Stupid World

[Viking01]

I was recently in contact with some family back home in Copenhagen,
discussing the supposed upcoming visit of Trump to Denmark and its
likely justification:

http://cphpost.dk/news/donald-trump-...ark-visit.html

I jibed that Don simply wanted to come over and see how a decent social
democrat country - one that looked after its citizens - actually functioned.
So that they could replicate that back home.

But on reflection, I see that now that global warming has exposed more
of the "green land" under Greenland, he simply sees good opportunities to
build some exotic golf courses and new exclusive Trump hotels ...

That explains the reason behind his upcoming visit. He obviously wants
to come do a deal.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ying-greenland

Well, Don, I have only two words to say to you.

[Edit]

https://sputniknews.com/world/201908...ril-fools-day/

[Edit 2]

https://www.commondreams.org/further...ned-new-danish

[Edit 3]

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2019/08...musement-park/

[F5 Dave]

"I love you" no, wait. That's 3 words.

"Suck my. . . " no. Still 3.

Hmm this is hard.

[husaberg]

Hmm this is hard.

Nah thats three plus a vocalisation?

If the two words were coming from Bend Oregon it would be "YES please" or "I'm Cumming"

[Viking01]

There have been quite a number of articles posted in the western
mainstream press recently about Chinese Silk Road projects, with
shrieks of alarm about Chinese lending and "debt entrapment".

Even a good friend of mine (who should know better) was recently
telling me how I should be aware of unscrupulous Chinese lending.

As if the Australian banks have not been "making hay" here in NZ
the past few years, and that we shouldn't be a little more focused
closer to home:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/114...ustry-failings

But I digress.

I suggested to my friend maybe he should instead spend some time
looking at the history of the IMF (and the World Bank).

The book "Pillaging the World - The History and Politics of the IMF"
(by Ernst Wolff) is both easy and interesting reading.

But it seems there are few articles posted by the mainstream press
about past lending action by either the IMF or World Bank. Unless
you go looking for them, of course. So, maybe it's time to do a little
search.

Let's start with the IMF.

The IMF is an intermediary, effectively acting as "arranger" (and
"enforcer") for the banks making the actual loans to the approved
borrower.

Following the recent Argentine election (where the incumbent Macri
was dealt a heavy defeat, and currency and stock / bond markets
then "tanked" quickly afterwards), I came across an article on a
conservative blog where the author effectively asked the question:

"How can the IMF be so stupid as to consistently make such poor
lending decisions ?"

https://www.project-syndicate.org/co...-ghosh-2019-08

Is the writer that naive, or simply just being disingenuous ?

Of course, it's not a "poor lending decision" by the IMF. It's
just the standard IMF "loan recipe" being applied.

Where certain "standard conditions" (externalities) are imposed
upon the borrower e.g.

-currency devaluation
-cut back on fuel and food subsidies
-cut back on pensions and social welfare payments
-focus loan monies primarily on exporting activities (whose income
streams must be directed back into IMF loan repayment in the very
first instance)

And where it is desirable to try and strip borrowing countries of
certain key physical assets (e.g. energy/water/mineral companies).
Typically through privatisation and sale (and generally with rapid
purchase by circling "vulture funds" for just cents on the dollar).

It's not exactly a great surprise as this behaviour has been going
on since the end of WW2, though probably more visibly since Chile
and the "Chicago Boys" in the early 1970's :

https://www.globalresearch.ca/pillag...he-imf/5420397

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019...-saviours.html

You might be forgiven thinking that given the IMF's control over
the approval of loans, at least it would adhere to its own rules.

But No, you'd be disappointed. Apparently, IMF rules were made to
be "broken" or "amended" at will.

A few recent examples.

Ukraine

For those who remember the Ukraine coup in 2014, sovereign loans
made by Russia to the previous Ukrainian administration (ousted in
the coup) should have been repaid to Russia via the IMF when the
latter approved new loans.
[Result: Russian repayment rejected]

http://johnhelmer.net/the-kolomoisky...de-of-the-imf/

Similarly, extension of existing loans to the Ukraine should have been
denied by the IMF (because of Ukraine's "conflict status", and through
its failure to adhere to terms of the Minsk agreement made with the EU).
[Result: New loan extensions approved]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/09...on-courthouse/

Pakistan

It has also been interesting watching Pakistan over past months,
watching to see whether it would manage to obtain loans from
outside of the IMF cabal of western banks.

Despite some funding from outside parties, Pakistan still ended up
requiring a $US 6 billion loan via the IMF.

Whereas IMF loans will normally be repaid to the country's creditors,
in this case the IMF loan was made conditional upon none of the loan
amount being used to repay Chinese creditors (involved in building
of Pakistani infrastructure forming part of the new Silk Road). Part
of the reason why lending was being undertaken in the first place.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/07/the-...r-of-pakistan/

China and Russia

Given China's (and Russia's) willingness to help fund the building of
new infrastructure within neighbouring nations, the IMF has also been
busy investigating "creative ways" to try and meddle.

One example: If a Chinese (or Russian) bank makes a loan - instead of
an IMF affiliated bank, maybe the IMF could encourage the borrower to
"stiff" the lender regarding loan repayment - once the infrastructure
has been built or the product delivered and installed?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-im...ssia-2/5506116

Social Inequality

While the IMF professes to care about social inequality, it seems clear
that it is only bank shareholders that the IMF truly cares about.

https://theconversation.com/imf-says...ts-ways-120105

World Bank

Maybe the IMF's sister organisation (the World Bank) has a better track
record ?

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019...kwardness.html

Nope. And it seems that no opportunity is too small not to be exploited:

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019...the-congo.html

Perhaps the slogan "we're here to help" should be re-written "we're here
to help ourselves" in the case of these two organisations.

So please pardon my increasing "deafness" when I start hearing shrieks
about Chinese lending and "debt entrapment".

[Edit]

You'd also expect to hear more about some of the IMF and World Bank
"success stories" in the media:

https://sputniknews.com/world/201904...nezuela-block/

https://www.rt.com/news/466728-lee-c...nduras-brazil/

https://off-guardian.org/2019/08/20/...f-agriculture/

[Edit 2]

Some of you may remember an IMF loan being taken out by Ecuador around
the time that Assange was given up by the Ecuadorian authorities and was
expelled from their London embassy. Pure coincidence, of course.

Another IMF "success story" (just read the attached transcript):

https://therealnews.com/stories/ecua...doesnt-need-it

[Viking01]

https://www.rt.com/news/466939-austr...oalition-iran/

Maybe once we get our new Poseidon 8A's, we can go play there
as well.

Don, we'd send a frigate, but it's such an awfully long way to go.
Maybe if we ask the Iranians nicely, they'll fuel it up for us when
we get there.

[Edit]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12260633

[Viking01]

I've always loved graphs. A great way to help simplify things or to
try and tell a story.

But I'm not quite so sure about this one.

https://www.statista.com/chart/19070...-states-index/

After just a cursory examination, I noticed:

That NZ and Greenland are clearly in a stability league of their own.

That Greece and Argentina are almost stable - WT# ??

And as for the US and the UK being stable ? They clearly didn't evaluate
the mental state of their politicians.

At least it brought a smile.

[pritch]

After just a cursory examination, I noticed:

After just such an examination I noticed we aren't on their map. Fuckem! I hate it when that happens.

[oldrider]

After just such an examination I noticed we aren't on their map. Fuckem! I hate it when that happens.

I thought that is what he was referring to - Greenland and God's own - are not on the map?

[Viking01]

I thought that is what he was referring to - Greenland and God's own - are not on the map?

Pritch: We are on the map, but shown in very light grey in the bottom
right-hand corner.

Old Rider: Yes, it did cross my mind that maybe there was a subtle
political message being delivered (i.e. that "Gods own" might soon be
subject to some ownership change as well ... 8-)

On possibly a related note, I see the IMF plans to visit and participate
in a conference here next week:

Introduction
The Reserve Bank and the International Monetary Fund are hosting a
conference in Wellington next week to discuss broad issues around
monetary policy, the labour market, and the future of inflation targeting.

Inflation Targeting: Prospects and Challenges has attracted delegates
from around the world. It will be co-hosted by the Bank and the IMF’s
Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, and will be held at Te Papa
Tongarewa on August 28 and 29.

While inflation targeting has had a history of success in delivering low,
stable inflation and substantial macroeconomic stability over the past
several decades, the last 10 years have proven to be challenging for
monetary authorities.

RBNZ Assistant Governor and General Manager of Economics, Financial
Markets and Banking Christian Hawkesby says: “We are now faced with
stubbornly low inflation and low interest rates, driven by structural and
cyclical factors. If monetary policy is to be successful for a further 30
years, we need to confront these challenges.

“This is what this conference is about — understanding the big questions
about inflation targeting and considering how we need to adapt to continue
being as successful as possible.

Programme
https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/research-an...and-challenges

[pritch]

It would appear that map is device dependent. On the laptop the map stops just to the right of Australia. On this iPad a pop up jammed the screen. On the smallest screen the best picture. The iPhone map shows the pale NZ.

[oldrider]

The most constructive parts of that program are the "breaks". - - All they really need to do is float the decimal point! -

[mashman]

There have been quite a number of articles posted in the western
mainstream press recently about Chinese Silk Road projects, with
shrieks of alarm about Chinese lending and "debt entrapment".

Jeremy Rifkin wants the world to undertake an infrastructure overhaul to create jobs for the growing population. Part of that infrastructure undertaking is a train line from China to France. His reasoning is economics based and projected ROI in terms of savings for business etc... As such, it completely ignores human behaviour and the planetary limits that it will have to completely ignore to develop the resources for such projects. Completely moronic, but also exceptionally ironic........ especially when he claims that such things will be required in order to pay for the sharing economy that is to come. Moronic. Insane would be closer... but hey, it's what people want to hear ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa

[austingtir]

Jeremy Rifkin wants the world to undertake an infrastructure overhaul to create jobs for the growing population. Part of that infrastructure undertaking is a train line from China to France. His reasoning is economics based and projected ROI in terms of savings for business etc... As such, it completely ignores human behaviour and the planetary limits that it will have to completely ignore to develop the resources for such projects. Completely moronic, but also exceptionally ironic........ especially when he claims that such things will be required in order to pay for the sharing economy that is to come. Moronic. Insane would be closer... but hey, it's what people want to hear ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa

China's not going to have any money to build that train line with once Trump is done with them.

[Viking01]

The year started with the election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, and change
(not always positive) was on the cards:

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201...zil-bolsonaro/
https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/02/ar...mazon-forests/

We started the month with mention of a greater-than-normal number
of forest fires in the Amazon:

https://www.dw.com/en/brazil-forest-...zon/a-50116455

Though Bolsonaro denied that these claims were in fact legitimate:

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...ation-11738700
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019...cord-rate.html

Importance of the Amazon

The Amazon is the last major global bastion of rain forest.

It has sometimes been described as the "lungs of the planet", and has
been recognised as not only having significant diversity of plants and
animal species, but an ability to stabilise world weather patterns.

Germany and Norway had earlier protested to Brazil about Amazonian
forest fires and reacted by withdrawal of Amazon protection subsidies:

https://www.france24.com/en/20190816...tion-bolsonaro

To which Bolsonaro responded by criticising their "colonial attitude".

But despite Bolsonaro's claim the fires were nothing unusual - and that
many were started by environmentalists (instead of illegal loggers and
ranchers clearing forest), it looks like the locals didn't necessarily agree
with his story, have had enough, and are now protesting for action.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/...0824-0001.html

So after 20 days of "doing nothing", whilst claiming that Brazil did not
have the fire-fighting resources, we now see that he has arranged for
the deployment of up to 44,000 of their military to fight their fires.

So what has changed?

https://www.vox.com/world/2019/8/24/...cron-trump-g7-

rondonia-amazonias

Separately, I see the latest G7 conference has convened in southern
France.

At first, I thought I saw what were "heads on pikes", but sadly I was
disappointed. They were only cardboard cut-outs (very much like the
politicians themselves).

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/...0824-0002.html

After first discussing the "big ticket" items like Brexit, GAFA tax and
the US trade war with the EU, they managed to found a little time
to discuss environmentalism.

Well, the "next best thing". The EU-Mercusor trade agreement, and
how that deal might be compromised by the Amazonian fires.

https://sputniknews.com/latam/201907...ent-with-us---

report/

But as the following article says, what does the G7 have to offer?
Or indeed, what does the G7 propose to do ?

https://www.rt.com/news/467179-g7-macron-amazon-crisis/

Guess that we'll have to wait for the G7 press release and conference
minutes.

Apart from local ranchers and loggers, there are others that will
seek to benefit economically from opening up of the Amazonian
basin to exploitation e.g. mining.

[I'll ignore soy beans for the moment - it's presently being argued
over on another thread]

https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/b...020613066.html

https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...genous-consent

Which typically try to avoid meeting the true costs of their operations.

https://ips-dc.org/wp-content/upload...ed_April29.pdf


Perhaps we should forget such extractive processes for a minute, and
focus on what rain forests themselves offer (and why their ongoing
destruction matters).

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/10...st-ecosystems/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/h...dwest-n1045886

http://www.globalissues.org/article/...tant-who-cares

I do recognise the above does not address ecological footprint, estimated
resource over-consumption (Earth over-shoot) and need for more sustainable
development. Which Mashman often mentions. [Ack]

[mashman]

China's not going to have any money to build that train line with once Trump is done with them.

China have already built that which is necessary their end. Economies between China and Europe need infrastructure projects to contribute to growth. Those countries will build their part in order to boost their economy's. As such, China needing money to finish the project isn't a requirement. Other countries having the money to do it is, which is exactly what underpins Rifkin's economic model to grow the economy.

The money creation is simple: "Hi. We wish to build a trainline to lower costs and speed up various business facets. It'll cost $X, and we're all in on it because it'll create jobs and grow the economy, so no one loses.". The money is created on the promise of future ROI i.e. it's backed by a future asset and the economic growth that surrounds its creation. Same as a death pledge, I mean mortgage, the asset exists on paper without necessarily ever coming to fruition... but it keeps the economy ticking and allows the agencies of concern to keep on spreading the manure that more pointless jobs are a good thing given that the associated economic activity leads to planetary collapse.

If Trump somehow manages to drop China's economy on its arse, then we'll all feel it. You don't crash a massive economy without the rest of the world feeling it (GFC), especially when they are the owners of (goods) production that holds up approximately 1/3 of the global economy. As such, trumps tough talk is demonstrably pretty fuckin' moronic from an economic perspective... but hey, limited vision is limited vision when the knowledge base demonstrably sucks ass. That seems to be people in business for ya.