The picture emerges that mass vaccinations against bogus threats are part of the strategy to keep the public dumb as fuck , lots of autistic mongos who won't mind about bank bailouts.
1 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Argentina & Iceland show Ireland the way: Don't bail out the banks
Most people know Swift as the author of "Gulliver's Travels." But recent events have me thinking of his 1729 essay "A Modest Proposal," in which he observed the dire poverty of the Irish, and offered a solution: sell the children as food. "I grant this food will be somewhat dear," he admitted, but this would make it "very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children." O.K., these days it's not the landlords, it's the bankers — and they're just impoverishing the populace, not eating it. But only a satirist — and one with a very savage pen — could do justice to what's happening to Ireland now. The Irish story began with a genuine economic miracle. But eventually this gave way to a speculative frenzy driven by runaway banks and real estate developers, all in a cozy relationship with leading politicians. The frenzy was financed with huge borrowing on the part of Irish banks, largely from banks in other European nations. Then the bubble burst, and those banks faced huge losses. You might have expected those who lent money to the banks to share in the losses. After all, they were consenting adults, and if they failed to understand the risks they were taking that was nobody's fault but their own. But, no, the Irish government stepped in to guarantee the banks' debt, turning private losses into public obligations. Before the bank bust, Ireland had little public debt. But with taxpayers suddenly on the hook for gigantic bank losses, even as revenues plunged, the nation's creditworthiness was put in doubt. So Ireland tried to reassure the markets with a harsh program of spending cuts. Step back for a minute and think about that. These debts were incurred, not to pay for public programs, but by private wheeler-dealers seeking nothing but their own profit. Yet ordinary Irish citizens are now bearing the burden of those debts. Or to be more accurate, they're bearing a burden much larger than the debt — because those spending cuts have caused a severe recession so that in addition to taking on the banks' debts, the Irish are suffering from plunging incomes and high unemployment. But there is no alternative, say the serious people: all of this is necessary to restore confidence. Strange to say, however, confidence is not improving. On the contrary: investors have noticed that all those austerity measures are depressing the Irish economy — and are fleeing Irish debt because of that economic weakness. Now what? Last weekend Ireland and its neighbors put together what has been widely described as a "bailout." But what really happened was that the Irish government promised to impose even more pain, in return for a credit line — a credit line that would presumably give Ireland more time to, um, restore confidence. Markets, understandably, were not impressed: interest rates on Irish bonds have risen even further. Does it really have to be this way?
1 comments:
Argentina & Iceland show Ireland the way: Don't bail out the banks
Most people know Swift as the author of "Gulliver's Travels." But recent events have me thinking of his
1729 essay "A Modest Proposal," in which he observed the dire poverty of the Irish, and offered a
solution: sell the children as food. "I grant this food will be somewhat dear," he admitted, but this
would make it "very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents,
seem to have the best title to the children."
O.K., these days it's not the landlords, it's the bankers — and they're just impoverishing the populace,
not eating it. But only a satirist — and one with a very savage pen — could do justice to what's
happening to Ireland now.
The Irish story began with a genuine economic miracle. But eventually this gave way to a speculative
frenzy driven by runaway banks and real estate developers, all in a cozy relationship with leading
politicians. The frenzy was financed with huge borrowing on the part of Irish banks, largely from banks
in other European nations.
Then the bubble burst, and those banks faced huge losses. You might have expected those who lent
money to the banks to share in the losses. After all, they were consenting adults, and if they failed to
understand the risks they were taking that was nobody's fault but their own. But, no, the Irish
government stepped in to guarantee the banks' debt, turning private losses into public obligations.
Before the bank bust, Ireland had little public debt. But with taxpayers suddenly on the hook for
gigantic bank losses, even as revenues plunged, the nation's creditworthiness was put in doubt. So
Ireland tried to reassure the markets with a harsh program of spending cuts.
Step back for a minute and think about that. These debts were incurred, not to pay for public
programs, but by private wheeler-dealers seeking nothing but their own profit. Yet ordinary Irish
citizens are now bearing the burden of those debts.
Or to be more accurate, they're bearing a burden much larger than the debt — because those
spending cuts have caused a severe recession so that in addition to taking on the banks' debts, the
Irish are suffering from plunging incomes and high unemployment.
But there is no alternative, say the serious people: all of this is necessary to restore confidence.
Strange to say, however, confidence is not improving. On the contrary: investors have noticed that all
those austerity measures are depressing the Irish economy — and are fleeing Irish debt because of
that economic weakness.
Now what? Last weekend Ireland and its neighbors put together what has been widely described as a
"bailout." But what really happened was that the Irish government promised to impose even more
pain, in return for a credit line — a credit line that would presumably give Ireland more time to, um,
restore confidence. Markets, understandably, were not impressed: interest rates on Irish bonds have
risen even further.
Does it really have to be this way?
Post a Comment