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!
Friday, October 17, 2008
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
