A Conservative Farewell Speech

No, I'm not giving a farewell speech.  The fight goes on, even if it's conducted from the marshy wasteland on the fringe of the kingdom.

Here is the farewell speech of the greatest conservative politician of my lifetime.  The speech was given in 1991, at the end of her 12 years as PM of the United Kingdom and one year before the formation of the European Union.

She used her two terms as PM to turn the UK from a socialist basket case (in 1979, the UK's standard of living was on par with East Germany's), to an economic powerhouse, by standing up to the unions and capably advocating the Free Market system.  Though the UK has diverged somewhat leftward since her time, it is still in far better shape than she found it and the British overall are still maintaining their independence from the EU. 

In this speech she shows clearly and simply what liberals want, and in so doing shows the ridiculousness of their desire.  She also delivers a parting warning about the danger of the EU that is remarkably prescient.

We need a Thatcher badly now, as Americans have shown that they prefer the results liberalism provides rather than conservatism.


What Do You Think?

Europe is dealing with major economic issues that are threatening the survival of the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the whole European political project.

The historian Niall Ferguson points out that a monetary union requires economic and thus political centralization:

Is to follow through the original logic of monetary union. If you go back to 1989 Delors report it was explicit that one consequence of monetary union would be central control of national budgets, of national policy. And that is ultimately the crucial staging point for a federal system of the sort that you have here in Canada.

So if this logic is correct, then for the EMU to saved it will require further political and economic integration.

Do you think that the current situation in Europe will lead to the break up of the European Monetary Union or do you think that it will try to be saved. My opinion is that there will be further political and economic integration as the cost of not doing this would be too economically costly for Europe and the rest of the world.

EU Update

Bad news out of the EU has been driving global worries over another financial crisis and this has been a contributing factor behind the volatility in the stock market the past couple of weeks. What happens in the EU will affect the U.S. and global economy to a great extent. A note of interest is that the U.S. is already bailing out the EU. It appears as if the great EU political project is falling apart. This is not the case according to a lot of market analyst:

'The default position is more integration, which is why commentary, especially that coming out of the US, is very focused on euro break-up is biased towards thinking about the downside scenario, and is not really thinking about the upside scenario,' he told CNBC.com. 'The upside scenario I think is one that's more consistent with the history of European projects.'[...]

'When people ask us 'is Greece going to leave the euro?' our immediate pushback is that Greece doesn't have the agency. It's not really Greece's choice – it's Germany's choice and it's France's choice,' Rahman said. [...]

However, he too said that stepping forwards towards integration, not backwards, is the far more likely scenario.

'Of course, it didn't happen in an orderly way, and now possibly it's coming in a disorderly way, because now everyone's realizing that you can't have a currency and a single market and communalized trade policy without also having more political cohesion and more fiscal union,' Techau said.
'Maybe, in the end, ironically, Helmut Kohl will be vindicated because the answer to the crisis is either disruption, or another bold step towards integration,'[...]

The most noise seems to be coming from commentators who believe in disintegration, but those who really understand the inner workings of the EU say the opposite: economically it does not make sense, technically it is exceptionally difficult and politically it is nearly unthinkable.

One of the legacy of this global financial crisis will be a more economically united globe. This economic crisis is going to force some politicians and nations to do things that they otherwise would not do: like integrate further into international governing bodies.

European leaders are being pushed into closer fiscal union sooner than they had anticipated by volatile markets concerned over a dearth of ideas on how to solve the sovereign debt crisis in the euro zone, analysts and investors told CNBC.[...]

'If you believe the United States of Europe is stronger than the individual nations, it's simply a step that the politicians have been working towards, but now they're being pushed into it rather than managing the process,' Neil Dwane, chief investment officer for Europe at RCM told CNBC.

Over the weekend, German chancellor Angela Merkel seemed to soften her position on the issuance of so-called euro bonds, but she stressed they were not on the table for now.

'I think [Merkel] is just realizing that politicians are pushed by markets into solutions that politicians don't feel comfortable with yet,' Frank Engels, co-head of European Economics Research and Asset Allocation Strategy at Barclays Capital explained.
His comments reflected those made by Paul Donovan, deputy head of Global Economics to CNBC last week, who warned that markets would push European leaders towards "extreme action" and he called for the appointment of a European statesman to oversee closer fiscal union within the euro zone.[...]

'There is a sense that you have to move eventually towards a common fiscal union, a very coordinated policy approach on economic and fiscal policies, but not now, not yet because you need to lay the foundations in terms of political and legal infrastructure first and then later on move, that is the message [Merkel] wants to provide to markets,' Engels said.

It appears that the EU has lost, to some extent, "its power of decision over the direction that it is going". This economic crisis is the result of a government managed economies. The main instrument that the governments use to manage the economies of the world is through central banking and international governing bodies like the IMF/World Bank (both founded by a Fabian Socialist and a communist). The IMF/World Bank is helping to keep the socialist's dream of global socialism from falling apart in the case of the EU by continuing to bailout the failed nations that should be allowed to default. (A look into the history of central banking and the IMF/World Bank is illuminating.) These government institutions are helping to create an economic crisis that will push the world into a global-socialist-communist-governance. Well that sounds stupid doesn't it? The financial analysts take on the events happening in the EU point to the fact that the EU is being pushed by economic events into a tighter political/fiscal union. What has been the overall effect of the global economic crisis, larger and more united government(s) that are/is taking over economic functions once carried out by the private sector. The direction that the the world is a more in is that of a more united globe, economy and politically. I could state it in a more intelligent manner but that would take a lot more time and room.

Some News

Some news to keep abreast of the changes occurring in the world. Portugal is seeking a bailout from the European Union after its Parliament rejected austerity measures,

Portugal's prime minister said Wednesday his country has asked for financing assistance from the European Union due to its high debts and difficulty raising money on international markets.[...]Portugal becomes the third financially troubled eurozone country after Greece and Ireland to request assistance from Europe's bailout fund and the International Monetary Fund.[...] Such an announcement had long been expected as Portugal, one of the 17-nation eurozone's smallest and weakest economies, struggled to finance its economy. Following a rejection of additional austerity measures by its parliament last month, Portugal has seen its borrowing costs rise to unsustainably high levels.

It looks like another EU country has fallen. Instead of making very painful budget cuts, Portugal has decided to receive a bailout. This will no doubt require that Portugal cede some of its sovereignty to the larger international governing body as happened in the case of Ireland and Greece. This bit of news needs to be put into the larger context of the EU debt sovereign debt crisis and Dominique Strauss-Kahn's recent speech to understand what how this piece fits into the still nebulous large puzzle that is being put together. Every time period is one of change so this transformation is nothing new.

The IMF managing director has made some comments on the direction that the global economy is headed,

In a speech entitled “Global Challenges, Global Solutions”[...] Mr. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), called for a new approach to economic policymaking in the wake of the recent global crisis. He singled out three areas for improvement: a new approach to macroeconomic and financial sector policies, a new approach to social cohesion, and a new approach to cooperation and multilateralism.[...]Middle East, noting that it is going through an 'historic transformation' as 'citizens are seeking greater freedom, and a fairer distribution of economic opportunities and resources'.[...]'In designing a new macroeconomic framework for a new world', he stated, 'the pendulum will swing—at least a little—from the market to the state, and from the relatively simple to the relatively more complex'.[...]Mr. Strauss-Kahn called for policymakers to pay more attention to inequality and social cohesion. 'The lethal cocktail of prolonged high unemployment and high inequality can strain social cohesion and political stability, which in turn affects macroeconomic stability.' He suggested that inequality, which was a factor in the Middle East, might also have been among the root causes of the global crisis, and that sustainable global growth is associated with more equal income distribution.[...]Mr. Strauss-Kahn stressed the virtues of enhanced cooperation and multilateralism in the post-crisis world, noting that 'the great challenges of today all require a collective solution'. [ All emphasis is mine.]

I disagree with some of what is stated in this speech, most notably that in the new global economic framework the state will have a larger role, but my disagreement does not negate the realities of the world that we live in nor does it mean that this should not happen. The lost of social cohesion due to high unemployment, inflation, and overall bad economy will pose a very real threat to global stability, the Middle East and Europe are a prime example. This unequal distribution of wealth, "inequality", being spoken of sounds like the main theme of "The Communist Manifesto". This problem begs the question: who or what entity will solve this inequality? Government or the private sector? Well the pendulum is swinging a new direction. The challenges that the world faces will require "collective solution". If the nations of the world, the collective, are all socialist, then what will that solution be?

Americans took a pay cut because of inflation, "You may not have noticed it when you opened up your paycheck last month, but you just took a pay cut. Wages in America are flattening as inflation surges, therefore real income growth is actually negative, according to the latest data from the Labor Department. " If I had to make a guess I would say that real inflation will peak around thirty percent.

And El Baradei of Egypt has decided to challenge Israel's right to exist and promise to declare war on them. There is nothing like a peaceful uprising of the youth in the name of democracy.

Some interesting and exciting news.

Some News That Point Towards A Future Economic Degringolade.

I am doing a short post on two videos I found interesting about QE 2 and the European economic situation and an interesting poll about Americans' views on the viability of marriage. (The first two videos are worth a watch while the other links aren't as interesting but they are informative.) I came across this interesting animated video from the Ludwig Von Mises Institute's website that is about the recent Federal Reserve decision to purchase 600 billion more dollars of assets which is known as QE 2. It is a short and humorous overview of QE 2.

It looks like there is still a lot of economic and social troubles going on in the EU. This is a good video that is a warning for America to not go down the same socialist economic path that Europe has. Sadly America is headed towards this situation. One question I have with all of these strikes going on over in the EU is when election time comes around for these various nations will these people vote the officials in office who will continue to make the necessary spending cuts and the other hard changes?

And on the subject of the EU, Ireland will possibly be needing a bailout from the EU and the IMF. Ireland is reluctant to receive a bailout as it will threaten their sovereignty and will possibly force them to give up their low corporate tax rate because the other EU nations will not want to be giving Ireland bailout money which will allow Ireland to maintain its low corporate tax rate. Ireland's low tax rate attracts capital and businesses away from other EU nations. I have read that Ireland does not have a lot of natural resources and its low cooperate tax rate is very important to its economy as it is its main way to attract capital which makes up for the nation's lack of natural resources. And according to Financial Times, as a result of Ireland's banking crisis,"'four of the five domestic lenders are set to be state owned, with only Bank of Ireland in the short term likely to remain outside the grasp of state ownership'". From looking at this fact, and what resulted from the similar situation in America, it appears that these various economic problems coalesce economic functions that were once performed by the private sector in to the hands of the government. If being bailed out is something that has to happen and is a good thing, why would Ireland be quick to deny the need for a bailout and reluctant to receive one? It appears as if there are strings that are attached to this bailout money which results in a loss of sovereignty as evident in the concerns being voiced by Ireland. Of course the PIIGS nations probably should lose some of their sovereignty since they are threatening the stability of the greater EU. The only question is if the broader EU governing body will be able to bring about more prudent economic policy to these PIIGS nations and the greater EU. Bailing out these nations don't force the necessary and painful structural changes to occur as they allow for halfway measures to be implemented in the place of the necessary ones which means they have the effect of kicking the can down the road. These troubled nations, PIIGS, are making changes but it is yet to be seen if they are the necessary structural changes or just half way measures, from what I have read and seen from various commentary on business shows the latter scenario appears to be the case especially in the case of Greece. It is evident from the various protest occurring in Greece and even France that the measures so far taken to address these economic problems are very unpopular. If necessary changes were to have happened then these bailouts would not have been needed, but then there would have been a collapse of these economies that would have spread to the greater EU and that would have probably brought about social instability. Hopefully, the EU will be better able to handle such a situation when and if such a situation happens at a later date. Note that America could soon be facing a situation similar to the EU's as many of its states will probably require a bail out in the coming year[s], California being one example. It still appears as if the EU and the world is headed towards a future economic degringolade.

And here is an interesting article for those who think that the stock market is back to where it was in 2008, "Adjusted for inflation (as per the Bureau of Labor Statistics), the Dow would have to reach 13,570 to equal the 'purchasing power' value of Dow 11,000 in 2001. ($1 in 2001 equals $1.23 in 2010.)"

And there was an interesting poll that found that there is an increase in the number of people who thing that marriage is becoming obsolete.

Nearly four in 10 Americans think marriage is becoming obsolete, according to a new survey that reveals changing attitudes on gay marriage, unwed couples and the definition of what a family is.[...]Among the biggest changes in Americans' attitude toward marriage was the number of those who now believe the institution is becoming obsolete. Thirty-nine percent of respondents said they believe that's the case, compared with 28 percent who said that when Time magazine asked the same question in 1978. [...]Some 86 percent of respondents said they consider a single parent and child to be a family, and 80 percent said unmarried couples living together with children are families. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) said they think a gay or lesbian couple raising a child constitutes a family. But even though a majority (88 percent) think a childless married couple is a family, a similar majority thinks a childless unmarried couple is not.

I found this interesting because the traditional family is the foundation of our society and this one of the reason that those who wish to change our society, mostly the Left, promote anything that will help destroy it: gay marriage, cultural themes that run throughout popular culture like music and that promote single motherhood and that having a kid outside of marriage is acceptable, a government that helps replace the need for a father and the traditional family with welfare, and etc. I was also reading the "Communist Manifesto" where it states that the destruction of the traditional family will be necessary to bring about the Revolution of the Proletariat,

Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists. On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution. The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.

This is a couple of little news bits that I found interesting and relevant. They don't necessarily mean that some future decline in the situation of the world will occur, but they do point one to look in that direction.

Angela Merkel - Bankroller of the EU

OK, not sure that the bankroller of the free world should be showing that much cleavage, uhm,  dunno, maybe it gets the perverted old Greek Prime Minister to agree to what she says.

Anyway, Der Spiegel has a very interesting article, showing the German perspective of what is going on in the EU.  At times, it makes you think that the EU will probably spin apart, at other times, it makes you think that, as Melkor thinks, that the EU and the IMF are doing their best to hold everything together and control everything. 

The first paragraph reads like something straight out of a Jeff or Melkor World Domination prediction:

Fearing a lasting burden on taxpayers, the German government is preparing a set of insolvency rules for countries in the euro zone. It would require private investors to bear some of the financial burden and force the affected countries to give up some sovereignty.

But, notice that she's making this proposal because her constituents, the German voters, are pissed off about funding the EU's basket-case economies. So that one paragraph seems to both back-up the World Domination cheerleaders and the local government cheerleader (that would be me).

The whole article is fascinating because it's dealing with things we talk about so much here, not particularly from the perspective of any of us.  More:

The effort is necessary, because important safety measures to protect the common currency are not working. The Stability and Growth Pact, which was intended to nip excessive government borrowing in the bud, proved to be largely worthless. Some of the monetary union's ironclad principles were ignored, including a rule that prohibits member states from coming to the aid of others in financial difficulties. It was only with political tricks of questionable legitimacy that the euro-zone countries managed to ward off the crisis in the short term, but by no means has it been overcome. German taxpayers, in particular, could face enormous burdens if the current measures fail. Under the provisions of the bailout package, Germany has pledged up to €170 billion.

I skipped over the part of where Merkel and her Finance Minister have worked so hard to put together a package, that France can go along with, that sets up new rules for how to manage the crisis and not screw over the German taxpayer. The above paragraph shows that one country in particular is carrying the weight of Europe, and that the rules that were laid down by the international authority were ignored by some member states.

The article is goes into great detail explaining everything that is going on, including the creation of a "Berlin Club" of donor nations. Summary paragraphs:

The concept by no means sells itself. If the project were organized under the auspices of the EU, it would face a high hurdle: The European treaties would have to be amended to establish the Berlin Club, which would require the consent of each individual member. This is not a process governments are keen to repeat after the experiences of the Lisbon Treaty.

Nevertheless, there is no way around pushing ahead with emergency planning, because the situation could come to a head more quickly than anticipated. The aid for Greece is subject to the Papandreou government fulfilling the EU and IMF requirements. The Greek prime minister is full of good intentions, but his measures have been relatively ineffective so far. Although the government is raising taxes and even introducing new taxes, revenues have fallen short of expectations. Strikes, like the one that was staged last Thursday, are constantly paralyzing public life and the economy.

In other words, it is quite possible that Greece will not fulfill the conditions and thus will receive no aid from the European fund. This could lead to a consequence that European leaders have been trying to prevent at all costs: a total national bankruptcy. And, if the reform package has not been implemented by then, it could end up being anything but an orderly process.

What do you guys think?

Get Your Greek Updates Right Here at RTP&GG!

H/T Hot Air - First of two quick steals from Hot Air: Man, we have been ON this issue! 

Anyway, Greece announced its $145 billion rescue plan from the EU and IMF, which is supposed to stave off bankruptcy and stop investors from further panic with other European nations on the edge of disaster: Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Ireland.  In return for the $145 billion bailout (as Hot Air notes, this is 1/6 of Obama's Porkulus package), the Greeks are being severely hobbled:

The agreement is a financial lifeline for a country staggered by repeated budget deficits and economic malaise. In exchange for the loan, Greek government officials have promised to continue an array of reform measures that, among other things, already have cut pensions and raised taxes.

These aren't just little hardships:

The proposed cuts in Greece include a new round of reductions in salaries for state workers, more flexibility to fire them, an increase in the value-added tax from 21 percent to 23 percent, and higher taxes on fuel, tobacco and alcohol. More state-run industries are expected to be privatized, and military spending will be slashed.

There are two questions: 1) will the Greek people stand for their financial disciplining? & 2) will it turn things around even if they can stand it?  Read the Hot Air and Washington Post links to learn more.  Hot Air's summarizing paragraph makes an interesting point:

American voters might be interested to see the scope of this bailout. It’s about a sixth the size of Porkulus, the Obama administration’s efforts to stimulate our economy, and just a little over a tenth the size of our annual budget deficit — and yet the EU and IMF have just about exhausted themselves to provide it. If we don’t fix our own problem, no one will be coming to our rescue.