Month: July 2019

Authored by Neil Clark,

It’s a crowded field but, by any objective standard, outgoing British Prime Minister Theresa May must rate as one of the worst – if not the worst – occupants of the office of all time.

Spare us the Uriah Heep-style hypocrisy and gushing ‘tributes.’ The truth is an Op-Ed on the achievements of Theresa May would be the shortest one ever written.

Winston Churchill helped defeat the Nazis in World War Two. Clement Attlee gave Britain the NHS. Harold Wilson established the Open University. Ted Heath saved Rolls Royce. Gordon Brown gave over-60s and disabled people free nationwide bus travel. What did Theresa May give us except a Brexit impasse and the worst movements to Abba’s Dancing Queen ever seen?

May boasted about delivering “strong and stable” leadership but in reality she was as weak and wobbly as a plate of jelly.

Given the task of implementing the EU referendum vote of 2016, she gave the horse named ‘Brexit’ such a terrible ride that if she’d been a jockey she’d have been hauled before the stewards.

Of course every one was to blame for this debacle except Theresa herself.  But as Prime Minister, the buck stopped with her. She prevaricated and this prevarication emboldened the ‘Stop Brexit’ campaign.

In 2017, she needlessly called a general election, and fought the most unimpressive election campaign any sitting prime minister has ever fought. Mr Bean himself couldn’t have ballsed it up more.

May would in normal circumstances have gone the morning after she lost her party’s Parliamentary majority, but the Establishment’s fear of Jeremy Corbyn kept her hanging on for two more excruciating years.

On the foreign policy front May did her bit to stoke up Cold War 2.0 tensions with Russia and in April 2018 rushed to join in with Trump’s punishment bombing of Syria before chemical weapons experts could carry out a proper investigation into reports of an attack in Douma.

New revelations of a leaked but hitherto unpublished report cast doubt on but do not conclusively prove that it wasn’t Syrian government forces that carried out an attack, but May preferred to bomb first and wait for evidence later.

At home, she continued policies of austerity, which have caused great misery across the land. Drug trade-fuelled knife crime has spiralled horrifically following cuts to frontline police services – which began in 2010 when one Theresa May was Home Secretary. Hundreds of local libraries, the hallmark of a civilized society, have closed during May‘s period in power. In December 2018 it was reported that almost 130 of Britain’s public libraries had closed during the previous year.

Even under Thatcher it was never this bad.

Promises to the electorate were broken even before they were made. 

In 2017, the Tory Manifesto pledged to ‘maintain’ pensioner benefits “including free bus passes, eye tests, prescriptions and TV licences, for the duration of this Parliament”.

Yet a month before it was published, May’s government had already handed over the power to the BBC to take TV licences away from over-75s in 2020 – a full two years before the new Parliament’s expiry date. Last month, the BBC said they would be withdrawing free TV licenses for up to 3.7 million over-75s. May could have said ‘the government will step in to keep good our promise made to pensioners’ but she didn’t. Instead we just got a government minister saying the BBC ‘should do more to support older people.’  Meaningless waffle when instead action was needed.

May posed as a ‘moderate‘ – to contrast herself both from her own ‘right-wing’ and Jeremy Corbyn’s ‘left-wing extremism’ but there was, in truth, nothing moderate about her or her policies. Under her watch the gradual privatization of the NHS has continued. In March it was reported that the number waiting more than 18 weeks for operations had tripled in five years. Early this year, NHS chiefs asked May to reverse pro-privatization reforms.

In October 2018 May declared ‘austerity is over,’ but the situation on the ground was very different.

Just take a tour of Britain’s town and city centers and count the number of boarded-up retail outlets, to see the impact austerity has had. 

Theresa Mayhem inspired no-one but demoralized millions.

Britain is best rid of her.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2yfDuup Tyler Durden

Following weeks of unrest amid a corruption scandal and damning text messages, Puerto Rico Governor Ricardo Rossello announced his resignation on Wednesday in a videotaped address which aired just before Midnight. 

After discussing his “laundry list of accomplishments,” Rossello said he ‘did his best,’ and ‘worked during vacations, weekend and long days to make Puerto Rico more just.’ His resignation will take effect August 2nd. 

Now he’s talking about hurricanes Irma and Maria and praising his response to it.

— claudia irizarry aponte (@clauirizarry) July 25, 2019

He just announced his resignarion effective August 2, 2019.

— claudia irizarry aponte (@clauirizarry) July 25, 2019

Rossello’s resignation comes days after thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Old San Juan, calling for his ouster.

Following the announcement, crowds broke out into celebration, exclaiming “Ricky, te botamos!” (“Ricky, we threw you out!”). 

“After the birth of my son, this is the happiest day of my life,” said Puerto Rican reggaton star René Pérez Joglar, also known as Residente. Joglar released a song last week calling for protesters to take to the streets, rapping “This is coming out early so you can eat it for breakfast … Sharpening the knives. Fury is the only political party that unites us.“

As we noted last week, protesters broke past a barricade at the governor’s mansion on Wednesday, resulting in the deployment of tear gas. “By early hours Thursday, the old city of San Juan resembled a war zone, with police chasing protesters through the streets while firing rubber bullets, gas canisters and what appeared to be flash bombs,” according to NPR. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YfhI4H Tyler Durden

Authored by Tom Chatham via Project Chesapeake,

In 1940 you could buy a nice cape cod style home for around $2,500. Someone entering the job market likely started out at $25 a week. A 1940 Buick with a straight 8 would run you $895 and up.

Why this stroll down memory lane? Because it is meant to show how much inflation has changed the price of things. When we still used money that was based on gold and silver, inflation was kept in check to some degree. Fractional reserve banking and excessive credit creation have distorted the value of things we depend on for life and we are coming to the end of that failed experiment. All of our recent prosperity has been paid for with our ability to print dollars out of thin air.

If you want to know where we are being led you only have to stroll down any city street where the homeless live, or you can look through the many pictures of the great depression. The American people are being systematically impoverished and it is being done knowingly by those in charge and is allowed by a dumbed down, apathetic public too busy staring at their iphone to notice.

If this nation is to survive and retain a reasonable standard of living and quality of life, we will have to downsize to a level that we can actually afford. We will need to forego the 2,000 sq. ft. $300,000 homes we all like so much and settle for a more affordable 900 sq. ft. $30,000 home we can actually pay for. We will have to give up the $40,000 autos coming out of Detroit now and settle for a smaller inexpensive model that can actually get 60 mpg.

We will also need to return to a financial system that is based on real value. This being gold and silver money. If we try to use anything else we are simply trying to fool ourselves. You cannot use a currency that does not act as a store of wealth over the long term.

We can do this by choice and salvage what is left of our country or we can continue on the current path and end up an impoverished country with a dictator in charge like most other failed nations in the world.

If we want to continue having a country worth living in we need to go back to what we know works and try to build up from there. We no longer have sufficient manufacturing capacity to employ all of the people in this country and any kind of welfare will not work without debasing the currency.

This will necessitate 20% of the population going back to living on small farms to insure they have a job and sufficient resources to care for their families. Nothing else in our current situation will work. We have too many unemployed people living off of the state and this will end soon. We will either have a mass exodus from the country or a mass extinction within it. As unpleasant as it sounds that is our future if we do not make substantial changes while we still have time. That time is nearly up.

Downsizing our lives and our wants will be a necessary change if we want to salvage something of our future. We have lived too long in fantasy land and now we must come back to reality. The west line has moved and we will never get back all of the production jobs we once had. We must accept that and accept that our country will be less productive and less prosperous in the future and learn to live within our means.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Y1nPOY Tyler Durden

The US military said on Wednesday that a guided-missile cruiser had sailed through the Taiwan Strait just hours after the Chinese military criticized Washington for “adding complexity to regional security” and warned it to stay clear of the island or else risk war.

Trump’s support for Taiwan, which recently was cleared by Congress to purchase over $2 billion in US weapons, is among a growing number of flashpoints in the U.S.-China relationship, which include a trade war, U.S. sanctions and a growing geopolitical conflict in the South China Sea, where China has been expanding its military presence while the United States conducts freedom-of-navigation patrols.

The warship sent to the 112-mile-wide Taiwan Strait was identified as the Antietam. “The (ship’s) transit through the Taiwan Strait demonstrates the U.S. commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific,” Commander Clay Doss, a spokesman for the U.S. Navy’s Seventh Fleet, said in a statement. “The U.S. Navy will continue to fly, sail and operate anywhere international law allows,” he added, quoted by Reuters.

The defiant move comes shortly after China warned that it is ready for war if necessary, to prevent any attempts to split the island from the mainland, or any push toward Taiwan’s independence, and accusing the United States of undermining global stability and denouncing its arms sales to the self-ruled island.

While the voyage will further escalate tensions with China, it will also be viewed by self-ruled Taiwan as a sign of support from U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration amid growing friction between Taipei and Beijing.

While the United States has no formal ties with Taiwan but is bound by law to help provide the island with the means to defend itself and is its main source of arms. Meanwhile, China has been ramping up pressure to assert its sovereignty over the island, which it considers a wayward province of “one China” and sacred Chinese territory.

On Wednesday, Chinese Defense ministry spokesman Wu Qian told a news briefing on a defense white paper, the first like it in several years to outline the military’s strategic concerns, that China would make its greatest effort for peaceful reunification with Taiwan.

“If there are people who dare to try to split Taiwan from the country, China’s military will be ready to go to war to firmly safeguard national sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity,” he said, in a clear warning to the US.

Commenting on the white paper’s implications, China’s notorious twitter troll, Hu Xijin, editor in chief of the nationalist Global Times, said “there are few possibilities and necessities for China to possess military power to provoke the US. But if attacked by the US, China must be able to cause unbearable losses to the US.“

There are few possibilities and necessities for China to possess military power to provoke the US. But if attacked by the US, China must be able to cause unbearable losses to the US. https://t.co/mx3Naqvpui

— Hu Xijin 胡锡进 (@HuXijin_GT) July 24, 2019

There are few possibilities and necessities for China to possess military power to provoke the US. But if attacked by the US, China must be able to cause unbearable losses to the US.

In recent years, China has repeatedly sent military aircraft and ships to circle Taiwan on exercises – usually around the time US had sent its own ships in the vicinity – and worked to isolate it internationally, whittling down its few remaining diplomatic allies.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Gs9MHi Tyler Durden

Jeffrey Epstein has been found injured in a fetal position inside his New York City jail cell, according to NBC New York, citing sources close to the investigation. 

The 66-year-old convicted pedophile is being held in the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in lower Manhattan pending trial. He was found semi-conscious with ‘marks on his neck,’ according to the report – which adds that investigators are still trying to figure out what happened. 

Two sources tell News 4 that Epstein may have tried to hang himself, while a third source cautioned that the injuries were not serious and questioned if Epstein might be using it as a way to get a transfer.

A fourth source told NBC New York that assault has not been ruled out – as investigators have questioned former Orange County police officer Nicholas Tartaglione in connection with the incident. Tartaglione was arrested in December 2016 on suspicion of killing four men in an alleged cocaine distribution conspiracy, before burying their bodies in his Otisville yard, according to court records. 

Sources told News 4 investigators questioned Tartaglione, and the former cop claimed not to have seen anything and didn’t touch Epstein, sources said.

The attorney for Tartaglione denied all the claims that his client attacked the financier, saying he and Epstein get along and saw each other recently. –NBC New York

Epstein was arrested on July 6 for allegedly sex-trafficking minors, and was denied bail on July 18 by US District Judge Richard Berman after prosecutors said he poses an “extraordinary risk of flight” due to his “exorbitant wealth.” He has notified the court that he will appeal the decision. 

Berman said prosecutors established a “preponderance” of evidence of Epstein being a flight risk, calling the fake Saudi passport “concerning,” and said the government also established community danger by “clear and convincing evidence” — which led to his decision to keep the financier behind bars.

Epstein’s lawyers had wanted him released on house arrest with electronic monitoring at his $77 million Manhattan mansion. They said he wouldn’t run and was willing to pledge a fortune of at least $559 million as collateral.

That said, Epstein would likely be in solitary confinement for 23 hours per day, lawyer Andrew Laufer, who has represented MCC inmates, told Reuters earlier this month. 

“When you have someone that’s allegedly a sexual predator like Jeffrey Epstein, he’ll need to be in protective custody,” said Laufer. 

“The sex offenders have a hard time,” said former BOP employee Jack Donson. “He’s definitely going to get ostracized.” 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2SEXOPf Tyler Durden

Via Srinivas Mazumdaru of DW,

75 years ago, the Bretton Woods conference laid the foundations for much of today’s global economic order. But the system is facing a serious threat from growing nationalism and protectionism worldwide.

In July 1944, as it appeared that World War II would be coming to an end with victory for the Allies, senior finance officials from 44 countries huddled in a luxury hotel in Bretton Woods, in the US state of New Hampshire, to put in place the post-war economic order.  

The decades prior to Bretton Woods were characterized by commercial conflict, trade wars and military conflict. Restrictions on global commerce and “beggar-thy-neighbor” economic policies had deepened the reach of the Great Depression in the 1930s, imposing huge economic and social costs, which contributed to the rise of nationalist movements, resulting in the outbreak of World War II.

The delegates, including the principle architects of Bretton Woods — John Maynard Keynes of the UK Treasury and Harry Dexter White of the US Treasury — were acutely aware of the adverse effects of the depression, two world wars, economic chaos and poverty.

They set forth to bring about change by promoting international monetary cooperation, supporting the expansion of trade and economic growth, and discouraging policies like trade protectionism and competitive currency devaluations. 

The mission of Bretton Woods, in the words of then US Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, was that it should “do away with the economic evils — the competitive devaluation and destructive impediments to trade — which preceded the present war.”

The delegates agreed to create a new international monetary system, underpinned by open markets and fixed exchange rates. The agreement pegged the value of other nations’ currencies to the US dollar, which, in turn, was pegged to the price of gold, fixed at $35 (€31.2) an ounce.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was established to monitor and enforce a rules-based system of exchange rates and financial stability, while the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, now part of the World Bank Group, was set up to provide assistance to countries that had been physically and financially devastated by the war.

The conference at Bretton Woods thus laid the foundations for much of today’s global economic order.

Shaping economic agenda

By the early 1970s, the regime of fixed, but adjustable, exchange rates came under heavy pressure. It ultimately collapsed in 1971 when US President Richard Nixon, following large US trade deficits, broke the dollar’s link to gold. It marked the effective end of the Bretton Woods monetary arrangement.

But the Bretton Woods institutions – the IMF and the World Bank – have continued to shape the international economic agenda. And the objective and spirit of Bretton Woods have continued to guide global policymakers.

In terms of overall economic development, the decades since have been a success, say many economists, although the world has had to deal with inevitable economic and social challenges.

For the 75th anniversary, the Washington-based Bretton Woods Committee organized a compendium of 50 essays – Revitalizing the Spirit of Bretton Woods – examining the 1944 conference’s legacy and challenges ahead.

In their chapter, Nicholas Stern of the London School of Economics and Amar Bhattacharya of the Brookings Institution pointed out that “overall, world income per capita has grown by a factor of 4 since 1950 as population has roughly trebled, so that total output has gone up by a factor of around 12.”

They also noted, “inequality between countries has fallen as a result of the more rapid growth of the large populous emerging markets.” Adding, “however, there has been an increase in inequality within many countries, particularly in terms of the shares of income and wealth going to the top 1%.”

Governance issues

Overall, the Bretton Woods ideal of multilateral cooperation and open markets worked well. Paul Volcker, former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, once said: “Bretton Woods is not a particular institution — it is an ideal, a symbol, of the never-ending need for sovereign nations to work together to support open markets in goods, in services, and in finance, all in the interest of a stable, growing and peaceful economy.”

But for decades, the Bretton Woods institutions have drawn hefty criticism for imposing “neoliberal” economic policies, involving financial deregulation, mass privatizations and austerity. The IMF has faced flak for forcing debtor countries around the world to open their markets and weaken labor protection.

Prior to the 2008 financial crisis, some even questioned the continued need for the IMF. But the crisis changed all that, and the institution played a key firefighting role in cooperation with central banks and finance ministries. Today countries from Pakistan to Argentina continue to knock on the doors of the IMF for help when they find themselves in dire financial straits.

And countries from Asia to South America continue to seek funds from the World Bank to carry out all sorts of developmental projects, despite increased competition from the likes of other institutions, such as the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

The Bretton Woods institutions have been grappling with governance issues for years, with many emerging economies maintaining that they’re being denied adequate representation in the organizations’ governing bodies.

Another irritant is the informal arrangement between the US and Europe to name the heads of the institutions, where Europe chooses the IMF’s managing director and the US selects the head of the World Bank.

Many emerging economies are calling for an increase in their IMF shares, while also protecting the shares of African countries. Experts say that would mean reducing the shares of European countries.

‘Reached its limits’

China’s economic rise and the global shift away from US dominance have also strained the system. 

“The Bretton Woods order as we know it has reached its limits,” French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire recently said. “Unless we are able to reinvent Bretton Woods, the New Silk Roads might become the new world order,” Le Maire stated, referring to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which envisions rebuilding the old Silk Road to connect China with Asia, Europe and beyond with massive infrastructure spending largely financed by China.

“And Chinese standards — on state aid, on access to public procurements, on intellectual property — could become the new global standards,” Le Maire said.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump’s “America First” policies and trade protectionist measuresare viewed as a rejection of the spirit of multilateralism and international cooperation that defined Bretton Woods. Many fear that could ultimately lead to instability and conflict.

As Richard A. Debs, the international council chair of the Bretton Woods Committee, wrote in his chapter in the compendium: “History has proven that a nationalistic, isolationist, protectionist approach to dealing with other countries of the world can lead, and has often led, to instability, conflict and wars.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2GnByon Tyler Durden