Deflationary recession is now increasingly probable!

US bond yield has gone up by 50% in just 2 months reversing the long term trend!  This begun before  the recent US presidential election and is rapidly rising since the election, in the last couple of weeks.

The yield increase causes the financial asset values and the value of debt held as collateral - to decrease. This is highly deflationary! It can no longer be offset by "quantitative easing"(*) and any of the recently employed financial stimulation techniques, because injecting more cash into circulation causes the interest rates to increase or to decline less rapidly, which prevents the fixed assets and bond prices to recover or to reverse the declining trend. Providing a cash stimulus may even accelerate the banking and corporate collateral collapse by raising the interest rates and yields even further! On the other hand, the recently favored method of stimulating the large corporate economy by offering them cheap low interest credit might not work anymore (**) now that the interest rates have risen and the large corporate assets that can be used as the collateral for new loans - have declined in value!

The current global corporate economy has entered a classical two "poison pills" stage (***)! One "poison pill" being the corporate "globalism" - a credit-based corporate expansion (with austerity for everybody else), while the other "poison pill" being the financial stimulus policy of expanding the monetary mass. One "poison pill" solution neutralizes the effects of the other thus compelling the ruling elites to employ both of them alternatively resulting in the slower (but surer) decline as opposed to applying any one of the "solutions" alone which would lead to a rapid economic collapse!

Stan Bleszynski

Notes:

(*) The reason monetary stimulus cannot reverse the current deflationary assets' collapse (though it may produce a localized price inflation for services, food and commodities) is that the global amount of fixed yield investment assets is about two orders of magnitude higher than the amount of monetary mass in circulation. Any increase in monetary mass attempting to push inflation and yields up would therefore be countered by strong deflationary decline of the fixed-yield assets held by corporations, investment funds and governments.

(**) Cheap credit offered at low interest rates, might still work for small property owners who unlike large corporations, are not yet fully credit-collateral-tapped-out! This would also prevent or would slow down the property collapse.

(***) I have seen this technique employed successfully for manipulating a victim into self-destruction that is very general and not limited to economy but used extensively in consumer marketing and other areas as well. It is based on promoting two equally destructive but opposing paths , products, ideologies or beliefs, with one countering the other. The victim is entrapped into pursuing them both switching alternatively from one to the other while spiraling into oblivion. To make this work, all choices other than those two have to be hidden from view or obfuscated. It is good to know about that what is hitting us, so that we can take precautions choosing something unpredictable and none of the above. 8-:)

Quote of the day

... racism is supposedly "attacked at its root" by social engineering premised on attitude manipulation and a causal original sin.
Agency and responsibility are turned away from attacking the racist dominance structure directly; by focusing on a false and ancillary "cause", by blaming the internal beliefs of some individuals instead of emphasizing the needed praxis of liberation of all individuals subjected to the dominance hierarchy.
What results is that the slaves fight among themselves to ensure that they are oppressed fairly. There is a focus on defining and enforcing inter-slave rules instead of supporting rebellion.

http://activistteacher.blogspot.ca/2011/04/how-anti-racism-protects-class.html
(By Denis G. Rancourt)

Simultaneous defeat of fake "democratic" and fake "republican" establishment

Good luck to our southern neighbors!   What's next for us?  I would love to see our non-Liberals, Regressive Conservatives and Archaic Democrats nicely voted out.  All together.
Stan

DEAR LIBERAL FRIENDS: We need to talk...

Excessive industrial regulatory approvals - economic weapon of mass-destruction!

I wrote a note about it some time ago, see here .  It appears, the regulatory industrial product approval "game" is still spreading like a disease, worldwide, where the winners are certification consultants and the losers are everyone else.    It seems to be unstoppable except for some of the most eager adopters going out of business sooner than the rest of them, so there may be some hope.

The key-word here is "moderation".  Nobody advocates returning to the 19-th century industrial practices of producing unsafe consumer appliances such as  gasoline-fueled irons ("Burn Down Your House" model 1900) or "Coffe-Cutor" heater  .   But, in my humble opinion, things have gone too far following a general profitable (to them) tendency of our left-leaning decision makers and politicians to legislate all risk out of life.

Adoption of excessive regulatory certification is imposing a requirement to re-approve every product each  time one makes a model upgrade or a change.  This is resulting in increasing the cost of doing business in manufacturing!  Especially in the countries like Canada, US and Europe where the cost of doing business is already very high.  The natural response of management against rising costs is shifting production to cheaper countries, resulting in the loss of manufacturing jobs and stagnant economies with careers opportunities eventually limited to firefighters, cops and a certain old profession ...   8-:)

Why Peterborough Liberal MP Ms Monsef does not seem to respond or participate?

According to a Peterborough Examiner article:

Hunger strike continues at Central East Correctional Centre; activists press Monsef to end indefinite immigration detentions


------------------------------------------------------
 Updating Ms Monsef story  (24-Sep-2016)

 From the original article:

Globe and Mail:   Heralded as Canada's first Afghan-born MP, Maryam Monsef shocked to discover truth of roots

 It appears that the birth certificate of Ms Monsef that was used on her immigration Canada is not valid:

 Ms. Monsef says she only learned about her Iranian birthplace last Thursday when approached by The Globe and Mail, which had been making inquiries about how she came to Canada in 1996 when she was age 11.

Problem:

 Her claim that the family fled Afghanistan's Taliban must be not entirely correct either. She was born in Iran in 1985, while Taliban was in Power between 1996 and 2001!
 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban )

 In 1985 Afghanistan was ruled by Soviet protege Babrak Karmal while an Islamic insurgency (pre-Taliban) supported by Americans was going on, quote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

 The Soviet war in Afghanistan resulted in the deaths of over 1 million Afghans, mostly civilians,[49][50][51] and the creation of about 6 million refugees who fled Afghanistan, mainly to Pakistan and Iran.[52] Faced with mounting international pressure and numerous casualties, the Soviets withdrew in 1989 but continued to support Afghan President Mohammad Najibullah until 1992.[53] 

 Her family was fleeing a pro Soviet state not Taliban! Pakistan was at that time pro-US, while Iran was anti-US. What is her family true origin? Iranian/Dari? Pashtu? Pakistani? Other? Why is Ms Monsef dribbling the small bits of facts about herself drop by drop rather than come up in full for the sake of truth? Why not?

----------------------
Update 29-Sep-2016

http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/2016/09/28/former-peterborough-mp-knew-years-ago-that-monsefs-family-was-from-iran

Plot thickens.  It turns out this may not have been such a surprise, since some of her friends knew it all along.  How many more  lies inaccuracies are  going to be found?


(3-Oct-2016) It looks like the Trudeau's Liberal government is pursuing draconian deportation and revocation law with a vigor matching that of Mr. Harper's. Meanwhile our local Liberal representative appears to have done nothing to address this issue while she still could. That is until her own case came to the light.

Article (Peterborough Examiner 27-Sep-2016): "Peterborough-Kawartha MP Maryam Monsef could be stripped of citizenship without a hearing under existing laws"

Quote:

... Monsef could be stripped of her citizenship without a hearing under a law the Liberals denounced while in opposition but which they’ve been enforcing aggressively since taking power, civil liberties and refugee lawyers say. ...

If Monsef’s birthplace was misrepresented on her refugee claim and was relevant to the ruling on her case, her citizenship could be revoked, regardless of whether it was an innocent mistake or the fault of her mother, said immigration lawyer Lorne Waldman. She could even be deported, said Waldman, part of a group that launched a constitutional challenge of the law Monday.
...

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association argue that the citizenship revocation law, known as Bill C-24, is procedurally unfair and a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Josh Paterson, the BCCLA’s executive director, said Monsef’s case demonstrates the absurdity of the law, which was passed by the previous Conservative government. "The minister’s situation ... is exactly the kind of situation that many other Canadians are facing right now because of this unjust process," Paterson told a news conference.
"When we get a parking ticket, we have a right to a court hearing ... You leave your garbage in the wrong place and you get a ticket, you have the right to a hearing and yet for citizens to lose their entitlement to membership in Canada based on allegations of something they may or may not have said 20 years ago, they have no hearing? It just doesn’t make any sense."

Nevertheless, repeated requests that the government stop enforcing the law until it can be changed have been ignored. As recently as two weeks ago, Paterson said Justice Department lawyers informed his group that the law would continue to be enforced.

Indeed, he said the Liberal government has been enforcing the law "aggressively," setting targets to strip 40 to 60 Canadians each month of their citizenship.

McCallum said Monday that the government is "certainly considering options for changes" in the law. He did not say why the government is enforcing it with such zeal in the meantime.

His department, meanwhile, denied that it imposes a target for the number of revocations each month. But it does have "performance standards targets" to ensure it has the resources to efficiently review and resolve cases.

According to the department, 206 individuals have been stripped of their citizenship since May 2015 - about 18 per month.

Waldman said he’ll be in court next month on a case similar to Monsef’s, in which "the government is seeking to revoke the citizenship of two children who came to Canada at a very young age, not because of anything they said but because their father allegedly misrepresented on his application for permanent residence."

"So even though the children are completely innocent ... the government is still going after the children, saying that because their father lied on his application, they should lose their citizenship and their permanent residence as well," Waldman said.

--------------------------------
Monsef Watch Update (19-Jan-2017)

A photograph:

http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/2017/01/10/prime-minister-justin-trudeau-holding-town-hall-friday-morning-at-evinrude-centre-in-peterborough

Strange non-responsivness to a seemingly trivial questions by a journalist:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/the-answer-that-took-days-monsef-used-her-afghanistan-passport-for-2014-iran-visit

Brexit - UK for Ukraine - Russian connection?

In my personal opinion, the only political force vitally interested in weakening the European Union by possibly openly financing many if not all of the European nationalistic splinter movements - is Russia, in a tit-for-tat action against Europe's support for the anti-Russia splinter movements in the post-Soviet block. Especially in the Ukraine.

Interestingly, a country that has become the most vocally anti-Russian - Poland, has become the most recent target of unprecedented attacks by Nigel Farage's UKIP supporters in Britain (see the links below). For example the Polish Institute in London (POSK) has been vandalised by grafitti for the first time in its over 60 years history and many Polish residents in Britain has been, for the first time in recent history, targeted by neatly printed plastic-framed leaflets with insulting contents totally inconsistent with the generally tolerant British tradition.
Somebody has spent real money on all that.

Who?

Why was the former London Mayor Boris Johnson unexpectedly "discouraged" (by British intelligence services?) from becoming the new prime minister, and [updated 04/07/2016] why did UKIP leader Nigel Farage suddenly have to resign today?   A Russian connection perhaps?

References:

The rise in hate crime reports is a dark sign of post-Brexit Britain
Polish boy, 11, finds 'leave EU' card
Graffiti at a Polish center in London sends a clear message: Some 'Brexit' supporters want immigrants out
Nigel Farage's relationship with Russian media comes under scrutiny
Marine Le Pen's Party Asks Russia for €27 Million Loan
A comparison of Germany's AfD and France's National Front
EU referendum: Boris Johnson labelled a 'Putin apologist' after Russia remarks

 ----------------------
Update on the the UKIP financing:

  http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-38650596

Arron Banks, the former UKIP donor who bankrolled the campaign for Britain to leave the European Union, is making a move into the media sector by backing an anti-establishment news website that launches tomorrow.

and

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arron_Banks

Occupation Businessman Net worth £100 million[1] Spouse(s) Ekaterina Paderina

the following is also interesting:

According to Companies House records, Banks has set up 37 different companies using slight variations of his name. The names used by Banks are Aron Fraser Andrew Banks, Arron Andrew Fraser Banks, Arron Fraser Andrew Banks and Arron Banks. The profiles for the first three names all use the same date of birth but register different lists of companies. When asked by The Guardian about this, he declined to answer questions on the topic.[19] In 2016, the leaked Panama Papers indicated Banks was the shareholder of British Virgin Islands company PRI Holdings Limited, which was the sole shareholder of African Strategic Resources Limited.[20] However, a spokesperson for Banks has denied any links to the lawyer named and denies that Banks was involved with the Papers.[21]

Brexit

Brexit, a discussion with friend

Dav0:    

While I feel it's important to say what's on your mind (and we both do!).

There is a grey area when it comes to racism, xenophobia etc. It's come to

light in the UK in the last few days for instance.

S: 

Re: xenophopia

Absolutely!   I didn't really explain a while back why I was (and am) always pro EU when you were questioning it and voted against Lisbon Treaty.  The reason is my experience in Germany in 1983-86.  I was talking then with a Russian professor of physics at University of Tel Aviv, Yuri M. a former Russian dissident from Leningrad, he was on a scholarship in Germany at that time in the same institute. He had a huge impact on my philosophy and made me rethink many of my beliefs. 

I was saying at that time to him that I don't see anything wrong with a moderate dose of nationalism, in the Eastern European context, that would counterbalance that dreadful Soviet monostate and counteract the communist ideology. It was just exactly the same reaction as the Brits rejecting the EU centralism right now. 

His view was the opposite - he cautioned me against embracing any form of nationalism even a moderate one and even for a noble purpose such as fighting some centralized bureaucracy for the benefit of the people.

He said to me (around 1984) that if the Soviet Union ever collapsed, many of the individual post soviet republics, would very likely degenerate into nationalistic intolerant fiefdoms run by ruthless dictators, and people will end up worse off.  A few years later I realized that he was 100% right! 

Nationalism is not an antidote against centralized bureaucracy or against any other totalitarian political, religious, pseudo-scientific or other belief system, because nationalism is also a form of collectivism just like bureaucracy and statism.  Just like Christianity, Islam, scientific atheism, socialism, communism, fascism etc. 

By promoting nationalism, British people have replaced one form of collectivism with another, a more toxic one, in my opinion!  

What Britain and other countries need more is not replacing one collectivism with another but replacing collectivism with individualism and self-empowerement.  

Fighting collectivism can be effectively done by:

1)  embracing individualism and popularizing it by personal examples (see Ayn Rand) 

2) renouncing people (*) who believe in and strongly identify with the collectivistic belief systems

Take care,

S.

*) Only renouncing the believers, not beliefs,  works!  Very important and counter-intuitive!   Renouncing beliefs alone, debating beliefs, debunking or disproving beliefs is not  only ineffective but often makes the beliefs stronger in the minds of people by giving them our attention and publicity.  I had an insight about it in my dream earlier this year.  Renunciation of believers can be mentally reinforced (in one's mind)  by a ritual: stand at front of a group of people, raise both hands up at an angle and at front of you and then lower them down rapidly as if you were pushing something down and away, while saying in your mind or aloud "I renounce you!".  (Don't do it at work or you may get fired.)

Dav0: 

I am pro European!

I voted [in Ireland] against the version of the Lisbon treaty at that time _purely_ because in the form it was presented, they had proposed a tiered membership that I totally disagreed with.

IIRC it was somewhat rehashed and presented again, I don't think I was in Ireland second time around.

My main beef was that Poland (and the Baltics etc. IIRC) would be given membership at a lower level than say Ireland or France. I believed it was all or nothing, not some half baked version that benefited the hacks that were already in, with their snouts already well entrenched in the trough.

I was very saddened by what happened in the UK last week. I have been more saddened to see that the Brexit has given further license to those jingoist thugs who for instance have been seen hurling verbal abuse at Poles over the weekend (not sure if you heard about that). I have a great deal of time for the Poles (present company excepted ;-)    and everyone else for that matter. We are all one living, breathing, experiencing and discovering giant unified consciousness - separation is artificial.  (can't remember the exact quote, it was from a brilliant comedian - Bill Hicks - who died very young from pancreatic cancer).

One particularly derisive argument that I heard for the 'Leave' campaign was that surrendering British sovereignty to the EU was an affront to the memory of those who died in the wars fighting for Britain. The opposite is true. The whole raison d'être for European integration was to prevent any such atrocities like those wars from happening again.

It seems now that Scotland may have a legal argument to veto the Brexit. We'll see how it all pans out.

Have you thought about buying Sterling?

Dav0.

P.S. Re believers and beliefs - De gustibus non est disputandum. 

S:

Re: buying sterling

No, I think it is very likely to fall further (with ups and downs).  Since the banks have very little reason to remain in the UK,  it will put a huge pressure on the British establishment [causing them] to protect their personal assets (=mostly property!) by inflating the  money supply to stimulate demand (for property) and to maintain the prices.  Without a strong banking system that used to inflate the monetary mass in a non-inflationary way (by offsetting it with the equivalent debt), the next British government (Labour!) will have very little choice in that matter.  They will be printing money!   The real decline of the sterling is ahead of us.   What you have seen to date is the beginning. 

 Britain will most likely become one of the poorest countries in Europe since they have no industry that would take up the slack after the bexit (banking exit).  In my crude estimate, banking used to provide about 50% of the British GDP (official figures are lower, about 30% but I am adding the indirect contributions).   I would not be surprised if 90% of that would leave, that will leave Britain with 40% drop of the GDP.  This would have to be reflected  by a commensurate or higher drop in the sterling exchange rate - if they refrain from inflationary policy otherwise it will drop much further than that, which is IMHO much more likely.   I read George Soros' warning - he gave similar estimates.   Then, this would create some favorable condition to rebuild the manufacturing back (as long as they will not generate hyper-inflationary hickups like in Brazil or Argentina which would negate the positive effect of the drop in sterling)  - but that will probably take about 30 years, 1 generation.  Incidentally this is a very good news for Ireland because it will make reunification with the Republic attractive to N.Irish Prots, and secondly it will make some of the banks move to Dublin, lifting the property market and creating some jobs.

S.

Canadian NDP committs suicide by Leap Manifesto

See Leap Manifesto. Generalizations and platitudes written by slightly detached ivory tower academics and intellectuals. Fighting for all good causes and sacrificing other people's jobs on the altar of "Global Warming" nonsense. As one Alberta NDP official put it in an interview: "You would destroy Alberta's oil industry jobs - How would the folks in Ontario feel if we said we want to shut down your car manufacturing industry?" Stan