Tag Archives: gdp
This week on Facebook: When I first read about The Great Firewall of China I concluded that it was a model that most States would try to find a way of emulating, the rationale being that it was the first step towards securing the political supremacy of a governing oligarchy under the pretext of a democracy. Now China has launched The New Silk Road¹ (OBOR: One Belt One Road) and notionally democratic governments find themselves not only having to consider a trade war with China, but to seriously consider China’s political model as representative of the future. Read more of this post
This week on Facebook: Is prosperity and wealth the same thing I asked myself a year ago and concluded that it depended on how you defined each word and who that definition applied to:
Oxfam thinks that $8-coffee-drinking millennials with student debt are amongst the world’s neediest and they are if you define wealth without taking into account its context. A millennial who can indulge in an $8 cup of coffee may not be wealthy but is certainly prosperous. The Scramble for Growth! (Aasof’s Reflections)
This week on Facebook: Last week’s post was about pensions and the political fiscal chicanery that successive governments have adopted to steal pension funds and hide their connivance in keeping public sector pensions ‘off the books’. On Sunday I posted a short exert from the television series ‘Yes Minister’, which indicates that the public sector pensions deficit is not a new political issue. What is rarely written about is the financial burden of the funds required to service the pensions of politicians, but perhaps more importantly, how the pensions and contributions of politicians are not subject to the same vagaries as other pensions. Read more of this post
This week on Facebook: Trying to use last weeks post on Criminals & Taxation as a link to those that may follow at some point proved to be very difficult, the reaction of a public administration’s response to economic failure is more akin to investigative journalism than a short, singular, post. So this week I focused a little bit on factors relating to Government economic policy, with particular reference to Social Security and taxation in the UK. My post last week last week illustrated some of the financial disasters that can occur when a public administration overreaches its level of competence. In an earlier post on Debt & Taxation (2013) I began: ‘The role that economic theory plays in the creation of money and the role played by all politicians in the manipulation of economic theory for the purpose of a fiscal policy, bear little relationship to the social responsibility that Drucker applied to a private enterprise.’ Read more of this post
This week on Facebook: Sometime in July I read that the fraud scandal carried out at Lloyds bank took the police six years to investigate at a cost £7 million (excluding the cost of the trial). The case was dealt with by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) which, regardless of its successes and failures, as part of the public sector, has an impact on a seemingly inexorable budget deficit. It was only casually reading about the Lloyds bank case that I decided to research some of the government’s financial losses¹ for which no one, and especially not a politician or apparently any other public servant is ever held responsible. Certainly some investigative journalism usually results in a story reaching the public, it may even create a furore for a time, but the government know that any furore will eventually subsided and its cause forgotten. Yet if you are taxpayer, and even if you are not, any financial loss by the government has an impact on your well being. For a right or left leaning government, such financial losses become an excuse for increasing government debt and austerity measures. Read more of this post
This week on Facebook: My attention was caught yet again by shills offering fantastic returns on a financial investment. It could be harsh perhaps to use the definition of a shill as, an accomplice of a confidence trickster or swindler who poses as a genuine customer to entice or encourage others [SOED]. However, it’s implausible the think that a shill is anything other than, a person who pretends to give an impartial endorsement of something in which they themselves have an interest [SOED]. Of course the term shill, when used in this context and especially in a derogatory sense, is sure to raise a lot of resentment, especially when shills are simply responding to the volatility of an economic cycle that is the inevitable result of a fiscal policy adopted by a public administration. In today’s world the euphemism financial crisis is used to disguise actions taken by the public administration that exacerbate the economic cycle and inevitably fail to provide a stable economy. Read more of this post
This week on Facebook: There was a General Election in the UK on Thursday and perhaps for the first time in my life I found myself with a real justification for seriously declaring myself to be an Anarchist. I spoilt my postal voting slip on the basis that non of the candidates represented a leader that I would choose to be the next Prime Minister. It seems to me that the commonality shared by all the candidates and especially those who won the election (regardless of their political affiliations) will be increased government debt. Despite their declared political diversity, the party assuming power will inevitably rob Peter to pay Paul. The electorate — certainly on Facebook — thought that it was faced with a choice between conservatism and increased wealth for the few versus socialism and increased wealth for the many, when in my opinion the electorate was faced with the undeclared totalitarianism that both offered at the hustings. Read more of this post
This week on Facebook: My five reprises this week reflect the epigram Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. The epigram is probably familiar to most of my generation and needs no translation (Google it), but perhaps some of my family may read my reflections so it was a somewhat cynical remark that translates as, “The more things change, the more they stay the same”. Jean Baptiste Alphonse Karr (1808-1890) wrote this epigram in the January 1849 issue of Les Guêpes (“The Wasps”), the year following the European 1848 Revolutions. A number of broadsheets¹ at the time extolled or attacked the presidential candidates General Cavaignac and (most of them) Louis-Napoleon, both of whom Karr described as Les Guêpes.
This week on Facebook: Were I a conspiracy theorist I could be drawn to the notion that Free Trade agreements are a means of ensuring hegemony over a democratic electorate and expanding the global authority of totalitarian regimes. Increasingly these agreements intend to penalise nation states where productivity, or lack of it, are not subsidised by the visible hand of a state’s public administration. Read more of this post
2017 @ A.P. Herbert AI Albert Haddock Banks blog book books budget budget deficit C.S. Lewis censorship Civil Service constitution Crime CRT cryptocurrency CWG debt deficit democracy education ethics EU euro fiat money Film France freedom of expression free trade gdp government history human-rights inequality internet J.R.R. Tolkien J M Keynes language Law Ludwig Von Mises Margaret Thatcher morality music Musical national debt New Labour NHS opinion parody PFI poetry police Police & Crime Commissioners politics Quantitative Easing research school Screwtape Sir Ethelred Rutt K.C. social-media Social Welfare statistics T.E. Utley taxation terrorism Thatcher The Telegraph UK Unemployment USA Victor Hugo war war on terror
© Peter Barnett and Aasof’s Relections. Unauthorised use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Aasof and Aasof’s reflections with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.