Financial Follies: smart money is against the surge

Posted on by

“This NBER paper by MIT’s Michael Greenstone reinforces Paul Krugman’s message…. that the “smart money” is betting against Iraq’s survival. According to this analysis of the Iraqi state bond market, since the Surge began there has been “a 40% increase in the market’s expectation that Iraq will default. This finding suggests that to date the Surge is failing to pave the way toward a stable Iraq and may in fact be undermining it.”

More by Michael Greenstone of MIT at the Social Science Research Network

Media-trix & inforwarmongering: 3 day strike against Iran?

Posted on by

Alexis Debat, former media consultant to ABC (especially to Brian Ross’ s reports) is proving worthy of more and more scrutiny, especially after posting a widely circulated report that the US planned a 3-day strike against all Iranian military facilities. Apparently, Debat was also active in the run up to the Iraq war and in concocting interviews-that-never-were with Barack Obama, Bill Gates, and others…

“The renewed scrutiny has been driven by revelations about Mr. Debat after a French news Web site, Rue 89, reported this week that an interview supposedly with Senator Obama was entirely made up. Mr. Debat, who could not be reached last night, sent an e-mail message to ABC yesterday saying the allegations against him “are slanderous.”

He told The Washington Post Wednesday that an intermediary had spoken with Mr. Obama. But representatives for Mr. Obama denied that he spoke with anyone connected to Mr. Debat.

Subsequently, other figures whose interviews appeared under Mr. Debat’s byline in the French magazine Politique Internationale have come forward to say they never spoke to him. These included Mr. Clinton; Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg; Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman; Bill Gates, the chairman of Microsoft; and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Since his departure from ABC News in June, Mr. Debat has continued to work as a senior fellow for national security and terrorism at the Nixon Center in Washington. He was quoted as a knowledgeable source in an article in The Times of London this month, saying that American military forces were planning attacks that would demolish “the entire Iranian military.” He has also been quoted by many newspapers and news services.

Guillemette Faure, a reporter for Rue 89, said doubts had been raised about an ABC report, with Mr. Debat as a source, during the buildup to the Iraq war. The report said that Uday Hussein, a son of Saddam Hussein, had ordered two French ballet students at gunpoint to have sex in public…..”

More at the New York Times.

Now, wazzup with that, eh?

Why would a known liar from the Iraq war run-up now be overstating the Pentagon’s plans against Iran?

You can’t guess? Well – here’s a little anecdote from the life of Bertold Brecht, the German writer. Brecht recalled fondly how he would snooker his teachers in much the same way. If he got back a failing grade, he would cover the right answers on his paper with red ink and then go back and complain to his teacher that the marking was all wrong. The embarrassed teacher would naturally undo all the redmarks, even the ones he had originally given, and Brecht would get through the exam.

Over at Kos, some bloggers seem to agree:

“The publicity over Debat’s alleged “massive” Pentagon strike plan has helped render a “less than massive” strike much more viable, in PR terms. ”
Oh, what a tangled web we weave/when first we practice to deceive etc. etc…

Marketing books…

Posted on by

A reader at the New York Sun on reviewers, sales, and marketing:

“I think the mistake is thinking in today’s world that reviews really, really matter when it comes to how well a book will sell. It’s all about the marketing and not the Times Book Review cover. Sad to say authors should have a marketing plan of their own and work their website, their contacts, their blog and everything else they need to become well known.

There are going to be fewer and fewer reviews as time goes on but there are more and more opportunities for author’s to promote themselves. We all know it’s kind of a mystery as to why some books become bestsellers and some don’t. but today an author also has to be a marketer….”

So – dear, long-suffering reader of this blog, it is not immodesty but pure survival as a writer that compels me to assert myself in cyberspace.

On the first book I avoided even a bio. On this book there’s been more of a marketing effort, clearly. The result is painfully convincing to me, even though joining the blogosphere entails a loss of privacy I don’t like. Still, so far, I’ve been able to live with it, except for one or two peculiar incidents, which I think probably had politics behind them.

A little marketing also helps prevent misattribution.
Contrary to appearances, none of this has much to do with personal style. The persona of a blogger demands that even recluses leave their caves and saunter out, even if it’s with a mask….

Raimondo on Petraeus…

Posted on by

More thoughts on Petraeus:

The media seems more comfortable with “horse-race” questions (i.e. how did this go down, do you think this will fly, etc. etc.) than anything substantial where they don’t have the knowledge or grasp of history to make any kind of real evaluation of the news.

But that said, I don’ t think Move On should be in the business of questioning the patriotism of people, simply because they interpret facts differently. As for Petraeus putting a good spin on things — this is a rather juvenile take on it. The man is in the army – it’s part of his job description to put the best face on an ongoing effort (and I have no means of knowing that he was being disingenuous in doing so).

I think the antiwar message by itself is strong enough that it doesn’t need a personal attack at all (on military people, especially). Of course, trust the MSM to run off-track with it…

Justin Raimondo at antiwar, on the other hand, takes the tack that this ad is a good thing:

“Petraeus is surely cooking the books, as the MoveOn.org folks aver in their great New York Times ad – nice to see they’re (finally!) growing a pair – but this avoids the larger question: what is the administration really up to in Iraq? They’re hanging on, “buying time,” as the pundits ceaselessly report – but what do they hope to accomplish?

If you go through the Petraeus report, the key passages are those that deal with Iran. Petraeus continually points the finger at Tehran as an explanation for the lack of “progress” in Iraq. He claims to have “disrupted Shia militia extremists” – you know, the ones that sit in the Iraqi parliament – and to have captured the leaders of “Iranian-supported Special Groups, along with a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative supporting Iran’s activities in Iraq.” Who is this operative, and what are these “Special Groups”? Apparently, they are too special to be named in testimony before Congress. The “ethno-sectarian competition,” Petraeus avers, is being pushed toward violence, in part because of “malign actions by Syria and, especially, by Iran.”

What actions? No answer is given: not that anyone is asking, at least not in the Congress or among the presidential candidates of either party. Prior accusations that IEDs found in Iraq were manufactured in Iran have proved sketchy, at best, and pure invention, at worst. Yet Petraeus’ words are simply taken as gospel, much as Colin Powell’s peroration of Scooter Libby-produced lies performed in front of the UN was hailed as a home run. Years from now, will we look back on the Petraeus-Crocker dog-and-pony show with the same bitter regret that nobody – or almost nobody – doubted them?

You can bet the ranch on it.

More lies from the “honorable” Gen. Petraeus…”

Comment:

Maybe so, if the point is to call the man on his actions. But is it? The point is to change enough minds among the leadership that we get immediate troop withdrawal. An accusation of treachery won’t help that. It won’t change minds; it will harden them.
But it feels good.

Which is what a lot of activism amounts to.

(PS: not a criticism of activists….just a pensive afterthought that applies to me as well….)

Death of Alex: If only we were bird-brains…..

Posted on by

“Alex’s advanced language and recognition skills revolutionized the understanding of the avian brain.”

That’s Alex, the parrot.

“After Pepperberg bought Alex from an animal shop in 1973, the parrot learned enough English to identify 50 different objects, seven colors, and five shapes.

He could count up to six, including zero, was able to express desires, including his frustration with the repetitive research.

He also occasionally instructed two other parrots at the lab to “talk better” if they mumbled, though it wasn’t clear if he was simply mimicking researchers.

Pepperberg said Alex hadn’t reached his full cognitive potential and was demonstrating the ability to take distinct sounds from words he knew and combine them to form new words. Just last month he pronounced the word “seven” for the first time.

The cause of Alex’s death was unknown. The African Grey parrot’s average life span is 50 years, Pepperberg said.

She said Alex was discovered dead in his cage Friday morning. Pepperberg said she waited to release the news until Monday so grieving researchers could get over the shock and talk about it.

Pepperberg said the last time she saw Alex on Thursday, they went through their goodnight routine, in which she told him it was time to go in the cage and said: “You be good, I love you. I’ll see you tomorrow.”

Alex responded, “You’ll be in tomorrow.”

From MSNBC.

We could be spending money and time wasted on senseless wars to prod around in the mysteries in our own heads and the heads of other creatures.

Believe it or not, we might learn things that would do more to preserve peace and security in the world than a nuclear arsenal. More on Alex’s contributions to research on language and cognition here

 

Financial follies – the plastic empire

Posted on by

“We’ve all had old-timers (usually a grandfather) lecture us on the virtues of cash, and the evils of credit. But, never content to stand on mere common sense, we typical Americans (among whom I number), credit shoved in our faces, felt emboldened to ignore the wise counsel of our elders.

Imagine spending money you don’t have, on things you don’t need, using a piece of paper that’s essentially – valueless. This is a concept so diabolically surreal, so Dada, it must have originated with a roving sixth-century performance artist or some gnarled monk-like sage. A mere “banker” could never have concocted something so outrageous. It’s simply too…insanely artistic.

So what have we reaped for not listening to grandpa? Widespread financial impoverishment. Chattel slavery, American-style. The destruction of our manufacturing base. A service (that is, a slave) economy. A government whose scope and control would shame a Roman emperor. And always…war. Endless war.

And all those Great American middle-class consumers? What about them?

They have placed a bet that they can play chicken with the Federal Reserve – and win. But the Fed is driving a Mack truck. And they’re driving a Fiat.

But…what if neither side “turns chicken?” What if there’s a head-on collision?

Well, there’s no need to wonder how it all turns-out. The credit streams have, in fact, run dry. And there has just been a massive head-on smash-up. The Fed has fled the scene of the accident, wounded.

And the middle-class consumer? He’s lying on the highway in a coma, perhaps dreaming deeply of a fading image on his wide-screen TV.

At this moment in historical time, it looks as if America could use a really good emergency room physician. Someone who has delivered 4,000 babies instead of 4,000 body bags.

Someone who can deliver prosperity instead of bubbles. Freedom instead of slavery.

Most urgently, someone who can deliver us from the evil of fiat currency, which is at the root of perhaps most of our evils, both social and political.

Someone, come to think of it, like Ron Paul.”

More by James Herndon at Lew Rockwell.

Mobs update…

Posted on by

Just heard that “Mobs” debuted on the NY Times non-fiction hardcover list (September 23, 2007) at #20, which means it won’t be on the printed list, but a good showing still for a 400-plus page book packed with history and economics and pretty controversial material on the war, globalization, and the media — not the usual fodder of business books…

If you liked it, please write reviews – would much appreciate it. This wasn’t a book calculated to make us popular, especially as we don’t pay obeisance to the group. It was a purgative administered to the body politic, because in our honest opinion it needs it….

Is liberty only on the left?

Posted on by

So says Wally Conger in an interview with Sunny Maravillosa via Tom Ender at Endervidualism):

“Wally: It can be confusing, can’t it? [laughs] But I try to keep it simple. I’m a Hess-Konkin fundamentalist on left and right designations for the broad political landscape. Given Rothbard’s claim that our libertarian forebears were late 18th, early 19th century classical liberal “leftists”, and subscribing, as Hess and Konkin did, to the idea that politics follows a straight line, not a circle, I believe liberty lies in the leftward direction and culminates at the farthest left in statelessness, or anarchism. Likewise, as you travel rightward along the line, you move toward bureaucracy and concentrated power and wealth. That direction terminates in, well, tyranny, despotism, and repression. Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Winston Churchill, and FDR were all men of the right. Fidel Castro oversees a right regime. George W. Bush, of course, falls on the extreme right, as do Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and the reptilian Chuck Schumer. Whatever their rhetoric, they all believe in consolidating power into the fewest possible hands….”

Comment:

While I like Conger’s optimism, I am not sure that I follow this argument. There are too many ideas here not fully teased out. What is power, exactly? How is liberty affected by power – whichever version of power we are talking about?

As for politics being a straight line – I simply don’t buy it. Human interaction and ideological cross-pollination are so complex, many- layered and dynamic that any two-dimensional model is on its face suspect….

Financial Follies: Banana Republicans…..

Posted on by

Now, here in the US, we are supposed to be geographically challenged, i.e., we enjoy a deficit in social studies information of the kind that runs — what is the capital of Outer Mongolia and name its three leading exports. Ok..guilty as charged.

But guess what, turns out we don’t even know where we’ve been living all these years.

The U.S of A? Nope. Turns out, we’re Zimbabwe:

Here’s Puru Saxena on our banana republic:

“Take a look at the annual money-supply growth rates around the world –

US +12%
Euro zone +13%
Britain +14%
China +20%
Russia +51%
India +23%
S. Africa +22%
Brazil +12%

Now, you don’t have to be a NASA-scientist to figure out that as the quantity of money increases, each unit of money will continue to lose its value or purchasing power against assets whose supply cannot be increased at the same pace. This confiscation of purchasing power has bullish implications for precious metals.

Today, several highly-intelligent economists and analysts are anxiously waiting for “The Crash” which will wipe out the value of the Dow Jones by 50-60%, cut the value of gold by half, cause an economic depression and create a vicious bear-market in asset prices. In my humble opinion, these people are going to be disappointed because “The Crash” will be stealth and will take place via plummeting currencies rather than an outright collapse in nominal asset-prices. Those who are forecasting a significant decline in US asset prices need to look no further than Zimbabwe where stocks have been making record-highs, albeit in a collapsing currency!”

PS: The figures for the growth of M3 in the US were removed from the official stats sometime last year, I believe, but are available at a number of websites, such as, nowandfutures.com.

Now, the US rate doesn’t even look that bad next to some other places, like Russia, for instance. But should Russia, in its current state, with its huge criminal element, be the standard for the US? And note, please, that official Consumer Price Index numbers are massaged in various ways so that inflation rates are heavily disguised. Money supply increases seem only to be boosting asset prices and not hitting the grocery shelves right now, but that’s because we aren’t thinking about things like the massive growth in insurance rates, especially health insurance, but also home insurance costs, increases in rents (not as high as increases in house prices but still growing in most major cities), and another big one, increases in college tuition costs. The important thing is that in India, for example, money supply increases and asset prices inflation, while also bad, have at least been accompanied by increases in salaries (in some sectors) and growth in productivity. Not the case in the US, as far as I can tell…..where growth has been largely in the housing sector (in addition to the burgeoning of the health- care sector).