Hunger $ Billionaires

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

money

billionaires steal from the hungry


gangsters rule the world and our politicos are scared, bought or blind

[vinteuil]

our politicos are scared, bought or blind

... I don't think it's that our politicos are necessarily "scared, bought, or blind" ; I think it's rather that they - and our political systems - are radically impotent against much larger forces.

George Osborne and David Cameron can do little but tweak at the edges of what is going to happen; even Barack Obama and Angela Merkel are so ham-strung that most of their 'power' lies in their rhetoric.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

that is worse vinteuil ...... if our poliiticos went for the masters of the world through regulation tax and prosecution they would have the military, the church, the media, the intellectuals and the people mostly on their side - they are not weak in fact just in will ...

[vinteuil]

- they are not weak in fact just in will ...

... given the quicksilver nature of the financial world, our national politicians would only have power in fact if they were able to collaborate solidly - viz agree binding rules covering all countries with no risk of backsliding. Otherwise those currently holding the dosh will disappear to the countries not holding to an agreed line. When you look at how Ireland, fr'instance, tries to save its bacon by having corporate tax rates lower than its European "partners" it is clear how difficult (read: impossible) it is to get all nation states to reclaim any due 'power' over the financial system.

[ahinton]

if our poliiticos went for the masters of the world through regulation tax and prosecution they would have the military, the church, the media, the intellectuals and the people mostly on their side - they are not weak in fact just in will ...

Wouldn't that be even worse than the current situation in which each of those attempts to feather its own individual nest? How in any case can you meaningfully "go for" anyone through any of those three things when those with sufficient power and clout will simply evade what they don't like? You'd need not only the will of which you write but an established democratically elected world government in order even to have the remotest chance of developing such a situation!

And anyway, doesn't "the military, the church, the media and the intellectuals" comprise some of "the people" or is your use of "the people" intended to designate all the rest of those who are not active in or a part of any of those four categories?

[aeolium]

But calum's second link indicates that politicians are by no means as powerless to intervene in the economic system as is commonly thought. That article argues that it was the deregulation of the commodities futures market in 1999 that seems to have led to the pernicious speculation and artificially inflated food prices that we have seen of recent years. Similarly the Glass-Steagall Act in the US in 1932 prompted by the catastrophe of the Great Depression operated effectively for several decades in regulating banking, not least through the provisions separating investment and retail banking. An even more severe global economic crisis has resulted in part from the financial deregulation of the 1980s and 1990s.

It's often argued that extremely rich people and large multinational corporations can simply go elsewhere to operate if tax systems are more strictly enforced, or require them to pay more than they currently pay (in some cases absurdly small amounts relative to the size of their operation in the country). But if their freedom to operate or reside in major countries or economic blocs like the US and the EU were severely restricted unless they were prepared to pay a reasonable amount of tax, reflecting the benefit they derived from their residence or commercial operation, would they all disappear to more tax-friendly locations? Would the corporations abandon those huge markets?

Of course in practice there's more chance that I will see a Gloucester Old Spot passing by my upstairs window than that politicians will come together to agree on this kind of action, but it's not inconceivable that extreme popular discontent arising from lasting economic recession will be visited on the rich and powerful and force some kind of change.

[vinteuil]

Of course in practice there's more chance that I will see a Gloucester Old Spot passing by my upstairs window than that politicians will come together to agree on this kind of action, but it's not inconceivable that extreme popular discontent arising from lasting economic recession will be visited on the rich and powerful and force some kind of change.

I agree. And I don't think that that 'not inconceivable... extreme popular discontent' will lead to a happy outcome. For anyone. Except for a few chancers able to extract some goodies from the conflagration, as happened in post-revolutionary France and post-Gorbachev Russia.

My main hope is that the fear of such 'extreme popular discontent' may induce some "tempering of the wind to the shorn lamb" by the rich and powerful. I am not unduly optimistic. I think the next few decades are likely to be uncomfortable.

[amateur51]

money

billionaires steal from the hungryScared or just too cowardly to be useful


gangsters rule the world and our politicos are scared, bought or blind

People who can do this are deeply twisted people and akin to sociopaths in my opinion

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

no not akin ams, they are socio and psychopaths; the evidence is in, business psychologists have found a large slice of psychopathic personalities in banking and finance .... in fact the neocon agenda is a psychopath's charter

[amateur51]

no not akin ams, they are socio and psychopaths; the evidence is in, business psychologists have found a large slice of psychopathic personalities in banking and finance .... in fact the neocon agenda is a psychopath's charter

Not doubting you at all, Calum - do you have any references to articles/research please?

[ahinton]

It's often argued that extremely rich people and large multinational corporations can simply go elsewhere to operate if tax systems are more strictly enforced, or require them to pay more than they currently pay (in some cases absurdly small amounts relative to the size of their operation in the country). But if their freedom to operate or reside in major countries or economic blocs like the US and the EU were severely restricted unless they were prepared to pay a reasonable amount of tax, reflecting the benefit they derived from their residence or commercial operation, would they all disappear to more tax-friendly locations? Would the corporations abandon those huge markets?

But markets have no boundaries. You can operate out of wherever you like in an unrestricted market unless you can secure and enforce global agreement to designate those who do as members of pariah states and block all commercial activities emanating from them - or you could try - but it just won't and wouldn't work. You mention EU, yet Ireland is a member state and its corporation tax rates are competitive; likewise, Frnace's already punitive tax régime has become even more so since the accession of Hollande, so what did Cameron do? - overtly invite French companies to relocate to UK and boost the British economy by paying less taxes but to UK Treasury rather than in France. So, yes - they not only would but are disappearing to more tax-friendly locations - well, except that they're not "disappearing" as such, as they're doing this quite onenly and above board. It's the same with individuals. Most if not all EU nations require of each individual that he/she opts to be taxed in one country, but those who can afford to live in more than two have far greater choice in this than do most.

Of course in practice there's more chance that I will see a Gloucester Old Spot passing by my upstairs window than that politicians will come together to agree on this kind of action, but it's not inconceivable that extreme popular discontent arising from lasting economic recession will be visited on the rich and powerful and force some kind of change.

I'd shoot that pig if you do see it; great things, Gloucester Old Spots! The trouble is that you have first to be able to visit that discontent upon the rich and powerful effectively in order to make any impact - and one problem with that is that the rich and powerful are rich and powerful enough to avoid its effects and another is that it will generally be the rich and pwerful who are themselves charged with trying to achieve this and, as we know, they're hardly likely to do for themelves!

It's not all about taxes, though, is it? Greed and advantage-taking on a vast scale transcends anything that mere taxation policy adjustments could ever hope to address.

[amateur51]

It's not all about taxes, though, is it? Greed and advantage-taking on a vast scale transcends anything that mere taxation policy adjustments could ever hope to address.

Are you about to make the case for the teaching of a community-inspired moral sense related to finances and wealth-generation, ahinton?

[Serial_Apologist]

People who can do this are deeply twisted people and akin to sociopaths in my opinion

That's what makes you the nice fella you are, Ams. If only it were so. In reality they're only looking after their class interests - interests opposed to other class interests inbuilt into the very nature of capitalism. If they didn't do so, they'd go under - initially as competitors in the big game in which they are all fighting for a bit of the global market that sometimes expands (like, during periodic booms, or when the likes of Russia or China come "on-line"), but mostly (these days) contracts by virtue of its unsustainable capacity to produce, let alone maintain growth.

The socio-/psychopathological characteristics of privilege or ambition to succeed at the expense of all others will either bring up new geniuses of the Keynes type to come and rescue their system and its operations, or we will continue along the softening up process of eroding civil and democratic rights by stealth and targetted scapegoating, until those of working age who make them their wealth, and are therefore in a position to challenge power as exercised and supported in the boardrooms, police, militaries, mass media and churches of whatever religion, come up with a replacement for alternatives proven by history to be wanting.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

The headline-grabbing factoid in the article was an estimate that 10% of people in the financial services industry are psychopaths. And that's a conservative estimate, according to Christopher Bayer, a Wall Street psychotherapist cited by DeCovny.

DeCovny describes "financial psychopaths" as individuals who seek thrills, lack empathy, don't care about what others think, are charming and intelligent, and are skilled at lying and manipulation. Citing Richard Peterson, managing partner of MarketPsych (a firm that provides psychological and behavioral finance training for the industry), DeCovny notes that these are some of the traits that also predict success on Wall Street.

here you are ams 1

and 2

and 3

[Lateralthinking1]

My view, seriously, is that we need to redefine murder.

The poor might have invited these people in to their homes via elections. That isn't to say that they were asking to be shot while they were sleeping.

Of course, the perpetrators don't have a gun and no one dies overnight. But the impacts of their actions, rather like the excessive use of alcohol, are the same in the longer term.

There are as many murderers in the public sector as there are in the private sector. Plus there are far more ordinary people who are unwittingly psychopathic, having adjusted to modern economics just to earn a living.

The behaviour is wide ranging and it is there on every high street. Just have a look at the way many drive.

I stood at a speed monitor at 6am one morning. Virtually every vehicle was travelling at 60mph rather than 30mph. The people looked normal. Business people, white van men, mothers........every one was a psychopath.