Fixing LIBOR - Surely a crime?

I can't work out if the fixing of LIBOR by Barclays and others has had any real impact on the actual cost of borrowing at the retail level, for you and I.  I suspect little or no real effect but no doubt the 'ambulance chasers' sorry, class action lawyers, will get to the bottom of that (and claim their large fees)

What does bother me though, is the lack of actual police action. 

It seems that the 'regulatory authorities' (that wasn't a joke, I will try to slip one in later) on both sides of the Atlantic, have managed to find sufficient evidence to force Barclays to cough-up $450 million in fines.  I can't imagine that this was done unless there was compelling evidence.  No bank willingly pays that sort of money unless they are truly in a corner.

So....

Why no criminal charges?

Surely fraud has been committed (but please, please, let's not get the incompetent SFO involved, please).  Also a conspiracy to defraud?  Assuming someone lost out on this fixing, that would suggest theft as well.

I don't count myself among those bank bashers or people that negatively harp on about banker's bonuses but for the sake of our society and the only known effectivesystem of business (the capitalist one) none of us can allow such behaviour to go unpunished. 

The criminal people carrying out these actions are the same people who would be screaming from the roof-top that last summer's rioters  or welfare cheats should be locked up but they really think the law doesn't apply to them.  Where are the Bank of England and other financial institution leaders in all of this?  Why are they not clamouring for a house cleaning and criminal charges?  Surely they must realise that failure to speak out, says volumes about where there moral compass is set.    Same applies to politicians. 

I am not talking about any kind of public inquiry, we need criminal charges to be brought - dawn raids, doors smashed in, these criminals 'banged-up' with no bail.  Such crooks need to be embarrassed and shamed in front of family and friends.  By all means alert the press - local and national - for maximum effect!

Right now, the clear message, as far as financial fraud is concerned is - do it and don't get caught, but if you do get caught, you can use part of your criminally achieved gains to make the problem go away and, just for good measure, we will get the shareholders of the company (who might actually be taxpayer-owners) to foot the bill.  Doing time?  Sorry that is so not for us, it's not as if we are common thieves!

Oh!  Bob Diamond - of course he should go.  As should the chairman of Barclays.  How can there be any question.  Same should apply for any other banks that are found to have been partaking.  Those activist shareholders and financial institutions MUST demand this on behalf of the pension fund investors that they represent.  To do otherwise gives a nod and a wink to the criminals that operate, seemingly with impunity.  I don't suggest that Diamond committed any criminal act but such acts seem to have taken place while he was in charge.  Anyone with a shred of honour or integrity would have already resigned. 

Just for good measure and as a boost to the economy - pass a law, with retro-active effect, such that these fines, say any imposed since the start of this fiscal year, should not be allowed to be offset against corporate taxes, in fat go one better and dis-allow such fines by a factor of 2 - so a fine of £290 million means that Barclays costs are raised by a further £290 million and its taxable profits by a further £580 million.

Since it seems the police aren't acting, it is up to you to do so:

• If you are a shareholder in Barclays, send a letter to the board and demand Diamond's resignation and that of the chairman.
• Otherwise write to your pension company and demand they take action. 
• Don't forget to also write to your MP.  This isn't a party political issue.  This is about criminality and decency.  No party has the monopoly on this!
• Write to your local council and ask them to divest from Barclays until appropriate action is taken.

Julian Assange

Reading some of the, often mindless, comments about this case they seem to breakdown into the following:

It's all an American plot - this posits that the USA and it's 'intelligence' community set-up the rape charges and they plan to seek Assange's extradition from Sweden once he is there.  Not entirely sure I understand why the US doesn't just seek his extradition from the UK, if they are that keen on getting hold of him - any ideas?

Because Assange is serving the greater good of humanity, he should not face these charges.  Assange's selective leaking (he decides what is published and what isn't and, as far as we can tell, only those that promote his political agenda are 'leaked') somehow give him the freedom to be above the law?  Really?

The gullible 'Leftie' fools and their Guardianista follows are getting their come-uppance.  This one  says that the people who put up the money for his bail are now claiming they don't have to pay as he is either still on British soil (not sure what the Ecuadoreans think about that) or, because the police know where he is, bail hasn't been broken.  'Fools' is right.  He isn't where he is supposed to be and so the bail conditions have been broken.  End of story.  Don't pass Go, do pay 240K please and do please remove egg from face.

He hasn't been charged with Rape - he is wanted for questioning.  This is exactly the point.  Is anyone seriously contending that somehow, the Swedish courts and police service will suddenly turn from its Western liberal traditions, forgo a charge and criminal case and then publicly flay the skin from his body, just because the Americans are upset?  Or would we expect such a high profile (at least in his eyes) figure to be treated with the most softest of kid gloves?  Wouldn't we expect the Swedish equivalent of The Guardian to be pushing their 'right on' views and protesting his innocence (assuming he is even ever charged!).

What I don't see too much of, is any consideration for the alleged rape victims.  They are simply ignored and it is to the eternal shame of The Guardian, Pilger, Loach and company that their story is not being allowed to be heard.  Maybe the view from those Tuscan villas is the clearest of blue skies but can these people not see the rank hypocrisy of ignoring the 'voiceless victims' and doing so, simply because Assange has managed to get up the nose of the 'great Satan' aka USA and so he has a free pass?

We will find out, later today, what the Ecuadoreans decide.  If they refuse, I hope that Assange is then taken straight from the Embassy to the airport and put on a plane.  Frankly his abuse of the British and European justice system means that he has forfeited the right for any further appeals against the extradition.

Don't be surprised though if he is used as a pawn by the Ecuadoreans to snub the Americans and, as a gesture of solidarity with their Argentinian 'brothers', give a poke in the eye for the UK, and his request is granted.

Also don't be surprised if we then start to see more leaks which are damaging to US and UK interests and maybe put people's lives at risk.  It won't matter though, because those people won't be a 'sainted' Aussie who really believes that he is above the law.


    

Greek Election

So what can we expect from the Greek Election?

Based on the latest polls and the positions of the various parties, the 'stay in the Euro' camp has overwhelming support. 

The actual outcome of the vote though, hangs in the balance between those parties that simply want to mildly 'tweak' the bailout and those that want to radically alter it or even tear it up. 

Both camps depend on strange bedfellows actually co-habiting  New Democracy and Pasok?  Syriza and Golden Dawn?

Interestingly, the anti-bailout parties at least command something close to a majority - a government of national unity while they re-negotiate then new elections?  Might sound tempting.

The worrying thing is the impact that the election is forecast to have on the Euro and the Eurozone economies - particularly Spain and Italy.  Consider though that from an economy position, relative to the rest of the Eurozone, Greece is very small and unimportant.  This suggests that the 'market' which is infinitely smarter than EU politicians, has moved on from Greece and now the focus is Spain and the underlying concern is the Euro itself and its in-built contradictions.

Italy might survive seeing great pressure by selling off its massive gold reserves.  Say what you like about Berlusconi, he's no Gordon Brown!  I honestly can't believe I wrote that - Berlusconi smarter than Brown - now there's a thing!

The smart money has to be on continued capital flight from Spain and increasingly so from Italy.  Imagine all that 'black economy' Italian money just sliding over the border (if it isn't already there!)

We live in dangerously interesting times.

My prediction? 

I don't think that this election will solve too much for Greece but once it's out of the way, where does the Euro and Spain hide?

The 100 Billion Euro gamble

The Spanish economy ministry spokesperson was saying on Friday, that she had no knowledge that Spain would be seeking a bailout or loan or whatever is the current terminology.  There's being out of the loop and then there's ......   No matter.  I don't think anyone took her seriously.

So, now Spain has taken the plunge and gone to its Euro-zone partners for money.  It's not clear who will provide this or how.  Will the European Central Bank simply print yet more money? Will funds be transferred (surreptitiously, of course) from Germany via some new stability mechanism that joins the growing lexicon of acronyms beginning with E for Euro and containing S for stability (I kid not) and F for fund? 

At what point does this drip feed of very large amounts come to be seen as undermining the currency itself?  We are already seeing a devaluation in the Euro (coincidentally, this helps the strong German manufacturing sector a lot!!) but what happens when the financiers (bankers, by another name but don't frighten the children!) look at the sustainability of all this?  Italy will be lining up next and I keep wondering if 100 Billion is enough for Spain.  They could maybe come back for more?

Who knows how they will handle this 100 Billion?  Re-capitalise their over-extended banking system?  Does that mean the Spanish state takes stakes?  So we end up with largely nationalised banks?  Including all those local 'cajas'?  That will go down well with all those crazy autonomists in the regions.  These are the same crazies that build airports that no one needs and no planes land at and build arts centres that no one visits.  We have seen such craziness of large vanity projects in Africa for years, maybe the geographic proximity caused the disease to spread?

Why a gamble?
Well what if it isn't enough?  The 'independent audit' of the Spanish banks is not yet complete.  As said earlier, how much is slated to bail out the Regions?  Benefits for the more than 25% unemployment place an increasing burden on the Spanish budget.  If it isn't enough, and Spain comes back to the market to borrow again (maybe just to roll-over existing debt) - look out - Financiers (see you're getting the hang of this) can smell blood better than any shark!

We can expect to see some temporary respite from the recent market turmoils but this 'deal' is very light on details and those pesky financiers just love small print!  They will want to know where the money is coming from and how and for what is it being used.

Oh, and ask yourself again, who, among those poor taxpayers that will be contributing the 100 Billion have been consulted?  Democratic deficit doesn't really come close.  I just hope this is funded by the Eurozone and the UK can keep out and not get dragged in as part of some IMF 'contribution'. 

Watch this space!

Restore the Monarchy and ditch Parliament?

The Diamond Jubilee brings these thoughts to mind.

Should we not think of restoring rule by the Monarch rather than by Parliament? 

Our politicians (of all hues) have become more and more shifty and self-serving in the last 60 years (and the pace of decline is gathering speed).  Entering parliament today, is not about public service, it is about how close you can get to the trough and how much you can sup from it, before the electorate, in a fit of unreasonable pique, elect someone else to take your place.

Contrast that with Queen Elizabeth - soul of discretion - knows how to behave, never embarrasses the country, very diplomatic, oh!, and British.  So maybe she doesn't know the 'ins and outs' of macro-economic principles, she could though have advisers for that.  Hopefully such advisers would be better than the whiz-kids that got us into this mess in the first place!  Can anyone doubt that she would put Britain's interests first?

I am a firm believer in democracy but what we have now, in the UK, doesn't represent democracy.   It is a system designed to over-tax and over legislate the 'people' for the benefit of a few. 

So why not start again?  We could have the Queen as actual head of state,  a privy council to advise and something like the House of Lords, to act as a conduit for public opinion.  Then we could have a smaller army of civil servants to carry out Her Majesty's wishes.

Try and tell me these regal decisions would be any worse and shaming than what we have seen over the last 50 years or so!

One flaw in my 'Baldrick like cunning plan' is Prince Charles.  His views on Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever it is being called this week, show he is in thrall to the mad 'scientists', so we would have to ensure we skip a generation.  Otherwise, foolproof.

Oh! And those of you who would try and decry such a loss of democracy and all the rest of it - consider just how much power the UK has already lost to the EU and how many laws and directives come from this unelected bureaucracy!  My plan isn't so much about giving up democracy in favour of a monarchy, it's about, the British regaining control of our destiny!

Doesn't that sound grand!     

Ireland EU referendum - What did you expect?

Consider not what the Irish were asked:

• Do you support the Fiscal Treaty - Yes or No

Consider instead the real question:

• Do you support the Fiscal Treaty, knowing that even if you vote No, it will still be implemented because we only need to get 12 countries to ratify it and since you are the only ones being asked to vote, you may as well vote Yes because if you do we will give you more Euro funny-money.  If you vote No, we will cut-off that source and reckon you don't have the guts to default and damage those foreign banks that are depending on this circus continuing - Yes or No

Is it any surprise that the Irish voted yes?  Or rather, something less than 50% could see through the democratic sham and still be bothered to vote and then the vote was 60:40  So something like 30% of the eligible votes supported the measure.  Another resounding endorsement for 'EU style democracy'.

We can but hope that politicians of every hue and nationality start to put the position of their people before those of the Eurocrats!  This project has run its course, democracy needs to be enhanced but instead we are rushing headlong into a dictatorship of the bureaucrats and I worry that the reaction, when it comes (and it surely will, on the fringes, at least) will be bloody and violent.

To UK Conservative supporters reading this - time to let your MP know that he/she should tell David Cameron that the UK people need a referendum on continued membership of this institution, the EU, that holds views and practices that are so inimical to our British way.  Of course Labour and Lib Dem readers are equally free to advise their MPs.

Just think, if we 'pulled our fingers out' we could get such a referendum organised and completed before Alex Salmond and his wee merry band managed to organise their little exercise in extortion (sorry, I meant furthering the interests of the Scottish people)  Politicians should always have goals and those that annoy your opponents are the best ones - David Cameron, take note!