Kakaousia — Russia without SWIFT

Background on international payments systems and Western monopoly — so far.

While Russia's exclusion from SWIFT would be painful, there are workarounds, and the net effect would be to hasten the already developing de-dollarization that taking place owing the the US weaponing the USD-based system. Russia and China have already been taking steps to isolate themselves from a weaponized dollar. Now, it is a matter of time.

The Vineyard of the Saker
Russia without SWIFT
Kakaousia

See also

"SBP has already put in place the required regulatory framework which facilitates use of CNY in trade and investment transactions," the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) said in a press release late Tuesday, ensuring that imports, exports and financing transactions can be denominated in the Chinese currency.

"The SBP, in the capacity of the policy maker of financial and currency markets, has taken comprehensive policy related measures to ensure that imports, exports and financing transactions can be denominated in yuan," Dawn news, Pakistan's most widely read English-language daily, announced while quoting the SBP press release.

Zero Hedge
Pakistan Ditches Dollar In Trade With China In Retaliation For Trump Twitter Meltdown

Tyler Durden

Paul R. Pillar — Gazing at Iran Through a Distorted Glass

With any country that, like Iran, has been the subject of acrimonious debate in Washington, pronouncements by American observers about events in that country have more to do with politics here than with what is going on over there. So it has been with much of the spinning and interpreting of protests in Iranian streets during the past few days. Some guidelines for intelligent, responsible, and useful commentary on those protests are in order, and applicable no matter what are the policy preferences of whoever is commenting....

Consortium News
Gazing at Iran Through a Distorted Glass

Paul R. Pillar, retired CIA officer | nonresident senior fellow of the Center for Security Studies in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, a contributing editor at The National Interest, formerly federal executive fellow at the Brookings Institution, a visiting professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University.

Also

Moon of Alabama
Iran - Europe Rejects U.S. Drive To War

b

related

LobeLog
Bannon: Adelson Drove Jerusalem Embassy Move

Eli Clifton

UPDATE

RT
Maria Zakharova trolls Nikki Haley on Iran protests: ‘tell us how you handled Occupy Wall Street’

Also

Sic Semper Tyrannis
Iran Protests: A Few Of the Internal and External Factors
Willy B

PHILIP M. GIRALDI - Expect Even Less Freedom of Internet in 2018

It's laughable how Iran has been picked out as a rogue state but Israel, which is brutal to the Palestinians, and Saudi Arabia, which spreads international terrorism, gets hardly any criticism.

Israel is not surprisingly most active in patrolling the Internet as it is keen to keep out any material sympathetic to the Palestinian cause or critical of Israeli treatment of Arabs. Its security services scan the stories being surfaced and go to the service providers to ask that material be deleted or blocked based on the questionable proposition that it constitutes “incitement” to violence. Facebook reportedly cooperates 95% of the time to delete material or shut down accounts. Palestinian groups, which use social networking on the internet to communicate, have been especially hard hit, with ten leading administrators’ accounts being removed in 2017. Israeli accounts including material threatening to kill Arabs are not censored.

Microsoft, Google, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook are all also under pressure to cooperate with pro-Israel private groups in the United States, to include the powerful Anti-Defamation League (ADL). The ADL seeks “to engineer new solutions to stop cyberhate” by blocking “hate language,” which includes any criticism of Israel that might even implausibly be construed as anti-Semitism. Expanding restrictions on what is being defined as “hate speech” will undoubtedly become common in social media and more generally all across the internet in 2018.

Strategic Cultures

PHILIP M. GIRALDI - Expect Even Less Freedom of Internet in 2018

John Feffer — Trump and the Iran Protests

Good article about the political situation in Iran.

Here is an aside.

“The policy of the United States should be regime change in Iran,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) has said. “I don’t see how anyone can say America can be safe as long as you have in power a theocratic despotism.”

Of course, this ignores US support of Wahabi and Salafi Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE, which are far more repressive theocratic dictatorships than Iran's. Then, there is Israel, an apartheid state that is in effect a theocracy.

Trump is already facing something similar. After all, the president is now undeniably a member of the political elite. He’s the one implementing economic reforms that don’t benefit the vast majority. He’s the one making gobs of money off of the system. And, as in Iran, he’s the one backed by powerful religious fanatics.

But this is an aside. Read the post for the analysis. It's one of the better ones I've encountered. It bears out what I have been saying, but he doesn't say that a big issue in the protest is the result of President Rouhani's neoliberal policy that is hurting workers and other have-nots. In other words, Rouhani is really following the policy that Western neoliberals prescribe, with the predictable result social and hence politically.

LobeLog

Trump and the Iran Protests
John Feffer

Stephen F. Cohen — Four Years of Ukraine and the Myths of Maidan

Professor Cohen updates on Ukraine, which is turning into Trump's folly, along with Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, and North Korea, giving "America First" new meaning based on his previous statements. DJT now owns it, and it promises to come back and bite him.

The Nation
Four Years of Ukraine and the Myths of Maidan
Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation.

Lars P. Syll — Modern economics – an intellectual game without practical relevance

I stand with Paul Feyerabend in taking an "anarchistic" approach to the philosophy of science. There is no "scientific method" that is the final arbiter of doing science. Or, as Mao famously said but did not follow through one, "Let a hundred flowers bloom." The cream will rise to the top.

Science is what scientists do, and free inquiry requires that they be free to pursue their curiosity. Exploration of options and alternatives is basic to evolutionary theory. Those that don't adapt to changing conditions go the way of the dodo.

The actual problem is that conventional economics has become a cult that excludes (Marxism) or marginalizes (heterodox economics) the unconventional on the grounds that "the methodological debate" is over. The field is stuck.

This situation has been recognized and criticized as the dogmatic approach to knowledge that was supposedly supplanted by the rise of science. It is anti-scientific. But it persists owing not to results but to power.

The problem arises from equating "real science" with mathematical formalism and Platonic intuitionism as the basis for model construction.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach as one approach, especially if models are compared with what is modeled using adequate data.

Problems arise, however, when it is taken to be the only "really scientific" approach, especially when models are not adequately substantiated with evidence, or  are contradicted by events.

The field needs to be opened up. This requires some people giving up their considerable investment in the status quo.

 The solution is similar to that of economic policy.  Inequality can only be addressed by addressing rents that lead to it and that involves addressing maldistribution. This disrupts the status quo and powerful interest oppose it.

The fault also lies with universities that support the dogmatic approach rather than a scientific inquiry.

These are political issues involving power relationships that stand in the way of free inquiry, which is the basis of both science and liberalism.

However, there is also merit to the challenge of those who propose abandoning the conventional approach to show that another or other approaches are superior. 

That is a valid response. Let the debate begin.

However, the debate actually began some time ago, and it was partially resolved. Business schools turned away from conventional economics toward the case study approach, since the practical results of economic modeling were insufficient for business purposes. So practical economics is being done under another roof.

Lars P. Syll’s Blog

Modern economics — an intellectual game without practical relevance

Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University

Ramon Marks — Coming to Grips With a Rising China

Dragon-breath. 

Calling Siegfried.

Real Clear Defense
Coming to Grips With a Rising China

Ramon Marks

Reid Wilson — Sessions will end policy that allowed legalized marijuana to prosper

Big fight shaping up now that weed has been capitalized?

Ignoring how well Prohibition worked out?

States' rights?

The Hill
Sessions will end policy that allowed legalized marijuana to prosper
Reid Wilson

Bill Mitchell — The IMF still has the same spots

Just before Xmas (December 22, 2017), the IMF proved once again that leopards don’t change their spots. Thy released a Working Paper (No. 17/286) – Australia’s Fiscal Framework: Revisiting Options for a Fiscal Anchor – that demonstrated they hadn’t learned a thing from the last decade of crisis and fiscal interventions (stimulative and opposite). The paper demonstrates no understanding of context, history, or the role that fiscal policy should play in advancing general well-being. It is a technical exercise laden with the ideology of mainstream macroeconomics that fails badly.

The problem is that the mainstream political parties (on both sides of the fence – Labor and Conservative – although pretending there is a fence is somewhat far-fetched these days) will use it against each other, and, in their shameful ignorance, against the best interests of the nation and the people that live within its borders. And … on reflection using the leopard example is an insult to the leopards. The IMF is an ugly, destructive institution that should be defunded and their buildings given over to the homeless.

The IMF authors are all ‘insiders’, by which I mean have had careers in the network of mainstream institutions (central banks, European Commission, World Bank, IMF etc). The reinforcing Groupthink that this sort of career path engenders is powerful.

It is no wonder they produce total garbage like this devoid of any critical scrutiny or self-awareness....

Bill Mitchell – billy blog
The IMF still has the same spots
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Tyler Durden — Jeremy Grantham Warns: "Brace Yourself For A Near-Term Melt Up"

Summary of Grantham's guesses (described "absolutely my personal views")

• A melt-up or end-phase of a bubble within the next 6 months to 2 years is likely, i.e., over 50%.
• If there is a melt-up, then the odds of a subsequent bubble break or melt-down are very, very high, i.e., over 90%.
• If there is a market decline following a melt-up, it is quite likely to be a decline of some 50%.
• If such a decline takes place, I believe the market is very likely (over 2:1) to bounce back up way over the pre 1998 level of 15x, but likely a bit below the average trend of the last 20 years, as the trend slowly works its way back toward the old normal on my “Not with a Bang but a Whimper” flight path.

 Interesting tidbit.

Recently an academic paper titled “Bubbles for Fama” concluded that in the US and almost all global markets, the strongest indicator – stronger than pure pricing or value – was indeed price acceleration.

Zero Hedge
Jeremy Grantham Warns: "Brace Yourself For A Near-Term Melt Up"
Tyler Durden

Jessie Hellmann — White House: Trump hasn't shifted on not cutting entitlements

President Trump has not changed his position on protecting entitlement programs from funding cuts, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Wednesday.

After last month's GOP victory on tax reform, many Republicans are calling for changes to the social safety net as a way to cut government spending. But, asked about Trump's repeated campaign pledge to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, Sanders said he doesn't support cuts to the programs.

"The president hasn't changed his position at this point," she said at a White House briefing, adding that conversations with lawmakers are ongoing.
Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has set his sights on entitlement reform for 2018.

“We’re going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit,” he said in an interview last month.

Medicare and Medicaid “are the big drivers of debt,” Ryan said, “so we spend more time on the health-care entitlements, because that's really where the problem lies, fiscally speaking."

Ryan said Trump is beginning to warm to the idea of slowing the spending growth in entitlements....

The kicker.

The White House has said it doesn't consider slowing down Medicaid growth rates to be funding cuts....

The Hill
White House: Trump hasn't shifted on not cutting entitlements
Jessie Hellmann

Branko Milanovic — Inequality, Imperialism, and the First World War

Branko Milanovic on his new paper with Thomas Hauner and Suresh Naidu exploring inequality prior to World War I and providing empirical support for the classical theory of imperialism.

ProMarket — The blog of the Stigler Center at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Inequality, Imperialism, and the First World WarBranko Milanovic | Visiting Presidential Professor at City University of New York Graduate Center and senior scholar at the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), and formerly lead economist in the World Bank's research department and senior associate at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Whitney Webb — Birth Of An Insurgency: The US-Israeli “Secret Deal” To Manipulate Protests In Iran

With the Trump and Netanyahu administrations now working in lockstep, U.S.-Israeli hostility towards Iran has now ripened into a plan to repeat what befell Syria over six years ago – the hijacking of minor protests and their transformation into the cover for a foreign-funded insurgency intent on toppling Iran’s elected government.

Mint Press
Birth Of An Insurgency: The US-Israeli “Secret Deal” To Manipulate Protests In Iran
Whitney Webb

See also

Short and important. Flores is a good analyst. He views this as interim move and strategic iteration rather than the tactical play as a lead-up to the endgame of regime change.

Fort Russ
ANALYSIS: The US's goal in Iran this week is EU sanctions, not regime-change

Joachim Flores, Editor-in-Chief of Fort Russ News

Patrick Armstrong — Trump Cuts the Gordian Knot of Foreign Entanglements

 

Interesting theory along the lines of Scott Adams, who has pretty consistently been proved correct by events and who Armstrong cites.

(All real theories must be falsifiable; let's see in a year's time whether the US is more entangled or less entangled. It should be pretty apparent by then and, by the end of Trump's first term, obvious to all.)

Strategic Culture Foundation
Trump Cuts the Gordian Knot of Foreign Entanglements

Patrick Armstrong

RT — These fake images of ‘Iran’ are being shared on social media

Don't believe everything you see.

RT
These fake images of ‘Iran’ are being shared on social media

Konstantin Asmolov — Will China Give North Korea Up?

Backgrounder.

NEO
Will China Give North Korea Up?

Konstantin Asmolov, leading researcher at the Centre for Korean Studies at the Institute of the Far East RAS

Tony Cartalucci — Iranian Protests: Deep State’s Unfinished Business

Backgrounder.

NEO
Iranian Protests: Deep State’s Unfinished Business

Tony Cartalucci

One factor that I seldom see mentioned in the extensive commenting on Iran both in the mainstream and alternative media is that the protests are grounded in Iranian politics and the contention for power between the conservative hardliners and the liberal government now in power.

The Rouhani government is labeled "reformist" as if that is a good thing. "Reformist" means neoliberal.

There are two major factors in emerging nations, the haves and the have-nots. The haves favor liberalization and integration into the global economic order, while the have-nots, impoverished by neoliberal policies want none of it.

Under the "hardline" government of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the have-nots fared will under his "socialist" programs. Since the election of Rouhani, those programs have been cut back or ended. This has resulted in social dysfunction and now political turmoil.

This is similar to the causality behind events in different Latin American countries, where the US has key interests and also interferes covertly if not overtly, but with "plausible deniability."

That interference is generally though proxies and it often involves violence, which the US then uses as a manufactured excuse to intervention, e..g, with economic sanctions or even militarily.

The rationale under which this policy is sold is "spreading freedom and democracy." The real reason underlying the expansion of the neoliberal order as the "rules of the game" set by the US is all about the extension and solidification of the American Empire and the dominance of US interests, especially financial and commercial.

Corruption Watch — Links

I'll be adding this list.

Truthdig
The Visionless Society

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, New York Times best selling author, former professor at Princeton University, activist and ordained Presbyterian minister

Truthdig — Scheer Intelligence

The CIA's 60-Year History of Fake News: How the Deep State Corrupted Many American Writers

Robert Scheer, editor in chief of Truthdig

Russian and Eurasian Politics
America’s Russia Games: Pre-History and Implications
Gordon M. Hahn, analyst and Advisory Board member at Geostrategic Forecasting Corporation, member of the Executive Advisory Board at the American Institute of Geostrategy, a contributing expert for Russia Direct, a senior researcher at the Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies, Akribis Group, and; and an analyst and consultant for Russia – Other Points of View

Counterpunch
An Apology and Explanation
Robert Parry

Moon of Alabama
NYT Writes Epic Cover For Comey's FBI - Its Sole Source: "Officials Said"

UPDATE

Salon
Seeing the unseen in Ukraine: Why is America sending arms?

Patrick Lawrence

The Intercept
Wilderness of Mirrors
Jefferson Morely

UPDATE

The Intercept
My Life as a New York Times Reporter in the Shadow of the War on Terror
James Risen

Raj Raghunathan - Why Rich People Aren’t as Happy as They Could Be

Money certainly makes you more comfortable and increases the quality of life, but are some rich people less happy than they could be?

“I’ve been poor and I’ve been rich,” quipped the comedian Sophie Tucker. “Rich is better.”

There is merit to Tucker’s argument. All else being equal, more money is better. This is because, as professors Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton point out in their very useful book, Happy Money, money provides access to things—products, experiences, and services—that improve happiness levels.

And yet there’s also a stream of research that shows that wealthier people are not happier.

One reason is that wealth seems to make us less generous, both in dollar terms and in behavioral respects. Consider results from a series of studies conducted by Paul Piff and his colleagues from the University of Berkeley. In one study, participants were paired to play a game of Monopoly. The game was rigged so that one of the participants quickly became far wealthier than the other. The researchers then observed, through a one-way mirror, the participants’ behaviors. It turned out that the wealthier a participant grew, the meaner he/she progressively became. For example, the wealthier participants started assuming more dominant postures and began talking down to their “poorer” counterparts. They also consumed a greater share of a bowl of pretzels meant to be shared equally. Results from another study showed similar effects: when given $10 and told that they could contribute any or all of it to another participant, the richer participants contributed, on average, 44% less. In the world outside the lab, researchers have found that wealthier people tend to give a smaller percentage of their income to charity.

This has important implications for personal happiness; results from a massive study of over 200,000 respondents revealed that being generous had a positive effect on one’s happiness in a whopping 93% of (120 of 136) countries. Notre Dame researchers looked at generosity indicators such as giving money, volunteering, and even being emotionally available to friends and found that the more generous people were, the happier they reported feeling.

Harvard Business Review

Raj Raghunathan - Why Rich People Aren’t as Happy as They Could Be

How Money Actually Buys Happiness,  by Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton

Warren Buffett’s advice about money has been scrutinized — and implemented — by savvy investors all over the world. But while most people know they can benefit from expert help to make money, they think they already know how to spend money to reap the most happiness. As a result, they follow their intuitions, using their money to buy things they think will make them happy, from televisions to cars to houses to second houses and beyond.

The problem with this approach is that a decade of research — conducted by us and our colleagues — demonstrates that our intuitions about how to turn money into happiness are misguided at best and dead-wrong at worst. Those televisions, cars, and houses? They have almost no impact on our happiness. The good news is that we now know what kind of spending does enhance our happiness — insight that’s valuable to consumers and companies alike.

Buffet recently penned an op-ed titled “My Philanthropic Pledge” — but rather than offer financial advice about giving, he suggested we give as a way to enhance our emotional wellbeing. Of his decision to donate 99% of his wealth to charity, Buffett said that he “couldn’t be happier.”

But do we need to give away billions like Buffet in order to experience that warm glow? Luckily for us ordinary folks, even more modest forms of generosity can make us happy. In a series of experiments, we’ve found that asking people to spend money on others — from giving to charity to buying gifts for friends and family — reliably makes them happier than spending that same money on themselves.

How Money Actually Buys Happiness, by Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton

2017 A Banner Year for Corporate Mergers, Which Further Deepens Inequality — Gregory Wilpert interviews Michale Hudson

Video and transcript.

TRNN
2017 A Banner Year for Corporate Mergers, Which Further Deepens Inequality

Gregory Wilpert interviews Michael Hudson

Sean Keith and Alexander Kolokotronis — "But How Will We Pay for It?": Modern Monetary Theory and Democratic Socialism

An economic doctrine named Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is surging in popularity and offering answers. MMT is debunking popular narratives about the harsh necessity of austerity and belt-tightening. It is showing that money is not a finite abstraction, but a limitless public utility that can be used to meet human needs. More than this, however, MMT and its heterodox economic cousins offer a framework to build directly democratic, egalitarian political structures, and thus reimagine and recalibrate the viability of democratic socialism....

 Truthout | Op-Ed

"But How Will We Pay for It?": Modern Monetary Theory and Democratic Socialism

Sean Keith and Alexander Kolokotronis

MURAT YETKİN: Why is the US wrong and what is really happening in Iran?

Does U.S. President Donald Trump think Iranians are fools with goldfish memories, who cannot remember the CIA-sponsored coup in their country in 1953?

Does he also think other governments in this ancient part of the world were not alarmed by Trump’s tweet voicing support for Iranian protesters, perhaps with the exception of Saudi Arabia, Israel and the United Arab Emirates?

It is not necessarily because these governments support the regime of mullahs in Iran. And they do not necessarily support Iran’s military involvement in civil unrest in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine, or reported weapons support to groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Hashd al-Shaabi.

No. They are worried that the U.S. policy of supporting military coups in Latin America and the Middle East from the 1950s to the 1980s may well be back with Trump, and the same thing may happen to their governments. They will therefore be more likely to take harsh measures to crush every democratic protest in their country, justified by Trump’s open intervention in Iranian affairs.

Perhaps Trump wants to satisfy the most aggressive wing of the Republicans in Congress by referring to the Iran Democracy Act of 2003. But public encouragement of protesters by the U.S. president (and also by the Israeli intelligence minister) only contributes to them ultimately being denounced in Iran as “foreign agents.” It will only damage the demonstrations against price hikes and unemployment at a time when huge budgets are given to the Revolutionary Guards to fight in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Protesters may also be exhausted by living under the strict rules of a theocratic regime in which women are granted little place.

Responsible Americans like Philip Gordon, who was the Middle East coordinator of former U.S. President Barack Obama, have voiced objections to Trump’s words. “High-profile public support from the U.S. government will do more harm than good,” Gordon wrote for the New York Times on Dec. 30, adding that it would be better for Trump to “keep quiet and do nothing.”

Iran was also the stage of widespread protests in 2009 over allegations of irregularities in the re-election of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was closely in line with the country’s “Supreme” religious leader Ali Khamenei. The election of Hassan Rouhani in 2013, with his pledge of ending Iran’s isolation, led to the nuclear deal within the U.N. system, with the approval of the U.S. under Obama.

Trump and his anti-Iran partners in the Middle East may be hoping that protesters are crushed with maximum force, thus triggering more antagonism. But Rouhani is using the protests as an opportunity to weaken Khamenei and his use of the Revolutionary Guards as a foreign policy tool, thus undermining Rouhani’s efforts to secure more integration with the world. That is why he has praised Iranians’ “right to protest,” unlike Khamenei, and says they should see this as an opportunity to reform the system in Iran. It is state TV and state-run agencies – generally under Rouhani’s control - that are extensively reporting the widespread protests, which could certainly prompt envy for opposition groups around the world, including in Turkey.

For Rouhani, the protests could be presenting an opportunity to curb the hardliners in the regime – if of course Trump permits it and restrains himself from commenting too much. Khamenei on the one side (representing the hardliners of the Islamic regime) and Trump on the other side may well be the two biggest obstacles to Iranians who want to live and work in a freer country.

Let me also just add a footnote about the 1953 coup: It was staged by Shah Reza Pahlavi in cooperation with the CIA and the British intelligence agency MI6 in order to protect his chair against Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, who had wanted to nationalize Iran’s oil resources. Pahlavi ended up giving most of Iran’s oil riches to U.S. and U.K. companies, ruling his country under an oppressive, absolutist regime whose misdeeds were ignored by the West. His rule eventually came to an end with the Islamic Revolution in 1979, after which he was forced to escape to the U.S. and died in exile in Egypt the next year.

Hürriyet Daily News

MURAT YETKİN: Why is the US wrong and what is really happening in Iran?

UK terrorist organisation MI5 plotted to assassinate Irish Prime Minister

There's 'terrorists' and there's 'freedom fighters'.


A protestant paramilitary group wrote to former Irish Prime Minister Charles Haughey to warn him that MI5 had asked them to assassinate him, according to newly disclosed documents.

The Ulster Volunteer Force – a loyalist group classified as a terrorist organisation by the UK – contacted Haughey during his third term as Taoiseach in 1987, claiming that two years earlier, an MI5 agent had provided information about his home, his cars and the yacht he used to reach his private island, and encouraged them to assassinate him.

Hang the Bankers

UK terrorist organisation MI5 plotted to assassinate Irish Prime Minister

Bill Mitchell — Ireland – not as rosy as the official story might suggest

Everything you wanted to know about the Irish economy.

In fact, the Irish economy in total is only 68 per cent the size that the GDP data would suggest – around a third smaller. Further, the modified Gross National Income series has barely grown since the crisis indicating that the Irish population has not received much in return for the hardships the austerity has inflicted upon them.

Bill Mitchell – billy blog
Ireland – not as rosy as the official story might suggest
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Former Treasury Secretary Lew Says Tax Cuts Will Leave the U.S. Broke

hahahahahahaha!!!!!

Looks like the Dems are lining up to hit the GOP on the deficit this year (which EVERYBODY thinks is going over $1T) into mid-term elections.

Former Treasury Secretary Jack Lew says the GOP's tax cuts will leave the U.S. broke https://t.co/tiQYF8SZju pic.twitter.com/eheW9zO5ef

— Bloomberg (@business) January 2, 2018

Jason Ditz — Iranian Protesters Raise Stakes, Attacking Police Stations

Violent crackdowns overnight on Sunday against protesters have led to a violent backlash in Iran, as some of the protesters look to raise the stakes with attacks of their own against police stations, with reports of some posts and stations being set ablaze.…

At least one policeman has been confirmed killed, shot with a hunting rifle, and three others were reported wounded. The killing took place in Najaf Abad, on the outskirts of the major city of Isfahan.

Iranian state TV also reported clashes at unspecified military facilities in the country, where protesters attempted to force their way in and were repelled by “strong resistance” from the troops within....

"Protestors"? People initiating armed insurrection against the government cannot correctly be termed "protestors." Crossing that line make them "insurgents," "rebels," or "terrorists."

I fully expect the lamestream media to use such lame and loaded terminology, but the alternative media, too?

Let's call a spade a spade.

AntiWar
Iranian Protesters Raise Stakes, Attacking Police Stations

Jason Ditz

Update

Fort Russ
"Protesters" attack and burn police station in Iran
Paul Antonopoulos

Oscar Jorda — The rate of return on everything

Important.

The rate of return on capital plays a pivotal role in shaping current macroeconomic debates. This column presents findings from a new dataset covering returns of major asset classes in the advanced economies over the last 150 years. The data offer new insights on several long-standing puzzles in economics, and uncover new relationships that seem at odds with some fundamental economic tenets.

VOX - CEPR's Policy Portal

The rate of return on everything
Òscar Jordà, Katharina Knoll, Dmitry Kuvshinov, Moritz Schularick, Alan Taylor 02 January 2018

Here is the link to the paper if you wish to pursue it further.

Here is the open-source database.

JORDÀ-SCHULARICK-TAYLOR MACROHISTORY DATABASE

See also

Economists have provided detailed analyses of the economic basis of international currency status, but they have paid less attention to the geopolitical underpinnings. This column sheds light on the geopolitical premium enjoyed by the US thanks to its security alliances and ‘dollar diplomacy’.

Mars or Mercury? The geopolitics of international currency choice
Barry Eichengreen, Arnaud Mehl, Livia Chiţu

Related

Counterpunch
The Petro-Yuan Bombshell

Pepe Escobar

Nestlé Caught Stealing Billions of Gallons of Water from California—No One Arrested

Nestlé has been taking more than 60 million gallons of water per year from the San Bernardino National Forest, according to California regulators, which amounts to billions of gallons of water stolen over the past 68 years — without any valid basis of right to the water.

A two-year investigation by the California State Water Resources Control Board revealed that Nestlé, which sells water under the Arrowhead brand, lacked the proper permits for the vast majority of the water taken.

The State Water Resources Control Board notified Nestlé last week that the investigation had concluded, and that the company doesn’t have proper rights to roughly three-quarters of the water it withdraws for bottling.

“Nestlé appears to be taking more water than they likely have the right to take,” David Rose, an attorney for the water board’s enforcement section, told KPCC.

The investigation showed that Nestlé extracted roughly 62.6 million gallons of water from the San Bernardino spring each year on average from 1947 to 2015, but that the company only had the right to siphon some 8.5 million gallons yearly.

Essentially, Nestlé has been stealing nearly 55 million gallons of water each year from California for nearly 70 years.

Of course when a corporation does something illicit, like stealing billions of gallons of water over the course of 68 years in an extremely drought-stricken state, no one is held responsible – no one is arrested – and regulators simply recommend that they apply for a new permit. They were simply told that they must conform to California water diversion regulations while providing a timetable for the company to implement required actions.

Conversely, if an individual, without the cover of being a corporate entity, would engage in similar actions, they would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law – and would almost certainly be sentenced to jail or prison time.

Activist Post

Nestlé Caught Stealing Billions of Gallons of Water from California—No One Arrested

Baker: Dumb and Dumber: Trump on Amazon and the Postal Service

Left Baker takes a partisan shot at Trump here at "Counterpunch" which is revealing.

The Postal Service has a huge amount of fixed costs in the form of retiree benefits and especially retiree health benefits.  Congress has required that the Postal Service prefund 75 years of retiree health benefits. This requirement sets the Postal Service apart from private businesses, who do little or no prefunding of retiree health benefits. It also accounts for almost all of the Postal Service’s losses over the last decade.

This is interesting as Baker seems not to understand that what the Postal Service is doing is the same  Modified Accrual accounting methodology as any Federal government entity uses.

Baker says "Congress has required that the Postal Service prefund 75 years of retiree health benefits."

Like this is some special thing that Congress is doing to the Postal Service or something.

Yo, Baker, hello!!  this is how Congress treats ALL financial dealings of the Federal government.

Modified Accrual is described:

 "Modified accrual accounting is an accounting method commonly used by government agencies that combines accrual-basis accounting with cash-basis accounting. Modified accrual accounting recognizes revenues when they become available and measurable and, with a few exceptions, recognizes expenditures when liabilities are incurred."

Private businesses use normal Accrual Method where they can accrue the future value of their retirement funds based on some assumed ROI of the fund over the period that the fund is estimated to have to provide benefits so they don't have a problem.

The whole REAL problem comes in when you're an idiot and conflate these two methodologies (like Baker is doing here...) and evaluate Modified Accrual accounting based on normal Accrual criteria or vice versa.

This is routinely what the CBO morons do and all their Peterson toadies and then they say "the US is bankrupt!" or whatever nonsense they spew all the time.  "Unfunded liabilities!" , etc... its simply a product of their idiot accounting method conflations.

So who is dumb here where Baker doesn't even understand basic principles of Accounting 101?

I don't know if you want to be going all around calling the President dumb when you yourself don't even exhibit an understanding of basic principles of Accounting like all the other debt doomsday morons out there.

Baker might as well apply for a grant from the Peterson people.

Timothy Taylor — What Economists Need from their Readers: Goodwill, Intelligence Co-operation

Interesting Keynes quote. Was Keynes a Postmodernist?

Conversable Economist
What Economists Need from their Readers: Goodwill, Intelligence Co-operationTimothy Taylor | Managing editor of the Journal of Economic Perspectives, based at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota