heads in disbelief. 'We do not understand,' said their leader. 'Our top scientists and breeders worked for five years with the meanest, biggest Dobermans and Rottweilers. They developed a killing machine but your dog ate him in one bite, what happened?'
'Really?' the Israeli General replied. 'For five years, we've had a team of Jewish plastic surgeons in Beverly Hills working to make an alligator look like a Dachshund.'
One day the Israelis and Arabs finally realized that if they continued fighting, they would someday end up destroying the world. So they sat down and decided that the fairest and least destructive way to settle the whole dispute was with a dogfight.
The negotiators agreed that each country could take five years to develop the best fighting dog they could. The dog that won the fight would earn its country the right to rule the disputed areas. The losing side would have to lay down its arms.
The Arabs found the biggest, meanest Dobermans and Rottweilers in the world. They bred them together and then crossed their offspring with the meanest Siberian wolves. They selected only the biggest, strongest puppy from each litter, killed all the other puppies and fed them the best food. They used steroids and trainers in their vital quest for the perfect killing machine.
After the five years were up, they had a dog that needed iron prison bars on its cage. Only their trainers, using extreme caution, could handle this ferocious beast.
When the day of the big fight arrived, the Israelis showed up with a strange animal. It was a nine-foot-long Dachshund.
Everyone felt sorry for the Israelis. No one else thought this weird animal stood a chance against the growling voracious beast chained up in the Arab camp.
The bookies predicted the Arab dog would win in less than a minute. The cages were opened. The Dachshund waddled slowly, and seemingly unconcerned toward the center of the ring.
The Arab dog leapt from his cage and charged the giant wiener-dog. As he got to within an inch of the Israeli dog, the Dachshund opened its jaws and swallowed the Arab beast in one bite. There was nothing left but a small bit of fur from the killer dog's tail.
The Arabs approached the Israelis, shaking their heads in disbelief. 'We do not understand,' said their leader. 'Our top scientists and breeders worked for five years with the meanest, biggest Dobermans and Rottweilers. They developed a killing machine but your dog ate him in one bite, what happened?'
'Really?' the Israeli General replied. 'For five years, we've had a team of Jewish plastic surgeons in Beverly Hills working to make an alligator look like a Dachshund.'
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Qualifications
Occasionally I am asked why I have failed to list my qualifications on my resume. The reason for this omission is simple and obvious; I don’t posses any qualifications and I wouldn’t falsify my very lengthy CV.
Trust me I’m a highly intelligent person, offered entry to MENSA after taking a preliminary test, truly the reason for this lack is not because I didn’t have the ability to gain the bells and whistles of academic excellence. At every opportunity I was too busy, too young, or too old or not simply too tired to be bothered enough. This lack is entirely my own fault and responsibility but I did have good reasons at every stage.
As I’ve written previously in various other articles and blogs I dropped out of school early to rush headlong, and somewhat blindly after a career in film production. I was exactly 16, which was the first legal age you could leave school in those far off days. My father, who apparently had turned down an opportunity to go to Cambridge when he was very young prior to the war to pursue his original career as a structural engineer was more than keen that I went to university. To that end he insisted I qualified to enter higher education and then could take a year out to find out the realities of employment.
Following the line of least resistance and being a lazy sod, I discovered that you could then take the necessary tests to get into the California education system over the road from where we lived in the American Embassy. I remember my joy at discovering how comparatively easy it was and I was offered the chance at an American university, which I deferred. Approximately forty years later I think I’d better tell them I wouldn’t be taking it up!
I went on to start my career at the run. Working on wonderful films and for the Ministry of Defense via a small Soho media production company called Searchlight and even more fun, the Avengers TV series. From this run of work I found a friend called Mike Lytton, and together we started making small documentaries. Before we knew it the films were getting bigger and we even got cinema distribution internationally.
Now I was about 21 and had a burgeoning career. I thought it was high time I had an education to go with it. I applied to be amongst the first intake for the National Film School (it didn’t add the word television to its name for a few years) but was informed that I needed to have qualifications prior to obtaining entry. However I was offered the opportunity to teach one of the classes. I remember them telling me that the pay for the job was less than I then paid to my own assistant!
Years of a productive, creatively satisfying and remunerative career followed. I was in my middle forties before I returned to academia.
I found myself working at the Bournemouth Film School, first as an Associate Lecturer, then onwards in many roles including lecturer, Acting Course Director, Course Director, then moving to the Northern Film School at Leeds Metropolitan University where I was Course Leader and Head of Production for the MA Film Production and led the putting together and validation of their Foundation Degrees in Media Production. I sat on the validation and academic committees and then moved on to the University of East London where I was Director of the Media Production Centre. In addition to this I had two other academic and research Directorships and then became an External Examiner for the Open University Validation Service at various higher education establishments in this and other countries.
During this period I delivered academic papers at conferences and became National Secretary of the Association of Media Practice Educators and organized and hosted their conference at my university. I felt that the time had come for me to finally obtain some higher education of my own; after all I had been giving out degrees for about a decade!
I saw a Masters degree in scriptwriting at Salford advertised and applied. I was invited to come and sit their entrance test, which I did. I was taken into the room with the lecturing staff that told me that although I had passed the test with flying colors I should be teaching the course. They intimated that it would be silly, and faintly embarrassing for them if I took up the place on offer, so I didn’t. It was then proposed that I pursued a practice-based doctorate to accompany the film I was then making, called Full Circle. This would have involved me in running three university Directorates, making a film, serving as National Secretary of AMPE and now writing a few hundred thousand words for the doctoral thesis. I declined this opportunity.
So here we are, making films, writing books and screenplays, doing a bit of business and serving the Open University Validation Service, but still with not a qualification to my name but giving them to others. Life is awfully strange sometimes.
Trust me I’m a highly intelligent person, offered entry to MENSA after taking a preliminary test, truly the reason for this lack is not because I didn’t have the ability to gain the bells and whistles of academic excellence. At every opportunity I was too busy, too young, or too old or not simply too tired to be bothered enough. This lack is entirely my own fault and responsibility but I did have good reasons at every stage.
As I’ve written previously in various other articles and blogs I dropped out of school early to rush headlong, and somewhat blindly after a career in film production. I was exactly 16, which was the first legal age you could leave school in those far off days. My father, who apparently had turned down an opportunity to go to Cambridge when he was very young prior to the war to pursue his original career as a structural engineer was more than keen that I went to university. To that end he insisted I qualified to enter higher education and then could take a year out to find out the realities of employment.
Following the line of least resistance and being a lazy sod, I discovered that you could then take the necessary tests to get into the California education system over the road from where we lived in the American Embassy. I remember my joy at discovering how comparatively easy it was and I was offered the chance at an American university, which I deferred. Approximately forty years later I think I’d better tell them I wouldn’t be taking it up!
I went on to start my career at the run. Working on wonderful films and for the Ministry of Defense via a small Soho media production company called Searchlight and even more fun, the Avengers TV series. From this run of work I found a friend called Mike Lytton, and together we started making small documentaries. Before we knew it the films were getting bigger and we even got cinema distribution internationally.
Now I was about 21 and had a burgeoning career. I thought it was high time I had an education to go with it. I applied to be amongst the first intake for the National Film School (it didn’t add the word television to its name for a few years) but was informed that I needed to have qualifications prior to obtaining entry. However I was offered the opportunity to teach one of the classes. I remember them telling me that the pay for the job was less than I then paid to my own assistant!
Years of a productive, creatively satisfying and remunerative career followed. I was in my middle forties before I returned to academia.
I found myself working at the Bournemouth Film School, first as an Associate Lecturer, then onwards in many roles including lecturer, Acting Course Director, Course Director, then moving to the Northern Film School at Leeds Metropolitan University where I was Course Leader and Head of Production for the MA Film Production and led the putting together and validation of their Foundation Degrees in Media Production. I sat on the validation and academic committees and then moved on to the University of East London where I was Director of the Media Production Centre. In addition to this I had two other academic and research Directorships and then became an External Examiner for the Open University Validation Service at various higher education establishments in this and other countries.
During this period I delivered academic papers at conferences and became National Secretary of the Association of Media Practice Educators and organized and hosted their conference at my university. I felt that the time had come for me to finally obtain some higher education of my own; after all I had been giving out degrees for about a decade!
I saw a Masters degree in scriptwriting at Salford advertised and applied. I was invited to come and sit their entrance test, which I did. I was taken into the room with the lecturing staff that told me that although I had passed the test with flying colors I should be teaching the course. They intimated that it would be silly, and faintly embarrassing for them if I took up the place on offer, so I didn’t. It was then proposed that I pursued a practice-based doctorate to accompany the film I was then making, called Full Circle. This would have involved me in running three university Directorates, making a film, serving as National Secretary of AMPE and now writing a few hundred thousand words for the doctoral thesis. I declined this opportunity.
So here we are, making films, writing books and screenplays, doing a bit of business and serving the Open University Validation Service, but still with not a qualification to my name but giving them to others. Life is awfully strange sometimes.
Monday, October 20, 2008
SomeAdviceForThoseStartingOutInTheBiz
About two or three times a month I get a call from someone telling me that they have a younger relative, or the son or daughter of a friend who is looking to break into one part or other of show business.
Firstly let me make it very clear that there simply isn’t a one size fits all answer to the question of how to best get ahead in show business. Generally I am a fan of getting an education where and when you can, after all, a bit of knowledge can’t hurt can it? Well, in show business it actually could. There are leaps of faith in the creative arts that are best taken in sublime ignorance. I started that way, without any film education other than that I picked up on the run. I made my first few films in blissful ignorance, armed only with naïve self-belief, ambition and drive. Hopefully some talent was in that mix, but I dare say that came a long way behind dogged determination and optimism based on mostly wishful thinking.
It wasn’t until I was 21, some five years into my filmmaking career that I thought it would be a good idea to go back to formal education. I applied for the then fairly new National Film School, and was rejected. The reason given being that it was then just for post graduates and I needed to get a degree prior to applying again. However, based on my resume at that time, I was offered some teaching at an Associate Professor level. I could have taught the class I couldn’t get into!
I never took up anything other than an occasional Guest Lecturer role anywhere until many years later when I became an academic myself. But that’s another story.
I don’t want to appear to be too harsh, or negative, because I was once one of those kids looking to get ahead and I do realize that it can all seem very confusing and worrying when you’re starting out. The story of most of the aspiring talents reminds me of my bright friends when we were in our first schools who were then were sent to very good schools where everyone was as bright, or even brighter than they were. This was a shocking surprise for many of them, some of whom never really recovered their initial confidence, convinced of their own fallibility and lack of any consequence.
I also remember how frighteningly clever and prescient some of our film and media students were at the Bournemouth Film School. When we were running that course there were huge numbers of candidates for every place and half of them on the course already had an M level degree before they got to enter our program. It’s very intimidating and a great deal of it is unnecessary.
A great many of the people wanting to be in the creative industries simply are not suited to them. The prime reason is fairly obvious but needs stating here, it is because the majority of jobs within the industry are itinerant and therefore there is hardly any security, either economic or social. If, by your nature, you seek security and a warm, nurturing environment, then these are not the industries for you.
Naturally, every person proposing someone truly believes their relative or friend is the possessor of wonderful gifts as a talented ingénue, ready to be the best creative talent in the country. Usually they are described as being a bit shy, or not pushy enough but generally they are only lacking their first opportunity. Quite often when I speak to the prospective student or employee they are either not so convinced on the route they are pursuing or have any wish to listen to me, or anyone or anything else that contradicts their beliefs and aspirations. I’ve lost count of the number of times I have spoken, as a favor, to these young people, and realized, after two minutes, that they’re simply not willing to listen.
Their families are most often looking for an opportunity in the form of a job, or a pointer in the right direction. Sometimes they seek advice on where to go to university to best further their chances in their future search for a career in entertainment.
I guess I get more than my fair share of these enquiries because I am in the business, and have extensive knowledge of, and still occasionally work in higher education. So this is my general answer to all those people who ask me, and others these same questions, now and for the future.
The first question is one you should ask yourself. Do you really want to be in a business that is hugely demanding, and will give you criticism, sometimes very tough employment opportunities, amazingly long hours, intense competition from large numbers of very talented people and more often than not, bad, poorly paid start up jobs?
That’s what you have to think about first. Not the dreams of amazing money, easy chances with the opposite sex, unlimited fun and the chance to prove how brilliant you are! If you’re very lucky, in fact, unbelievably lucky, you might get a reasonable career in the creative industries. Most people in it end up doing jobs that were not their original choices. There simply are not enough roles for you all to be stars, and not nearly enough jobs as director or producer to boss other people around.
Most of the newcomers will do well to become one of the many thousands of Prop people, carpenters, plasterers, painters, hairdressers, make up, CGI artists, stunt artists, extras, bit part players, camera assistants, sound recording team, editors and hundreds of other back up, but vital roles that there are always well paid jobs for in the industry.
Whatever a newcomer has to do, following an educational or apprenticeship route is fine, if it suits them. Sarah, one of my lovely daughters undertook a film degree at Surrey University’s Farnham campus. She obtained a very well deserved, good degree and her graduation film was, by common consent, one of the best produced at the college. It won awards and made money, both of which are rarities. The irony is that after achieving all of this, and having a father, grandfather and husband in the business, she quit it, loathing the industry with a healthy contempt.
If you’re looking for help please feel free to contact me on tony@bcreativelimited.com and I’ll try to point you in the right direction at no initial charge, that’s for free for those of you who are cynical.
First published on http://www.tonyklinger.co.uk/
Firstly let me make it very clear that there simply isn’t a one size fits all answer to the question of how to best get ahead in show business. Generally I am a fan of getting an education where and when you can, after all, a bit of knowledge can’t hurt can it? Well, in show business it actually could. There are leaps of faith in the creative arts that are best taken in sublime ignorance. I started that way, without any film education other than that I picked up on the run. I made my first few films in blissful ignorance, armed only with naïve self-belief, ambition and drive. Hopefully some talent was in that mix, but I dare say that came a long way behind dogged determination and optimism based on mostly wishful thinking.
It wasn’t until I was 21, some five years into my filmmaking career that I thought it would be a good idea to go back to formal education. I applied for the then fairly new National Film School, and was rejected. The reason given being that it was then just for post graduates and I needed to get a degree prior to applying again. However, based on my resume at that time, I was offered some teaching at an Associate Professor level. I could have taught the class I couldn’t get into!
I never took up anything other than an occasional Guest Lecturer role anywhere until many years later when I became an academic myself. But that’s another story.
I don’t want to appear to be too harsh, or negative, because I was once one of those kids looking to get ahead and I do realize that it can all seem very confusing and worrying when you’re starting out. The story of most of the aspiring talents reminds me of my bright friends when we were in our first schools who were then were sent to very good schools where everyone was as bright, or even brighter than they were. This was a shocking surprise for many of them, some of whom never really recovered their initial confidence, convinced of their own fallibility and lack of any consequence.
I also remember how frighteningly clever and prescient some of our film and media students were at the Bournemouth Film School. When we were running that course there were huge numbers of candidates for every place and half of them on the course already had an M level degree before they got to enter our program. It’s very intimidating and a great deal of it is unnecessary.
A great many of the people wanting to be in the creative industries simply are not suited to them. The prime reason is fairly obvious but needs stating here, it is because the majority of jobs within the industry are itinerant and therefore there is hardly any security, either economic or social. If, by your nature, you seek security and a warm, nurturing environment, then these are not the industries for you.
Naturally, every person proposing someone truly believes their relative or friend is the possessor of wonderful gifts as a talented ingénue, ready to be the best creative talent in the country. Usually they are described as being a bit shy, or not pushy enough but generally they are only lacking their first opportunity. Quite often when I speak to the prospective student or employee they are either not so convinced on the route they are pursuing or have any wish to listen to me, or anyone or anything else that contradicts their beliefs and aspirations. I’ve lost count of the number of times I have spoken, as a favor, to these young people, and realized, after two minutes, that they’re simply not willing to listen.
Their families are most often looking for an opportunity in the form of a job, or a pointer in the right direction. Sometimes they seek advice on where to go to university to best further their chances in their future search for a career in entertainment.
I guess I get more than my fair share of these enquiries because I am in the business, and have extensive knowledge of, and still occasionally work in higher education. So this is my general answer to all those people who ask me, and others these same questions, now and for the future.
The first question is one you should ask yourself. Do you really want to be in a business that is hugely demanding, and will give you criticism, sometimes very tough employment opportunities, amazingly long hours, intense competition from large numbers of very talented people and more often than not, bad, poorly paid start up jobs?
That’s what you have to think about first. Not the dreams of amazing money, easy chances with the opposite sex, unlimited fun and the chance to prove how brilliant you are! If you’re very lucky, in fact, unbelievably lucky, you might get a reasonable career in the creative industries. Most people in it end up doing jobs that were not their original choices. There simply are not enough roles for you all to be stars, and not nearly enough jobs as director or producer to boss other people around.
Most of the newcomers will do well to become one of the many thousands of Prop people, carpenters, plasterers, painters, hairdressers, make up, CGI artists, stunt artists, extras, bit part players, camera assistants, sound recording team, editors and hundreds of other back up, but vital roles that there are always well paid jobs for in the industry.
Whatever a newcomer has to do, following an educational or apprenticeship route is fine, if it suits them. Sarah, one of my lovely daughters undertook a film degree at Surrey University’s Farnham campus. She obtained a very well deserved, good degree and her graduation film was, by common consent, one of the best produced at the college. It won awards and made money, both of which are rarities. The irony is that after achieving all of this, and having a father, grandfather and husband in the business, she quit it, loathing the industry with a healthy contempt.
If you’re looking for help please feel free to contact me on tony@bcreativelimited.com and I’ll try to point you in the right direction at no initial charge, that’s for free for those of you who are cynical.
First published on http://www.tonyklinger.co.uk/
Sunday, October 19, 2008
SundayBloodySunday
Do you remember when Sunday was a quiet day, when nothing happened, shops and entertainment were firmly closed, and there was a pause to breathe and think between last week and next?
It isn't like that in the Anglo American world any more, and it is all the less for the change. I happen to be Jewish so my rest day, my Sabbath, is a Saturday, but I grew up in the UK and therefore, not being overly religious myself, I was happy with sleepy Sundays.
Now you go to the shops on Sunday and they are packed with people who look fraught and tense, not relaxed or with their families, not taking the time to smell the air. Their lives are all the more limited because of this lifestyle change.
As I suggest above the reason for the old style Sunday in the UK and the States is religious in origin, and traditional thereafter. There was a group in the UK called The Lord's Day Observance Society who made sure the rules were kept. As a teenager I remember being hugely frustrated that there was absolutely nothing to do on a Sunday because of the efficiency of the Society's resistance.
I was one of those angry teens who battered at their reactionary gates to remove their silly rules. Our argument went roughly like this, "It does no harm if you just allow a local grocery shop or cinema or supermarket to be open for a couple of hours."
History tells us that once you remove the finger from the dyke the waters will flood in and sweep away everything in its path. Taking our metaphors a little further, once you open Pandora's Box you cannot put away the little devils you have unleashed.
We were wrong, I was wrong, our argument was wrong. I know we can't do anything about this now, and I'm sorry that we will be leaving our children such an inheritance. But next time someone argues for a small change to your life think about it very carefully before you agree.
It isn't like that in the Anglo American world any more, and it is all the less for the change. I happen to be Jewish so my rest day, my Sabbath, is a Saturday, but I grew up in the UK and therefore, not being overly religious myself, I was happy with sleepy Sundays.
Now you go to the shops on Sunday and they are packed with people who look fraught and tense, not relaxed or with their families, not taking the time to smell the air. Their lives are all the more limited because of this lifestyle change.
As I suggest above the reason for the old style Sunday in the UK and the States is religious in origin, and traditional thereafter. There was a group in the UK called The Lord's Day Observance Society who made sure the rules were kept. As a teenager I remember being hugely frustrated that there was absolutely nothing to do on a Sunday because of the efficiency of the Society's resistance.
I was one of those angry teens who battered at their reactionary gates to remove their silly rules. Our argument went roughly like this, "It does no harm if you just allow a local grocery shop or cinema or supermarket to be open for a couple of hours."
History tells us that once you remove the finger from the dyke the waters will flood in and sweep away everything in its path. Taking our metaphors a little further, once you open Pandora's Box you cannot put away the little devils you have unleashed.
We were wrong, I was wrong, our argument was wrong. I know we can't do anything about this now, and I'm sorry that we will be leaving our children such an inheritance. But next time someone argues for a small change to your life think about it very carefully before you agree.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
TheFuturePart2
In my most recent blog on this site I made myself a hostage of fortune when I predicted the future of our world. I have, thank you, received a great many communications about this. Some of you believe I am being unduly pessimistic, whereas others take the opposite view. Usually this signals to me that I have got it about right. But today I wanted to add a little more detail to this picture.
I wrote that the recent happenings in the economy meant that the old forms of capitalism have met their end. On the brighter side so have all forms of socialism. I say this because with all its manifest faults it is clear that capitalism can and usually does work when it is in balance and well managed, whereas socialism is a totally busted flush which has never worked for the benefit of the citizens of any country that has had the system foisted upon it.
The immediate future of the leading economies will be more effectively policed and the regulations more stringently applied, but it will still be a market driven economic model that prevails.
The reduction in available funds will, most likely, mean that once the immediate emergency has been addressed the percentage of the Gross Domestic Product being spent on government projects will be reduced. This is a bonus since this percentage; especially in countries like the UK have become bloated and insupportable.
When Obama becomes President, which he shall unless he manages to accomplish political suicide between now and the election, there is a distinct possibility that he might try his version of a New Deal to revitalize America if the recession bites too deep. I don’t know if he can afford not to do so in such a scenario.
Due to losses incurred by all kinds of local and regional funds there will be a concomitant reduction in the amount of cash available for anything the authorities consider non-essential projects. This will affect the quality and feel of life but is probably unavoidable over the next 3 to 5 years.
Businesses that thrive during economic prosperity will begin to suffer in the next few months, particularly fee charging specialists such as lawyers, accountants, consultants and certain purveyors of banking, financial advice and insurance.
Most seriously hit in many of the economies are mortgage brokers and estate agents (realtors) who have seen the volume of sales and their values drop through the floor but I suspect that there will be big winners in those that rent property as those prices are starting to climb and supply is finite whereas demand is bound to increase fast.
Despite all this, if our governments continue to respond with the same sense of urgency they have developed over the last month when dealing with the imploding economy then we need have no fear for social cohesion.
Now what was the good news I was going to forecast? Oh yes, Manchester United will win another trophy or two, the sun is going to come out tomorrow and my name is not Little Orphan Annie.
I wrote that the recent happenings in the economy meant that the old forms of capitalism have met their end. On the brighter side so have all forms of socialism. I say this because with all its manifest faults it is clear that capitalism can and usually does work when it is in balance and well managed, whereas socialism is a totally busted flush which has never worked for the benefit of the citizens of any country that has had the system foisted upon it.
The immediate future of the leading economies will be more effectively policed and the regulations more stringently applied, but it will still be a market driven economic model that prevails.
The reduction in available funds will, most likely, mean that once the immediate emergency has been addressed the percentage of the Gross Domestic Product being spent on government projects will be reduced. This is a bonus since this percentage; especially in countries like the UK have become bloated and insupportable.
When Obama becomes President, which he shall unless he manages to accomplish political suicide between now and the election, there is a distinct possibility that he might try his version of a New Deal to revitalize America if the recession bites too deep. I don’t know if he can afford not to do so in such a scenario.
Due to losses incurred by all kinds of local and regional funds there will be a concomitant reduction in the amount of cash available for anything the authorities consider non-essential projects. This will affect the quality and feel of life but is probably unavoidable over the next 3 to 5 years.
Businesses that thrive during economic prosperity will begin to suffer in the next few months, particularly fee charging specialists such as lawyers, accountants, consultants and certain purveyors of banking, financial advice and insurance.
Most seriously hit in many of the economies are mortgage brokers and estate agents (realtors) who have seen the volume of sales and their values drop through the floor but I suspect that there will be big winners in those that rent property as those prices are starting to climb and supply is finite whereas demand is bound to increase fast.
Despite all this, if our governments continue to respond with the same sense of urgency they have developed over the last month when dealing with the imploding economy then we need have no fear for social cohesion.
Now what was the good news I was going to forecast? Oh yes, Manchester United will win another trophy or two, the sun is going to come out tomorrow and my name is not Little Orphan Annie.
Friday, October 17, 2008
PredictingtheFuture
There are certain things a shrewd columnist should never do; chief amongst them is any attempt to predict the future. This article proves that I am not very shrewd as I am going to attempt some forecasting.
We start with a relative no brainer; Obama is going to be the next President of the USA. I’m not suggesting who my preference is here, as its not relevant, me not being American and therefore unable to cast a vote.
Once Obama is elected and in office I truly hope that the security services does everything to enhance his personal safety as he is sure to be a target for every nut case on the planet, particularly American lunatics who view him as if he were the anti-Christ.
The next people likely to test Obama once he’s in the White House will be the Russians, as its almost impossible to see President Putin not seeing how far he can push the new man. The likely spot for the test will be the Crimean Peninsula of the Ukraine, in which the majority of the population is ethnically Russian but the government is Ukrainian. The situation is made more volatile by the Ukrainian government wishing to move west politically whilst the Russian fleet has its base in Sebastopol within the Ukraine. This is the Georgian scenario writ large, and is a boil waiting to burst.
Also itching to test the new President will be the Iranian government who, like a certain Sadaam Hussein, can’t wait to goad the new man with turning their nuclear enrichment program into building nuclear weapons they can rattle at the Israelis.
This in turn will signal the new leader of Israel, who at that time will most likely be Ms. Livni into taking military action unilaterally against Iran. You might think I am over egging this pudding by signaling so many dangers but Obama scares me not because he is weak, but because extremist leaders who run other countries will perceive him to be weak.
All of this is threatening enough but doesn’t take account of potentially the biggest danger of all, the still unfolding economic crisis.
We are possibly reaching the end of the beginning of the collapse of the old forms of capitalism and don’t know yet what is going to replace it. For sure it will not take the same form exactly as its predecessor. Too much trust has unraveled for too many people for that to be possible.
Eventually the banks will be forced to unfreeze sufficiently that money will start to flow more easily inter bank and then onwards to all of us humble peasants who can qualify because of our exceptional credit worthiness. It is likely that meeting the criteria of the credit checkers will be well nigh impossible.
Property prices in the Anglo American markets will continue to fall, probably, on average bottoming out at about 30% to 40% below their peak before they start to rise again. Rental values, particularly in the UK will move in the opposite direction.
Jobless rates will rocket in many parts of the world, but will then begin to level out since the recession will not hurt the entire economy equally. There might be problems in some countries that have experienced large-scale economic immigration. As the economy shrinks there will be those who lose their jobs who will then blame the immigrant population for their ill fortune.
Raw materials and fuel such as oil will continue to drop in price simply because supply, built up to meet over demand of the recent past, far exceeds presently diminishing needs.
Manufacturing powerhouses like China will suffer huge problems as over capacity is slashed to meet the new realities. In certain sectors of their economy, such as toy production, they have already had about half of the manufacturers go out of business in the last year. This will spread across their offering.
Banking will lead the recovery of the markets that we can guess will start to meaningfully revive in about 18 to 24 months. The “real” economy might well take that long again to approach the prosperity we previously enjoyed. But, on the plus side, there will be an economic revival around the time Obama will be standing for a second term. We will survive the threats, posturing and brinkmanship but it is going to be tough and tricky for the next year or two. Now, if you keep this blog you will probably be able to wave it in my face in the near future to demonstrate how very foolish I was to make predictions!
We start with a relative no brainer; Obama is going to be the next President of the USA. I’m not suggesting who my preference is here, as its not relevant, me not being American and therefore unable to cast a vote.
Once Obama is elected and in office I truly hope that the security services does everything to enhance his personal safety as he is sure to be a target for every nut case on the planet, particularly American lunatics who view him as if he were the anti-Christ.
The next people likely to test Obama once he’s in the White House will be the Russians, as its almost impossible to see President Putin not seeing how far he can push the new man. The likely spot for the test will be the Crimean Peninsula of the Ukraine, in which the majority of the population is ethnically Russian but the government is Ukrainian. The situation is made more volatile by the Ukrainian government wishing to move west politically whilst the Russian fleet has its base in Sebastopol within the Ukraine. This is the Georgian scenario writ large, and is a boil waiting to burst.
Also itching to test the new President will be the Iranian government who, like a certain Sadaam Hussein, can’t wait to goad the new man with turning their nuclear enrichment program into building nuclear weapons they can rattle at the Israelis.
This in turn will signal the new leader of Israel, who at that time will most likely be Ms. Livni into taking military action unilaterally against Iran. You might think I am over egging this pudding by signaling so many dangers but Obama scares me not because he is weak, but because extremist leaders who run other countries will perceive him to be weak.
All of this is threatening enough but doesn’t take account of potentially the biggest danger of all, the still unfolding economic crisis.
We are possibly reaching the end of the beginning of the collapse of the old forms of capitalism and don’t know yet what is going to replace it. For sure it will not take the same form exactly as its predecessor. Too much trust has unraveled for too many people for that to be possible.
Eventually the banks will be forced to unfreeze sufficiently that money will start to flow more easily inter bank and then onwards to all of us humble peasants who can qualify because of our exceptional credit worthiness. It is likely that meeting the criteria of the credit checkers will be well nigh impossible.
Property prices in the Anglo American markets will continue to fall, probably, on average bottoming out at about 30% to 40% below their peak before they start to rise again. Rental values, particularly in the UK will move in the opposite direction.
Jobless rates will rocket in many parts of the world, but will then begin to level out since the recession will not hurt the entire economy equally. There might be problems in some countries that have experienced large-scale economic immigration. As the economy shrinks there will be those who lose their jobs who will then blame the immigrant population for their ill fortune.
Raw materials and fuel such as oil will continue to drop in price simply because supply, built up to meet over demand of the recent past, far exceeds presently diminishing needs.
Manufacturing powerhouses like China will suffer huge problems as over capacity is slashed to meet the new realities. In certain sectors of their economy, such as toy production, they have already had about half of the manufacturers go out of business in the last year. This will spread across their offering.
Banking will lead the recovery of the markets that we can guess will start to meaningfully revive in about 18 to 24 months. The “real” economy might well take that long again to approach the prosperity we previously enjoyed. But, on the plus side, there will be an economic revival around the time Obama will be standing for a second term. We will survive the threats, posturing and brinkmanship but it is going to be tough and tricky for the next year or two. Now, if you keep this blog you will probably be able to wave it in my face in the near future to demonstrate how very foolish I was to make predictions!
Thursday, October 16, 2008
ObamaCarter
The world needs the USA to be strong and true to the aspirations of its founding fathers. For this to happen the country must occasionally be lead by outstanding people of vision. This has not been the case for quite some time. Now there is a moment in history where a great leader in the USA could shape our entire world’s destiny. There are some who claim this mantle of potential greatness for Barack Obama. Unfortunately I see something very different and worrying when I look at this candidate for the presidency.
The last big US Presidential debate took place last night. Again, although I don’t admire the man or his chances too much I thought that McCain won the argument battle but probably lost the larger war.
More interesting in this brief overview was not what they said, but the way they chose to say it. The body language was vital and very obvious. Obama’s smile was almost patronizing and false, but although he clearly doesn’t rate his opponent highly he realizes McCain is a wounded beast, and is not yet dead in the water although he is clearly heading for that watery grave.
McCain clearly loathes Obama, and can barely tolerate sharing a stage with him. When he has to physically touch the man he almost takes a step back. I don’t think this is false body language; he loathes Obama with visceral hatred.
But we must ask if Obama’s very obvious attempts to wrap himself in the mantle of President John F. Kennedy is bearing fruit. Clearly it worked in Germany when he made his oration in the centre of Berlin. He was summoning the ghost of the late President when he visited that city and toured Europe.
The difference was that JFK was the President of the States when he made his visit and seminal speech, and not one of two Democratic candidates as Obama was at the time of his speech.
Kennedy had a vitally important message to deliver direct to the hearts of his Berlin audience and to the minds of the then Soviet occupiers of the other half of that country. Obama was simply nurturing an image in a more gullible, celebrity-obsessed age, in which image transcends accomplishment.
Yes, Europe particularly wants America to have a leader everyone can all admire and rally behind, and yes, Kennedy embodied that ideal for us just as Ronald Reagan embodied mom and apple pie for America itself during his tenure. Never forget that underneath the veneer of old world sophistication Europe and most of the rest of the world culturally aspires to ape America.
Yes, at first glance Obama is the type of leader Europe has seemingly been waiting for, especially if he could demonstrate the aspirational aspects of the vision and statesmanship of JFK.
However we see Obama morphing into another former President, one less lauded and admirable than Kennedy. Obama is Jimmy Carter reborn, and that is not good. You will recall that Carter was intellectually a very able man, far cleverer in an IQ sense than many of the Presidents with far better achievements on their presidential resume. Jimmy Carter was a disaster, indecisive, hectoring, and not viable. He screwed up in Iran; he failed with the economy and forced the wrong deals through in the Middle East. All of the same failed strategies he employed are being reborn with Obama and they didn’t work for the peanut farmer and they won’t work now or in the future.
Men like Carter always fail. America doesn’t need a bright Professor running the country as if it was a university department. What the world urgently need from the States right now is for its leader to lead, to be a tough guy with the courage to react, sometimes instinctively, to whatever problems the world generates. There are going to be plenty more problems available.
The last big US Presidential debate took place last night. Again, although I don’t admire the man or his chances too much I thought that McCain won the argument battle but probably lost the larger war.
More interesting in this brief overview was not what they said, but the way they chose to say it. The body language was vital and very obvious. Obama’s smile was almost patronizing and false, but although he clearly doesn’t rate his opponent highly he realizes McCain is a wounded beast, and is not yet dead in the water although he is clearly heading for that watery grave.
McCain clearly loathes Obama, and can barely tolerate sharing a stage with him. When he has to physically touch the man he almost takes a step back. I don’t think this is false body language; he loathes Obama with visceral hatred.
But we must ask if Obama’s very obvious attempts to wrap himself in the mantle of President John F. Kennedy is bearing fruit. Clearly it worked in Germany when he made his oration in the centre of Berlin. He was summoning the ghost of the late President when he visited that city and toured Europe.
The difference was that JFK was the President of the States when he made his visit and seminal speech, and not one of two Democratic candidates as Obama was at the time of his speech.
Kennedy had a vitally important message to deliver direct to the hearts of his Berlin audience and to the minds of the then Soviet occupiers of the other half of that country. Obama was simply nurturing an image in a more gullible, celebrity-obsessed age, in which image transcends accomplishment.
Yes, Europe particularly wants America to have a leader everyone can all admire and rally behind, and yes, Kennedy embodied that ideal for us just as Ronald Reagan embodied mom and apple pie for America itself during his tenure. Never forget that underneath the veneer of old world sophistication Europe and most of the rest of the world culturally aspires to ape America.
Yes, at first glance Obama is the type of leader Europe has seemingly been waiting for, especially if he could demonstrate the aspirational aspects of the vision and statesmanship of JFK.
However we see Obama morphing into another former President, one less lauded and admirable than Kennedy. Obama is Jimmy Carter reborn, and that is not good. You will recall that Carter was intellectually a very able man, far cleverer in an IQ sense than many of the Presidents with far better achievements on their presidential resume. Jimmy Carter was a disaster, indecisive, hectoring, and not viable. He screwed up in Iran; he failed with the economy and forced the wrong deals through in the Middle East. All of the same failed strategies he employed are being reborn with Obama and they didn’t work for the peanut farmer and they won’t work now or in the future.
Men like Carter always fail. America doesn’t need a bright Professor running the country as if it was a university department. What the world urgently need from the States right now is for its leader to lead, to be a tough guy with the courage to react, sometimes instinctively, to whatever problems the world generates. There are going to be plenty more problems available.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
HeadsShouldRoll
There is a wonderful expression, American I believe, called, Passing the Buck. It means when you blame someone else for your own mistakes. We now have the results of this behavior in the banks of the world. Led by the UK they are now being re-capitalized to a huge degree and, in many places, being effectively nationalized.
The biggest banks in the UK overstretched themselves to a massive degree over the last decade in which they went on a merger and acquisition rampage and leveraged themselves hugely to do so. The same is true around the globe.
It is now apparent that there were many, even within the British banks own management structures, who simply didn’t understand some of the details of how the more sophisticated banking deals were being done, organized or paid for. It seems self evident that the same is true in most, if not all of the banks around the world.
We should not be fooled into a quick look at the banks and naively think that by simply sacking a few senior managers and executive and indulging in some ritual blood-letting we will do enough to satisfy either the blood lust of the media on behalf of the nation or do what’s necessary to stop this type of lunacy happening again.
There is someone else who it is much more pertinent to look at in this regard and that is the Financial Services Authority. It is pertinent to see how the FSA describe themselves in their own web site;
“We are an independent body that regulates the financial services industry in the UK.
We have been given a wide range of rule making, investigatory and enforcement powers in order to meet our four statutory objectives. In meeting these, we are also obliged to have regard to the Principles of Good Regulation.
We summarize our Statutory Objectives and Principles of Good Regulation in three Strategic Aims:
* Promoting efficient, orderly and fair markets;
* Helping retail consumers achieve a fair deal; and
* Improving our business capability and effectiveness”
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) is an independent organization responsible for regulating financial services in the UK.
The FSA's aim is to promote efficient, orderly and fair financial markets and help retail financial service consumers get a fair deal.
The FSA was set up by government. The government is responsible for the overall scope of the FSA’s regulatory activities and for its powers.
The FSA regulates most financial services markets, exchanges and firms. It sets the standards that they must meet and can take action against firms if they fail to meet the required standards”.
The FSA Chief Executive has now joined the general accusations being made against the banks, the speculators and the bankers themselves. But Principle 4 of the FSA's own 13 Principles for market conduct states that firms are compelled to maintain adequate financial resources, including capital and liquidity.
This is the essence of the regulator's pay policy and the club it can swing. In the FSA's view, there are many firms that have followed pay policies which were inconsistent with sound risk management – or put another way, compromised Principle 4. So the FSA should be made to look closely at their defects in a mirror.
A great deal of financial pain and chaos would have been avoided if the FSA had done their job better and had they been tougher in enforcing their rules over the last few years. Ironically they force organizations to spend time and money out of all proportion to its usefulness on minor matters and seemed to totally miss the big targets to utterly alarming effect.
Now the question is whether this regulator with a blind spot about its own inadequacies will now actually wield its collection of shiny new weapons rather than continue to pose and clout the little guys and leave the big guys to do just what they want. Right now it looks like the boys in the bad suits from the FSA are bolting the door very carefully, well after the horse has bolted.
The draft guidelines for good remuneration practice is probably now going to serve as the guide, and there's more than a fair chance that it will. The guidelines make clear that pay will be based on profits rather than revenue; performance should be assessed on a moving average, in order that a significant part of a package is deferred; and that compensation schemes will be contractually enforced and not waived or ignored to suit the occasion.
And finally, when all things are considered it is fair and appropriate that we ask who is going to carry responsibility and resign from among the politicians and FSA chiefs because they are just as responsible for the financial debacle as the bankers who have already been forced to carry the can.
The biggest banks in the UK overstretched themselves to a massive degree over the last decade in which they went on a merger and acquisition rampage and leveraged themselves hugely to do so. The same is true around the globe.
It is now apparent that there were many, even within the British banks own management structures, who simply didn’t understand some of the details of how the more sophisticated banking deals were being done, organized or paid for. It seems self evident that the same is true in most, if not all of the banks around the world.
We should not be fooled into a quick look at the banks and naively think that by simply sacking a few senior managers and executive and indulging in some ritual blood-letting we will do enough to satisfy either the blood lust of the media on behalf of the nation or do what’s necessary to stop this type of lunacy happening again.
There is someone else who it is much more pertinent to look at in this regard and that is the Financial Services Authority. It is pertinent to see how the FSA describe themselves in their own web site;
“We are an independent body that regulates the financial services industry in the UK.
We have been given a wide range of rule making, investigatory and enforcement powers in order to meet our four statutory objectives. In meeting these, we are also obliged to have regard to the Principles of Good Regulation.
We summarize our Statutory Objectives and Principles of Good Regulation in three Strategic Aims:
* Promoting efficient, orderly and fair markets;
* Helping retail consumers achieve a fair deal; and
* Improving our business capability and effectiveness”
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) is an independent organization responsible for regulating financial services in the UK.
The FSA's aim is to promote efficient, orderly and fair financial markets and help retail financial service consumers get a fair deal.
The FSA was set up by government. The government is responsible for the overall scope of the FSA’s regulatory activities and for its powers.
The FSA regulates most financial services markets, exchanges and firms. It sets the standards that they must meet and can take action against firms if they fail to meet the required standards”.
The FSA Chief Executive has now joined the general accusations being made against the banks, the speculators and the bankers themselves. But Principle 4 of the FSA's own 13 Principles for market conduct states that firms are compelled to maintain adequate financial resources, including capital and liquidity.
This is the essence of the regulator's pay policy and the club it can swing. In the FSA's view, there are many firms that have followed pay policies which were inconsistent with sound risk management – or put another way, compromised Principle 4. So the FSA should be made to look closely at their defects in a mirror.
A great deal of financial pain and chaos would have been avoided if the FSA had done their job better and had they been tougher in enforcing their rules over the last few years. Ironically they force organizations to spend time and money out of all proportion to its usefulness on minor matters and seemed to totally miss the big targets to utterly alarming effect.
Now the question is whether this regulator with a blind spot about its own inadequacies will now actually wield its collection of shiny new weapons rather than continue to pose and clout the little guys and leave the big guys to do just what they want. Right now it looks like the boys in the bad suits from the FSA are bolting the door very carefully, well after the horse has bolted.
The draft guidelines for good remuneration practice is probably now going to serve as the guide, and there's more than a fair chance that it will. The guidelines make clear that pay will be based on profits rather than revenue; performance should be assessed on a moving average, in order that a significant part of a package is deferred; and that compensation schemes will be contractually enforced and not waived or ignored to suit the occasion.
And finally, when all things are considered it is fair and appropriate that we ask who is going to carry responsibility and resign from among the politicians and FSA chiefs because they are just as responsible for the financial debacle as the bankers who have already been forced to carry the can.
Monday, October 13, 2008
GettingFactsStraight
I received a comment from the son of one of the people I listed as having filed for bankruptcy. This stated simply that they were not aware of their father, now deceased, having ever been bankrupt. I apologized for my listing Harry Saltzman as it is apparently in error.
I remember someone saying the same, in error, about my late father, and I remember being upset about it as he had never been bankrupt, but had wound up one of his companies, after he had personally paid all the individuals owed money by that company from his personal account.
So this is a genuine apology as I was trying to point to the bravery of the people listed, not cast negatives in their direction.
More relevant still is the fact that I was broke in my fairly distant past, and it was very rough but I am living proof that you can come through it and do well in the future. I have a relative in the States who I think was bust two or three times and is now worth several hundred million dollars. I am very positive about people who get knocked down but get up and do it all better the next time around.
That's what I hope is going to happen for our countries who are also flat on their bums right now, but if I am any judge are going to crawl off of the canvas and get up better than ever. But I do mean to get my facts right, so I apologize any time I don't!
I remember someone saying the same, in error, about my late father, and I remember being upset about it as he had never been bankrupt, but had wound up one of his companies, after he had personally paid all the individuals owed money by that company from his personal account.
So this is a genuine apology as I was trying to point to the bravery of the people listed, not cast negatives in their direction.
More relevant still is the fact that I was broke in my fairly distant past, and it was very rough but I am living proof that you can come through it and do well in the future. I have a relative in the States who I think was bust two or three times and is now worth several hundred million dollars. I am very positive about people who get knocked down but get up and do it all better the next time around.
That's what I hope is going to happen for our countries who are also flat on their bums right now, but if I am any judge are going to crawl off of the canvas and get up better than ever. But I do mean to get my facts right, so I apologize any time I don't!
FamousBankrupts
I am seeking to do something a little different today because so many people are going to face financial problems due to global economic problems that will echo in a million homes.
They should not be alone in these circumstances. I therefore reprint an article I first published on another of my blogs in July.
All the high profile people I mention below could be considered both rich and famous, yet, at one time or other, filed for bankruptcy.
If someone that well off can get into financial trouble it can happen to anyone.
If you’re experiencing financial difficulties seek advice now. Don’t ignore the problem, deal with your creditors, don’t stick the unpaid bills in a drawer and try and forget about it. You need not be as alone as you think you are right now.
Try to remember there will be a tomorrow and it will be different. It was for almost everyone on this list of famous bankrupts.
Abraham Lincoln - 16th President of the United States
P.T. Barnum - The Great American circus owner
John Barrymore - Actor; Romeo & Juliet
Lionel Bart - British composer - lyricist - playwright (1972)
Kim Basinger - Oscar - winning actress (1993)
Frank Baum - Wizard of Oz author
Barbara Bel Geddes - Actor; Miss Ellie on Dallas
George Best - Manchester United soccer star
Jay Black - rock star, lead member of "Jay and the Americans" (1986)
Peter Bogdanovich - American Filmographer
Bjorn Borg -Pro tennis player
Toni Braxton - rock star (1998)
Lenny Bruce - Comic; Multiply obscene comic
Miguel de Cervantes - Novelist; Don Quixote
Natalie Cole -singer
John Connally - Former Texas Governor, wounded in 1963 Kennedy assassination in Dallas (1987)
Francis Ford Coppola - Oscar - winning film writer - director - producer (1999)
Daniel Defoe - Author; Robinson Crusoe
Dino De Laurentis - Oscar - winning film producer (1988)
John DeLorean - Automobile designer and entrepreneur
Walt Disney - Oscar - winning film producer, animation & theme park pioneer (1923)
Henry Dunant - Red Cross founder
William C. Durant -Founder of General Motors
Chris Eubank -Former World Champion Boxer (2005)
Eddie Fisher -Singer; crooner dumped by Liz Taylor
Mick Fleetwood - rock star, lead member of "Fleetwood Mac" (1984)
Henry Ford -Automobile manufacturer
William Fox - Co-Founder of 20th Century Fox Film Corporation (1936)
Red Foxx -actor – entertainer
Zsa Zsa Gabor - Cop-slapping Gabor sister
Marvin Gaye -singer (1970s)
Andy Gibb - rock star (1987)
Ulysses S. Grant 18th US President; Civil War general, best-selling American Author, face is pictured on the US fifty dollar bill (1884 after leaving office)
Paulo Gucci 1993
Bob Guccione - publisher and founder of Penthouse magazine (2003)
M.C. Hammer - rock star (1996)
George Frideric Handel -Messiah composer
Richard Harris -Oscar-nominated actor-producer-director
Isaac Hayes -Oscar-winning songwriter - composer - musician -singer
H.J. Heinz - Founder of Heinz Ketchup
Milton Snavely Hershey - founder of Hershey’s chocolate
Ron Isley - Rhythm-and blues singer (mid late 1990s)
La Toya Jackson - rock star (1995)
Don Johnson -actor-producer
Grace Jones Singer -Entertainer 1992
Chaka Kahn - rock star
Buster Keaton
Margot Kidder - Lois Lane in Superman movie
Larry King -talk-show host, best selling American author (1978)
Veronica Lake -actress (1951)
Cyndi Lauper - rock star (1983)
Stan Lee - Comic book industry pioneer, co-creator "Spider Man," "The Incredible Hulk," "The X-Men" etc (2001)
Jerry Lewis -comic
Jerry Lee Lewis -famous Rock n’ Roll star
Meat Loaf - rock star (1983)
Joe Louis -Boxer 1956
Jackie Mason -comedian – entertainer
George McGovern -politician 1991
William McKinley -25th US President 1897-1901
Marvin Mitchelson -celebrity divorce lawyer
John Nash -British Regency architect
Willie Nelson - singer-songwriter-actor, American Author (1990)
Wayne Newton - singer-actor - entertainer (1992)
Harry Nilsson -singer/songwriter; Me and My Arrow
Immanuel Nobel - father of manufacturers - philanthropist Alfred Nobel , who founded the Nobel Prize (twice - 1833/year Alfred was born, 1856/ when Alfred was 23)
Ted Nugent -Rock Star
Tom Petty - rock star (1979)
Randy Quaid - actor
Lynn Redgrave -actress
Rembrandt -painter
Burt Reynolds - Oscar-nominated actor - director, American Author (1995)
Debbie Reynolds - Oscar nominated actress-singer, American Author (1997)
Mickey Rooney - Oscar nominated actor, American Author (1962)
Run DMC -Rap Group in 1993
Ray Sawyer - rock star, member of "Dr. Hook and the Medicine Show" (1973)
Oskar Schindler -activist who saved over 1000 Jews from the Nazis
Leon Spinks -boxer
Donald Trump -billionaire entrepreneur
Mark Twain -Huckleberry Finn author
Mike Tyson - boxer (2003)
Oscar Wilde - acclaimed poet and author
Tammy Wynette - country music star (1988)
Florenz Ziegfeld
There is no shame to having tried and failed, but not having tried, that’s a sin!
Tremendous talent and the ability to get up and try again sets almost all of these famous bankrupts apart from the no-hopers who never dared to dream.
Almost every person on our list has triumphed in the historical context; we all remember them.
They should not be alone in these circumstances. I therefore reprint an article I first published on another of my blogs in July.
All the high profile people I mention below could be considered both rich and famous, yet, at one time or other, filed for bankruptcy.
If someone that well off can get into financial trouble it can happen to anyone.
If you’re experiencing financial difficulties seek advice now. Don’t ignore the problem, deal with your creditors, don’t stick the unpaid bills in a drawer and try and forget about it. You need not be as alone as you think you are right now.
Try to remember there will be a tomorrow and it will be different. It was for almost everyone on this list of famous bankrupts.
Abraham Lincoln - 16th President of the United States
P.T. Barnum - The Great American circus owner
John Barrymore - Actor; Romeo & Juliet
Lionel Bart - British composer - lyricist - playwright (1972)
Kim Basinger - Oscar - winning actress (1993)
Frank Baum - Wizard of Oz author
Barbara Bel Geddes - Actor; Miss Ellie on Dallas
George Best - Manchester United soccer star
Jay Black - rock star, lead member of "Jay and the Americans" (1986)
Peter Bogdanovich - American Filmographer
Bjorn Borg -Pro tennis player
Toni Braxton - rock star (1998)
Lenny Bruce - Comic; Multiply obscene comic
Miguel de Cervantes - Novelist; Don Quixote
Natalie Cole -singer
John Connally - Former Texas Governor, wounded in 1963 Kennedy assassination in Dallas (1987)
Francis Ford Coppola - Oscar - winning film writer - director - producer (1999)
Daniel Defoe - Author; Robinson Crusoe
Dino De Laurentis - Oscar - winning film producer (1988)
John DeLorean - Automobile designer and entrepreneur
Walt Disney - Oscar - winning film producer, animation & theme park pioneer (1923)
Henry Dunant - Red Cross founder
William C. Durant -Founder of General Motors
Chris Eubank -Former World Champion Boxer (2005)
Eddie Fisher -Singer; crooner dumped by Liz Taylor
Mick Fleetwood - rock star, lead member of "Fleetwood Mac" (1984)
Henry Ford -Automobile manufacturer
William Fox - Co-Founder of 20th Century Fox Film Corporation (1936)
Red Foxx -actor – entertainer
Zsa Zsa Gabor - Cop-slapping Gabor sister
Marvin Gaye -singer (1970s)
Andy Gibb - rock star (1987)
Ulysses S. Grant 18th US President; Civil War general, best-selling American Author, face is pictured on the US fifty dollar bill (1884 after leaving office)
Paulo Gucci 1993
Bob Guccione - publisher and founder of Penthouse magazine (2003)
M.C. Hammer - rock star (1996)
George Frideric Handel -Messiah composer
Richard Harris -Oscar-nominated actor-producer-director
Isaac Hayes -Oscar-winning songwriter - composer - musician -singer
H.J. Heinz - Founder of Heinz Ketchup
Milton Snavely Hershey - founder of Hershey’s chocolate
Ron Isley - Rhythm-and blues singer (mid late 1990s)
La Toya Jackson - rock star (1995)
Don Johnson -actor-producer
Grace Jones Singer -Entertainer 1992
Chaka Kahn - rock star
Buster Keaton
Margot Kidder - Lois Lane in Superman movie
Larry King -talk-show host, best selling American author (1978)
Veronica Lake -actress (1951)
Cyndi Lauper - rock star (1983)
Stan Lee - Comic book industry pioneer, co-creator "Spider Man," "The Incredible Hulk," "The X-Men" etc (2001)
Jerry Lewis -comic
Jerry Lee Lewis -famous Rock n’ Roll star
Meat Loaf - rock star (1983)
Joe Louis -Boxer 1956
Jackie Mason -comedian – entertainer
George McGovern -politician 1991
William McKinley -25th US President 1897-1901
Marvin Mitchelson -celebrity divorce lawyer
John Nash -British Regency architect
Willie Nelson - singer-songwriter-actor, American Author (1990)
Wayne Newton - singer-actor - entertainer (1992)
Harry Nilsson -singer/songwriter; Me and My Arrow
Immanuel Nobel - father of manufacturers - philanthropist Alfred Nobel , who founded the Nobel Prize (twice - 1833/year Alfred was born, 1856/ when Alfred was 23)
Ted Nugent -Rock Star
Tom Petty - rock star (1979)
Randy Quaid - actor
Lynn Redgrave -actress
Rembrandt -painter
Burt Reynolds - Oscar-nominated actor - director, American Author (1995)
Debbie Reynolds - Oscar nominated actress-singer, American Author (1997)
Mickey Rooney - Oscar nominated actor, American Author (1962)
Run DMC -Rap Group in 1993
Ray Sawyer - rock star, member of "Dr. Hook and the Medicine Show" (1973)
Oskar Schindler -activist who saved over 1000 Jews from the Nazis
Leon Spinks -boxer
Donald Trump -billionaire entrepreneur
Mark Twain -Huckleberry Finn author
Mike Tyson - boxer (2003)
Oscar Wilde - acclaimed poet and author
Tammy Wynette - country music star (1988)
Florenz Ziegfeld
There is no shame to having tried and failed, but not having tried, that’s a sin!
Tremendous talent and the ability to get up and try again sets almost all of these famous bankrupts apart from the no-hopers who never dared to dream.
Almost every person on our list has triumphed in the historical context; we all remember them.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
ChangingTheRules
Some of you who have followed my articles in the past might find this one a bit odd. I have always argued for international cooperation and cross border freedom and today I am urging some of the opposite.
During this financial crisis there is the danger that well funded opportunists will raid across international borders to pick up bargains. Britain’s own Sir Philip Greene is apparently attempting to exploit Iceland’s own economic collapse to see if he can pillage that country’s international retail operations.
In light of the fact that Britain’s main commercial retail banks are worth about a tenth of their market capitalization last year this fate could soon befall them if they are not protected by the state.
Similarly, if the country suffers another week like the last one the industrial landscape will offer an environment of bargains the like of which have never been available before. This will be so tempting that the national identity of the UK economy will go from being acceptably international to totally foreign in a matter of weeks.
The same scenario could unfold all over the western world, particularly in the USA and Western Europe. It is essential that we don’t let short-term opportunism turn into the end of the free market for the host countries.
There is a big plus side if the major economic powers can work together for the common good and this will be achieved if they think longer term when they take agreed short-term tactical decisions. If countries break ranks in bodies like the European Union it would spell disaster for the institution.
In a few hours there will be coordinated announcements of the proposed actions to be taken internationally by each government, acting in concert, to steady the economic ship. It is beyond doubt that these moves are essential, and their success will only be evident if the pandemonium and panic selling eases with the opening of the markets. Another week of losses of the magnitude of recent weeks is simply too frightening to contemplate.
During this financial crisis there is the danger that well funded opportunists will raid across international borders to pick up bargains. Britain’s own Sir Philip Greene is apparently attempting to exploit Iceland’s own economic collapse to see if he can pillage that country’s international retail operations.
In light of the fact that Britain’s main commercial retail banks are worth about a tenth of their market capitalization last year this fate could soon befall them if they are not protected by the state.
Similarly, if the country suffers another week like the last one the industrial landscape will offer an environment of bargains the like of which have never been available before. This will be so tempting that the national identity of the UK economy will go from being acceptably international to totally foreign in a matter of weeks.
The same scenario could unfold all over the western world, particularly in the USA and Western Europe. It is essential that we don’t let short-term opportunism turn into the end of the free market for the host countries.
There is a big plus side if the major economic powers can work together for the common good and this will be achieved if they think longer term when they take agreed short-term tactical decisions. If countries break ranks in bodies like the European Union it would spell disaster for the institution.
In a few hours there will be coordinated announcements of the proposed actions to be taken internationally by each government, acting in concert, to steady the economic ship. It is beyond doubt that these moves are essential, and their success will only be evident if the pandemonium and panic selling eases with the opening of the markets. Another week of losses of the magnitude of recent weeks is simply too frightening to contemplate.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
AvoidingDanger
The meeting of the finance ministers of the G7 countries in the USA this weekend seems to have been long on rhetoric and short on deeds.
Although the summary given by President Bush promised a comprehensive and coordinated plan of action there appeared to be no specifics on what the plan is.
Of course they could have a plan in which the details are complex but the details haven’t been worked out yet. Or, and this is considerably more worrying, perhaps they have not been able to agree an overall plan.
On the positive side let’s remember that earlier in the week the big players did come together to lower the interest rates by .5% and no one had forecast such a well-coordinated and decisive action.
My bet is that they do have some specifics worked out and it is the minutiae that are yet to be resolved and rolled out in public over the coming weeks. It needs to be or the world is facing escalating economic chaos.
However this small speech by President Bush was the 27th. by him designed to show the public that he is on top of the situation and to reassure the markets. Unfortunately so many public utterances in which he doesn’t actually say anything specific is probably becoming both soporific and counter productive.
There is grave political danger inherent in this terrifying financial spiral because people become irrational in a financial crisis and aggression follows and this provokes equal and opposite reactions.
It is quite possible that there will be leaders of countries who will use this financial meltdown, as an excuse to impose draconian legislation and new dictatorships could emerge, not all of them benevolent. It is already becoming almost unpatriotic to question any measure being taken to bolster a nation’s economy.
In these circumstances, both actual and potential, it is the duty of us all to question, probe and protest when necessary. In the UK’s Parliament we have what we call Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. It is an antiquated term for exactly what our situation demands. Of course in every country everyone back logical, well-considered policies and actions that our leaders propose and take but although we should be loyal we sometimes have a duty to oppose and must always question.
Although the summary given by President Bush promised a comprehensive and coordinated plan of action there appeared to be no specifics on what the plan is.
Of course they could have a plan in which the details are complex but the details haven’t been worked out yet. Or, and this is considerably more worrying, perhaps they have not been able to agree an overall plan.
On the positive side let’s remember that earlier in the week the big players did come together to lower the interest rates by .5% and no one had forecast such a well-coordinated and decisive action.
My bet is that they do have some specifics worked out and it is the minutiae that are yet to be resolved and rolled out in public over the coming weeks. It needs to be or the world is facing escalating economic chaos.
However this small speech by President Bush was the 27th. by him designed to show the public that he is on top of the situation and to reassure the markets. Unfortunately so many public utterances in which he doesn’t actually say anything specific is probably becoming both soporific and counter productive.
There is grave political danger inherent in this terrifying financial spiral because people become irrational in a financial crisis and aggression follows and this provokes equal and opposite reactions.
It is quite possible that there will be leaders of countries who will use this financial meltdown, as an excuse to impose draconian legislation and new dictatorships could emerge, not all of them benevolent. It is already becoming almost unpatriotic to question any measure being taken to bolster a nation’s economy.
In these circumstances, both actual and potential, it is the duty of us all to question, probe and protest when necessary. In the UK’s Parliament we have what we call Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. It is an antiquated term for exactly what our situation demands. Of course in every country everyone back logical, well-considered policies and actions that our leaders propose and take but although we should be loyal we sometimes have a duty to oppose and must always question.
Friday, October 10, 2008
NeatTrickGordon
Have you noticed in all the financial mayhem that one guy is walking the walk and talking the talk, has a jaunty air, a smile on his face and a glint in his eye? I talk of the UK’s esteemed leader, step forward the Right Honorable Gordon Brown.
Our man at Number 10 Downing Street has rediscovered himself during the present crisis. This is turning into, he hopes, his Falklands War. If he can steer us through the financial and economic super storm raging all around us he will go down in history as one of the great leaders of our history. You can see him sniffing the air, scenting the battle and relishing the challenge. The man clearly believes that history has ordained it is his destiny to be here now, at this precise moment.
He is clearly picking fights that he can win, for example with the economic basket case, which goes under the name of the country of Iceland. That cursed place has imploded and is in real difficulty. All three of their main banking institutions have either gone belly up or been nationalized totally. The results are now becoming obvious to British individuals, businesses and local government areas. We stand to lose billions of pounds because the Icelandic government has frozen the pay back of any of their deposits whilst maintaining a guarantee for their own people. In anger driven revenge Gordon, now attired in his Batman suit, used the terrorism laws to freeze all Icelandic assets in the UK. He has threatened the Prime Minister of Iceland that if the British assets are not repaid then he will repay these to the British people affected using the Icelandic assets he has seized to do so.
Like the Icelandic Prime Minister I have to question the use of the anti terrorism laws to seize another country’s non-associated assets in the UK.
Brown claims that Iceland acted illegally by not honoring their bank guarantees, so how can Britain justify breaking international law by way of retribution?
These are very murky issues as is much that is happening across the world. For example, how is the British bank bail out actually going to work?
It looks like the government, on the behalf of all the citizens of the UK is supporting these banks, one way or another up to a figure of £500,000,000,000, 000 (Five hundred billion pounds or about $.85 trillion) of our money. That is one third, approximately, of our annual gross domestic product. That is a lot of money!
The neat trick is that Gordo has also announced that there will not be any reduction of public spending, and has hinted that there will also not be any tax increases. The latter supposition I am prone to believe as there will be an election some time next year and the costs of all this palaver will start to become clear after the next regime is in power. One thing is for sure; we shall all be paying for this long into our future.
Even more perverse is the fact that this money, which we, the great British public are lending to the banks, without any choice on our part, is in turn going to be lent back to us, as individuals and businesses. We will, no doubt, be charged the going rate of interest.
So, if we are lucky enough to be considered credit worthy after our money has been forcibly removed from our wallets we will be able to borrow this same money back. Is this where we are surprised as the man jumps out from behind the wall and says, “Smile you’re on candid camera!”?
No wonder Gordon Brown predicts that the country won’t lose by this transaction. It isn’t his money, or the country’s money at risk; it is my money, and your money. It will be the citizens of the country who will be losing.
Of course this is made even more tragic and unbearable in that Mr. Brown is right to do what he’s doing, and the rest of the world could do a great deal worse than emulate his actions which are likely to prove far more effective than the American and others global efforts so far. But there is a sad and underlying truth to be told; despite everyone’s efforts the market is continuing to panic, and while that holds true all bets are off and it will all continue to unravel in an increasingly fast paced crash.
Personally I think we all need a time out, perhaps one week with all the markets closed down so that everyone can catch their collective breath during which the great economic powers can construct an agreed series of actions to bring these potentially terrible economic events to an end before the human costs become unbearable.
Gordon, in the meantime forgive me for doubting that you are a magician, I thought I caught you smiling and laughing yesterday, you looked almost boyish. I’m beginning to believe you should have a new name, from here on let’s call you the master of mayhem. I’ll write anything if you can help lead the world back from the brink, you big adorable Scotsman. Here, do you want another £5; I think I still have a fiver left over.
Our man at Number 10 Downing Street has rediscovered himself during the present crisis. This is turning into, he hopes, his Falklands War. If he can steer us through the financial and economic super storm raging all around us he will go down in history as one of the great leaders of our history. You can see him sniffing the air, scenting the battle and relishing the challenge. The man clearly believes that history has ordained it is his destiny to be here now, at this precise moment.
He is clearly picking fights that he can win, for example with the economic basket case, which goes under the name of the country of Iceland. That cursed place has imploded and is in real difficulty. All three of their main banking institutions have either gone belly up or been nationalized totally. The results are now becoming obvious to British individuals, businesses and local government areas. We stand to lose billions of pounds because the Icelandic government has frozen the pay back of any of their deposits whilst maintaining a guarantee for their own people. In anger driven revenge Gordon, now attired in his Batman suit, used the terrorism laws to freeze all Icelandic assets in the UK. He has threatened the Prime Minister of Iceland that if the British assets are not repaid then he will repay these to the British people affected using the Icelandic assets he has seized to do so.
Like the Icelandic Prime Minister I have to question the use of the anti terrorism laws to seize another country’s non-associated assets in the UK.
Brown claims that Iceland acted illegally by not honoring their bank guarantees, so how can Britain justify breaking international law by way of retribution?
These are very murky issues as is much that is happening across the world. For example, how is the British bank bail out actually going to work?
It looks like the government, on the behalf of all the citizens of the UK is supporting these banks, one way or another up to a figure of £500,000,000,000, 000 (Five hundred billion pounds or about $.85 trillion) of our money. That is one third, approximately, of our annual gross domestic product. That is a lot of money!
The neat trick is that Gordo has also announced that there will not be any reduction of public spending, and has hinted that there will also not be any tax increases. The latter supposition I am prone to believe as there will be an election some time next year and the costs of all this palaver will start to become clear after the next regime is in power. One thing is for sure; we shall all be paying for this long into our future.
Even more perverse is the fact that this money, which we, the great British public are lending to the banks, without any choice on our part, is in turn going to be lent back to us, as individuals and businesses. We will, no doubt, be charged the going rate of interest.
So, if we are lucky enough to be considered credit worthy after our money has been forcibly removed from our wallets we will be able to borrow this same money back. Is this where we are surprised as the man jumps out from behind the wall and says, “Smile you’re on candid camera!”?
No wonder Gordon Brown predicts that the country won’t lose by this transaction. It isn’t his money, or the country’s money at risk; it is my money, and your money. It will be the citizens of the country who will be losing.
Of course this is made even more tragic and unbearable in that Mr. Brown is right to do what he’s doing, and the rest of the world could do a great deal worse than emulate his actions which are likely to prove far more effective than the American and others global efforts so far. But there is a sad and underlying truth to be told; despite everyone’s efforts the market is continuing to panic, and while that holds true all bets are off and it will all continue to unravel in an increasingly fast paced crash.
Personally I think we all need a time out, perhaps one week with all the markets closed down so that everyone can catch their collective breath during which the great economic powers can construct an agreed series of actions to bring these potentially terrible economic events to an end before the human costs become unbearable.
Gordon, in the meantime forgive me for doubting that you are a magician, I thought I caught you smiling and laughing yesterday, you looked almost boyish. I’m beginning to believe you should have a new name, from here on let’s call you the master of mayhem. I’ll write anything if you can help lead the world back from the brink, you big adorable Scotsman. Here, do you want another £5; I think I still have a fiver left over.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
PopsTheEconomist
My grandfather Gershon was not an economist, he was a tailor’s presser, not far up the food chain in terms of macro economic theory, but he possessed more common sense in one of his strong fingers than our present government leaders have in their entire bodies.
Poppa used to whistle and sing little foreign songs as he skipped up and down his pressing table lifting the impossibly heavy iron for hours without end. Whilst he did this he dispensed little pearls of homespun wisdom that have stayed with me.
One of these was a favorite, and you need to imagine it being said with a strong East European accent, “If you owe the bank one pound you have a problem, if you owe the bank one million pounds then they have a problem!”
This from a man who never borrowed a pound from anyone was quite a theoretical leap, but it seemed clever and true to me. So how does it work when you’re the bank and you owe hundreds of billions of pounds; who has the problem then?
The answer is obvious; we will all have the problem. And we need to remember that this is the gift that will keep on giving. The bad smell from this gift is going to be with us, like an anchor on our longer-term aspirations for generations to come.
I wrote several months ago that we are living through the last days of the golden age of our society and that soon it would draw to a close. I feel like calling myself a seer, but then again it was so obvious to me I was surprised that many other columnists were not making the same predictions. Our society was creating a fair facsimile of the South Sea Bubble, and like all bubbles it had to burst.
This morning the UK leaders followed their peers in many other countries in creating a supply of capital liquidity to our banks so that they were propped up against imminent and possible total collapse. We would all prefer not to be where we are, but we have to start rectifying the situation and this was an obvious if somewhat belated step. The time to start taking such decisions was when the run on Northern Rock started instead the management of this crisis has been piecemeal and tactical instead of what we needed, which was bold, decisive and strategic decisions.
The USA and the rest of the world is suffering from the almost identical problems, and it was refreshing and very positive that the central banks and governments acted together today to reduce their interest rates by .5%. As I’ve said before we must act together for survival or sink separately.
It is democratic and correct that the US Presidential debates and election goes on throughout this period. It validates our system of democracy and confirms that it will survive this crisis. However, it would be even more encouraging if both the candidates stated that whoever won the election would be happy to work in a government of national unity until this situation was resolved and it could go back to business as usual. The same applies in the UK and elsewhere. This problem is economic but so profound that it could have the same impact as a major war or natural national catastrophe and we must use anyone with talent and ability to help sort the problems out.
The single biggest problem of this British government is that its leaders are OK with plenty of time to think but not great when the bullets are flying and they need to be diving for cover and firing back. Gordon Brown doesn’t do quick or slick. There is no other choice but to back all of our governments through this crisis as it is the only hope of getting through the debacle with as little damage as possible. The time for recrimination is later; right now we need steady nerves.
We are all going to suffer some damage resulting from this crisis. Some might gain financially but will see friends and family lose. This is going to hurt our society and the extent of this damage could change perceptions. Remember the hyperinflation suffered by the Weimar Republic led directly on to Hitler. We must remain vigilant against extreme thoughts and actions.
Perhaps the best place to be right now is in front of the mirror whilst we consider whether we should use this problem as a pause in which we re-evaluate our lives?
Tonight and tomorrow is the Jewish religion’s Day of Atonement, otherwise known as Yom Kippur. There will be no blog posted (or much eating!) by me until Friday. In my own inadequate way I shall pray for forgiveness for the sins of us all. Let’s hope that when we resume work there is better news for us all.
Poppa used to whistle and sing little foreign songs as he skipped up and down his pressing table lifting the impossibly heavy iron for hours without end. Whilst he did this he dispensed little pearls of homespun wisdom that have stayed with me.
One of these was a favorite, and you need to imagine it being said with a strong East European accent, “If you owe the bank one pound you have a problem, if you owe the bank one million pounds then they have a problem!”
This from a man who never borrowed a pound from anyone was quite a theoretical leap, but it seemed clever and true to me. So how does it work when you’re the bank and you owe hundreds of billions of pounds; who has the problem then?
The answer is obvious; we will all have the problem. And we need to remember that this is the gift that will keep on giving. The bad smell from this gift is going to be with us, like an anchor on our longer-term aspirations for generations to come.
I wrote several months ago that we are living through the last days of the golden age of our society and that soon it would draw to a close. I feel like calling myself a seer, but then again it was so obvious to me I was surprised that many other columnists were not making the same predictions. Our society was creating a fair facsimile of the South Sea Bubble, and like all bubbles it had to burst.
This morning the UK leaders followed their peers in many other countries in creating a supply of capital liquidity to our banks so that they were propped up against imminent and possible total collapse. We would all prefer not to be where we are, but we have to start rectifying the situation and this was an obvious if somewhat belated step. The time to start taking such decisions was when the run on Northern Rock started instead the management of this crisis has been piecemeal and tactical instead of what we needed, which was bold, decisive and strategic decisions.
The USA and the rest of the world is suffering from the almost identical problems, and it was refreshing and very positive that the central banks and governments acted together today to reduce their interest rates by .5%. As I’ve said before we must act together for survival or sink separately.
It is democratic and correct that the US Presidential debates and election goes on throughout this period. It validates our system of democracy and confirms that it will survive this crisis. However, it would be even more encouraging if both the candidates stated that whoever won the election would be happy to work in a government of national unity until this situation was resolved and it could go back to business as usual. The same applies in the UK and elsewhere. This problem is economic but so profound that it could have the same impact as a major war or natural national catastrophe and we must use anyone with talent and ability to help sort the problems out.
The single biggest problem of this British government is that its leaders are OK with plenty of time to think but not great when the bullets are flying and they need to be diving for cover and firing back. Gordon Brown doesn’t do quick or slick. There is no other choice but to back all of our governments through this crisis as it is the only hope of getting through the debacle with as little damage as possible. The time for recrimination is later; right now we need steady nerves.
We are all going to suffer some damage resulting from this crisis. Some might gain financially but will see friends and family lose. This is going to hurt our society and the extent of this damage could change perceptions. Remember the hyperinflation suffered by the Weimar Republic led directly on to Hitler. We must remain vigilant against extreme thoughts and actions.
Perhaps the best place to be right now is in front of the mirror whilst we consider whether we should use this problem as a pause in which we re-evaluate our lives?
Tonight and tomorrow is the Jewish religion’s Day of Atonement, otherwise known as Yom Kippur. There will be no blog posted (or much eating!) by me until Friday. In my own inadequate way I shall pray for forgiveness for the sins of us all. Let’s hope that when we resume work there is better news for us all.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Twit
The departing commander of British forces in Afghanistan says he believes the Taliban will never be defeated. Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, the commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, whose troops have suffered severe casualties after six months of tough fighting, will hand over to 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines this month.
In fact, he goes further, he strongly suggests that the best we can hope for is to negotiate some kind of settlement or accommodation with the Taliban. Does he not understand that even if he is pragmatically correct there is a human cost to ordinary Afghanistanis if we go down that road? For the sake of clarity let me make the point that the Taliban are evil, psychotic, murderous bastards who are violently misogynistic, racist, and who have a long record of slaughtering anyone that disagrees with them.
He stated that a military victory over the Taliban was “neither feasible nor supportable”. With the Brigadier in charge I concur, it is a certainty with his attitude that there is zero chance of victory.
He continues, “What we need is sufficient troops to contain the insurgency to a level where it is not a strategic threat to the longevity of the elected Government”.
The brigadier believes that his soldiers had “taken the sting out of the Taliban” during ongoing clashes in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, but at a heavy cost, with many of his men killed or injured by roadside bombs or other explosive devices.
The brigadier’s blunt warning follows a leaked cable from the deputy French Ambassador in Kabul in which he detailed dialogue with Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British Ambassador. It claimed that the strategy for Afghanistan was “doomed to failure”.
Mr Fitou told President Sarkozy that Sir Sherard believed “the security situation is getting worse, so is corruption and the Government has lost all trust”. He said Sir Sherard had told him Britain had no alternative but to support the US, “but we should tell them that we want to be part of a winning strategy, not a losing one. The American strategy is doomed to fail.”
You may well remember exactly the same sort of defeatist talk in Iraq before the super confident and competent General Petraeus came into military power there. He instigated the troop surge that almost everyone in the upper echelons of power, both military and diplomatic, believed was doomed to fail. In fact his tactics have been a major success, almost inconceivable just last year.
Brigadier Carleton-Smith admitted that it had been “a turbulent summer” but claimed the Taliban was “riven with deep fissures and fractures”.
He added: “However, the Taliban, tactically, is reasonably resilient, certainly quite dangerous and seems relatively impervious to losses. Its potency is as a force for influence.”
It is his belief that the only way forward was to find a political solution, which includes the Taliban with whom The Government of President Karzai has launched a reconciliation programme. The principal Taliban commanders are thought to be totally opposed to any compromise. Therefore negotiation efforts could be enhanced with the so-called “tier-two” and “tier-three” Taliban, who are perceived to be less ideologically intransigent. My view is that the Taliban are an enemy that has to be wiped out, as their idea of compromise is to kill you cleanly rather than sadistically.
The brigadier said that in the areas where the Government had no control, the Afghan population was “vulnerable to a shifting coalition of Taliban, mad mullahs and marauding militias”. In other areas, however, progress was being made and children were going back to school. “We are trying to deliver sufficient security for a degree of normalization,” he said.
The British commander said that there was a continuation of the 30-year-old Afghanistan government vacuum, and even now the Kabul Government didn’t view Helmand as a key province. He claimed that there were areas in which the Afghan people were starting to shift their allegiance towards traditional power structures “rather than the shadowy and illegal structures” of the Taliban and the warlords.
Just for the record Brigadier, you might be a good soldier, and you could be a nice chap, but you are certainly a grade A super twit! For my non-British readers a twit is a peculiarly British type of personality, somewhere beyond a fool and not quite a villain. It is defined by the sound of a small bird making a “twittering” sound, which is a little pathetic and somewhat plaintive.
The Brigadier is clearly aware he is about to be replaced or he wouldn’t utter such a defeatist and misleading statement. The truth is that any conflict is winnable with good strategy, well motivated and men and sufficient resources.
It could well be that the government’s refusal of his plea of September 24 to double the number of soldiers he could lead to cope with the increasingly tough fight against the Taliban so aggravated the general that he decided to push his case in this way. He has just got it wrong.
Despite my grave reservations at the Brigadier's tactics in this matter I still thank him, on behalf of us all, for his service and bravery for our country, during this tours of duty. I just wish our solders were as good at talking as they are at fighting.
In fact, he goes further, he strongly suggests that the best we can hope for is to negotiate some kind of settlement or accommodation with the Taliban. Does he not understand that even if he is pragmatically correct there is a human cost to ordinary Afghanistanis if we go down that road? For the sake of clarity let me make the point that the Taliban are evil, psychotic, murderous bastards who are violently misogynistic, racist, and who have a long record of slaughtering anyone that disagrees with them.
He stated that a military victory over the Taliban was “neither feasible nor supportable”. With the Brigadier in charge I concur, it is a certainty with his attitude that there is zero chance of victory.
He continues, “What we need is sufficient troops to contain the insurgency to a level where it is not a strategic threat to the longevity of the elected Government”.
The brigadier believes that his soldiers had “taken the sting out of the Taliban” during ongoing clashes in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, but at a heavy cost, with many of his men killed or injured by roadside bombs or other explosive devices.
The brigadier’s blunt warning follows a leaked cable from the deputy French Ambassador in Kabul in which he detailed dialogue with Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British Ambassador. It claimed that the strategy for Afghanistan was “doomed to failure”.
Mr Fitou told President Sarkozy that Sir Sherard believed “the security situation is getting worse, so is corruption and the Government has lost all trust”. He said Sir Sherard had told him Britain had no alternative but to support the US, “but we should tell them that we want to be part of a winning strategy, not a losing one. The American strategy is doomed to fail.”
You may well remember exactly the same sort of defeatist talk in Iraq before the super confident and competent General Petraeus came into military power there. He instigated the troop surge that almost everyone in the upper echelons of power, both military and diplomatic, believed was doomed to fail. In fact his tactics have been a major success, almost inconceivable just last year.
Brigadier Carleton-Smith admitted that it had been “a turbulent summer” but claimed the Taliban was “riven with deep fissures and fractures”.
He added: “However, the Taliban, tactically, is reasonably resilient, certainly quite dangerous and seems relatively impervious to losses. Its potency is as a force for influence.”
It is his belief that the only way forward was to find a political solution, which includes the Taliban with whom The Government of President Karzai has launched a reconciliation programme. The principal Taliban commanders are thought to be totally opposed to any compromise. Therefore negotiation efforts could be enhanced with the so-called “tier-two” and “tier-three” Taliban, who are perceived to be less ideologically intransigent. My view is that the Taliban are an enemy that has to be wiped out, as their idea of compromise is to kill you cleanly rather than sadistically.
The brigadier said that in the areas where the Government had no control, the Afghan population was “vulnerable to a shifting coalition of Taliban, mad mullahs and marauding militias”. In other areas, however, progress was being made and children were going back to school. “We are trying to deliver sufficient security for a degree of normalization,” he said.
The British commander said that there was a continuation of the 30-year-old Afghanistan government vacuum, and even now the Kabul Government didn’t view Helmand as a key province. He claimed that there were areas in which the Afghan people were starting to shift their allegiance towards traditional power structures “rather than the shadowy and illegal structures” of the Taliban and the warlords.
Just for the record Brigadier, you might be a good soldier, and you could be a nice chap, but you are certainly a grade A super twit! For my non-British readers a twit is a peculiarly British type of personality, somewhere beyond a fool and not quite a villain. It is defined by the sound of a small bird making a “twittering” sound, which is a little pathetic and somewhat plaintive.
The Brigadier is clearly aware he is about to be replaced or he wouldn’t utter such a defeatist and misleading statement. The truth is that any conflict is winnable with good strategy, well motivated and men and sufficient resources.
It could well be that the government’s refusal of his plea of September 24 to double the number of soldiers he could lead to cope with the increasingly tough fight against the Taliban so aggravated the general that he decided to push his case in this way. He has just got it wrong.
Despite my grave reservations at the Brigadier's tactics in this matter I still thank him, on behalf of us all, for his service and bravery for our country, during this tours of duty. I just wish our solders were as good at talking as they are at fighting.
Monday, October 6, 2008
StopDigging
Today the German leader, Frau Merkel, appears to have broken ranks with her peers in the European Union. Just a couple of days ago in an emergency summit of the major EU economic powers it was agreed that we would act together. Now, it seems, that Germany has decided to follow several smaller European economic powers and issue an unlimited guarantee to its personal bank depositors. This, if true, and right now the lines to Berlin must be buzzing, is another break in the wall against widespread, incipient panic among the central bankers.
To tell the truth, even without this problem, we are looking at such severe forecasts for employment and the economy that these are going to be hard blows for us all to absorb
We are facing about 5 to 10 years of financial rations of bread and water unless we get very lucky. We might have had about all the luck we were due when this collapse in confidence didn't happen about 5 to 10 years previously, when I started to predict it.
The economy being so buoyant was simply a mirage that was maintained by wishful thinking. The reality is we are not making enough stuff and have been pump priming ourselves with the "knowledge economy" or as we call it in the UK, the "creative sector". That element plus the financial sector itself has been propping up the Anglo Saxon economic global success story of the recent past and it was a totally unrealistic expectation that we can maintain ourselves at our present levels of consumption when we don't make much else (in proportion to our economic size) but puff and fluff.
Now, if it is accurate that Germany, Iceland, Ireland and Greece have cut and run by declaring a total guarantee for all the depositors in their banks we have the beginnings of the isolationism that led to the making of the Great Depression. The countries that have not given such blanket guarantees will now have to either do so or go under, or the governments in the countries that haven't will have to force the ones that have to reword those guarantees or we will all get financially slaughtered. This is seriously bad news and they need to get onto it today or the market drop of several percent in the first hour of trading in London just now will look like nothing.
By the way this was a direct breaking of her promise by Frau Merkel the Chancellor of Germany who assured the other major leaders of Europe that she wouldn't take any such action and her implication was that anyone who did was a selfish idiot. Reports indicate that she gave that promise on Saturday. What prompted her to break that promise was the news of later that same day, when Germany's second biggest mortgage bank, Hypo out of Munich, had a rescue package collapse on it. This was "corrected" yesterday at about the same time when Merkel apparently converted to seemingly short sighted and idiotic economic nationalism.
It's like I said to a pal who wanted to go with me to a bank to raise some funding for a good new business, and I said to him that if a bank won't lend to another bank now is not a great time to go seeking a loan, however good the proposition is, and whatever security you can provide. If that is the case, then businesses will start to go bust in big numbers, and these are the small businesses, which supply by far the largest number of jobs in the economy. That sector starting to unravel will cause a concomitant loss of jobs and of course has a knock on negative effect.
Interest rates will therefore be forced down in the short term, and we might well go the way of the Japanese economy in the late 80's through the 90's in which they suffered from stagflation. Let's hope we have learned enough from their experience not to repeat those mistakes.
The solution can only be a total rethink of some parts of our economic model led by international cooperation and some central players of stature. Looking around just now, I think we are in for bigger problems, as I don't see any FDR or Thatcher on the horizon. That doesn't mean we have to agree with every detail, but we need a man (or woman) with a plan, a vision, powerful charisma, and clout to push through radical new ideas to push us out of this huge pile of effluent or we are going to wallow in it for a long time. I hope and pray I am wrong about all of this, but we are now in the hole, and we are still digging,
To tell the truth, even without this problem, we are looking at such severe forecasts for employment and the economy that these are going to be hard blows for us all to absorb
We are facing about 5 to 10 years of financial rations of bread and water unless we get very lucky. We might have had about all the luck we were due when this collapse in confidence didn't happen about 5 to 10 years previously, when I started to predict it.
The economy being so buoyant was simply a mirage that was maintained by wishful thinking. The reality is we are not making enough stuff and have been pump priming ourselves with the "knowledge economy" or as we call it in the UK, the "creative sector". That element plus the financial sector itself has been propping up the Anglo Saxon economic global success story of the recent past and it was a totally unrealistic expectation that we can maintain ourselves at our present levels of consumption when we don't make much else (in proportion to our economic size) but puff and fluff.
Now, if it is accurate that Germany, Iceland, Ireland and Greece have cut and run by declaring a total guarantee for all the depositors in their banks we have the beginnings of the isolationism that led to the making of the Great Depression. The countries that have not given such blanket guarantees will now have to either do so or go under, or the governments in the countries that haven't will have to force the ones that have to reword those guarantees or we will all get financially slaughtered. This is seriously bad news and they need to get onto it today or the market drop of several percent in the first hour of trading in London just now will look like nothing.
By the way this was a direct breaking of her promise by Frau Merkel the Chancellor of Germany who assured the other major leaders of Europe that she wouldn't take any such action and her implication was that anyone who did was a selfish idiot. Reports indicate that she gave that promise on Saturday. What prompted her to break that promise was the news of later that same day, when Germany's second biggest mortgage bank, Hypo out of Munich, had a rescue package collapse on it. This was "corrected" yesterday at about the same time when Merkel apparently converted to seemingly short sighted and idiotic economic nationalism.
It's like I said to a pal who wanted to go with me to a bank to raise some funding for a good new business, and I said to him that if a bank won't lend to another bank now is not a great time to go seeking a loan, however good the proposition is, and whatever security you can provide. If that is the case, then businesses will start to go bust in big numbers, and these are the small businesses, which supply by far the largest number of jobs in the economy. That sector starting to unravel will cause a concomitant loss of jobs and of course has a knock on negative effect.
Interest rates will therefore be forced down in the short term, and we might well go the way of the Japanese economy in the late 80's through the 90's in which they suffered from stagflation. Let's hope we have learned enough from their experience not to repeat those mistakes.
The solution can only be a total rethink of some parts of our economic model led by international cooperation and some central players of stature. Looking around just now, I think we are in for bigger problems, as I don't see any FDR or Thatcher on the horizon. That doesn't mean we have to agree with every detail, but we need a man (or woman) with a plan, a vision, powerful charisma, and clout to push through radical new ideas to push us out of this huge pile of effluent or we are going to wallow in it for a long time. I hope and pray I am wrong about all of this, but we are now in the hole, and we are still digging,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
