Author Archives: lawofmarkets

Mark Steyn on Mueller’s conscious sham

Posted on by
1

Mark Steyn on village and other forms of idiot. It wasn’t Alexander Downer after all.

The Mueller investigation was a conscious sham: an investigation into foreign interference in the 2016 US election created to cover up high-level domestic interference in the 2016 US election. Which is far more serious. Mueller’s report dutifully did its part, asserting belatedly that it was the so-called tip from a friendly ally (ie, Alexander Downer’s g&t with George Papadopoulos in the Kensington Wine Rooms) that led to the unprecedented “counter-intelligence” operation against a major-party candidate in the presidential election.

The ever expanding FBI/DoJ paper trail suggests otherwise. The FISA applications relied on Christopher Steele, and the FBI knew the Steele dossier was a crock even as they laid its garbage before the FISA judge. It’s not just a lack of candor before the tribunal, but outright perjury. Ten days before the Feds obtained their first warrant to spy on the Trump campaign, the Deputy Secretary of State, Kathleen Kavalec, had Steele’s number, and put it in writing:

Kavalec’s handwritten notes clearly flagged in multiple places that Steele might be talking to the media.

“June — reporting started,” she wrote. “NYT and WP have,” she added, in an apparent reference to The New York Times and The Washington Post.

Later she quoted Steele as suggesting he was “managing” four priorities — “Client needs, FBI, WashPo/NYT, source protection,” her handwritten notes show.

Indeed. He was a hopelessly conflicted MI6 guy. But a foreign spook obsessed with Trump was vital to the FBI – because they had nothing else. Perhaps the most pitiful yet damning part of Ms Kavalec’s memo is this:

She quoted Steele as saying, “Payments to those recruited are made out of the Russian Consulate in Miami,” according to a copy of her summary memo obtained under open records litigation by the conservative group Citizens United. Kavalec bluntly debunked that assertion in a bracketed comment: “It is important to note that there is no Russian consulate in Miami.”

We shall have more on this in the days ahead.

This election is a character test for Australia

Posted on by
Reply

Scott Morrison gives flowers to his mother Marion and wife Jenny as he takes the stage at the Liberal party’s 2019 Australian federal election campaign

I have just watched the Coalition policy launch in Melbourne, and each party leader delivered an absolute stemwinder of a speech.

The choice right now is whether we preserve what we have or throw it away on unaffordable waste while preserving us from a global warming (aka climate change) that is non-existent.

Mostly on the economy, both what the Coalition will do – like balancing the budget – and what Labor will do – which is drive us into the poor house while plundering every cache of money they can get their hands on. In the PM’s words: “To spend well, you have to know how to manage money”. That is definitely not the ALP’s long suit.

And just for me, at the end the PM added in that they will keep our borders secure: “only the Liberal-National parties can be trusted”. Absolutely right.

It is game on and the election remains a toss up, but now leaning slightly, but only slightly, towards the Libs.

Here is the description from Channel Nine.

The election’s main non-issue gets a mention

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s the story: “Refugees” on Nauru everywhere hope for border policy change.

Refugees on Nauru and Manus ­Island have told officials they are hoping a new government will be elected and tough border security policies overhauled, delivering them a pathway to resettle in ­Australia and New Zealand.

The story comes with this: Parent visa ‘could see 200,000 applications’.

More than 200,000 parents of overseas-born Australians may arrive under Labor’s generous temporary visa, putting pressure on future governments to allow them to stay for good, demographer Bob Birrell has warned.

I’ve always thought that entry into Australia should be similar to applying to be a student at a university where you don’t just show up and demand to be admitted.

Global stocks have tumbled to a six-week low

Posted on by
Reply

taming_the_dragon

It’s the American president being quoted: ‘THEY BROKE THE DEAL’.

He pledged to hike tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods from Friday – rocking equity markets across the world.

US negotiators also want China to clamp down on the alleged theft of US technology.

“For 10 months, China has been paying tariffs to the USA of 25% on 50 billion dollars of high tech, and 10% on 200 billion dollars of other goods,” Mr Trump said in his tweet.

“These payments are partially responsible for our great economic results. The 10% will go up to 25% on Friday. 325 billions dollars of additional goods sent to us by China remain untaxed, but will be shortly, at a rate of 25%.

“The tariffs paid to the USA have had little impact on product cost, mostly borne by China. The trade deal with China continues, but too slowly, as they attempt to renegotiate. No!”

Analysts have now pointed out that the President’s message cost the markets more than $13bn for each of the 102 words in the tweet.

Global stocks have tumbled to a six-week low.

A six-week low. Not quite the end of the world. Free trade must work on both sides, not just on one. That’s what the WTO is there to remind us of. And while you consider the above, you might add this into the equation: China’s Communist Dictatorship Targets American Creativity. And no doubt all of the above is related to this.


ROCKETMAN

 

Inventing the individual has a long history

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s a book you might consider if you are interested in seeing the world in a different way: Inventing the Individual.

Here, in a grand narrative spanning 1,800 years of European history, a distinguished political philosopher firmly rejects Western liberalism’s usual account of itself: its emergence in opposition to religion in the early modern era. Larry Siedentop argues instead that liberal thought is, in its underlying assumptions, the offspring of the Church. Beginning with a moral revolution in the first centuries CE, when notions about equality and human agency were first formulated by St. Paul, Siedentop follows these concepts in Christianity from Augustine to the philosophers and canon lawyers of the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, and ends with their reemergence in secularism―another of Christianity’s gifts to the West.

Inventing the Individual tells how a new, equal social role, the individual, arose and gradually displaced the claims of family, tribe, and caste as the basis of social organization. Asking us to rethink the evolution of ideas on which Western societies and government are built, Siedentop contends that the core of what is now the West’s system of beliefs emerged earlier than we commonly think. The roots of liberalism―belief in individual freedom, in the fundamental moral equality of individuals, in a legal system based on equality, and in a representative form of government befitting a society of free people―all these were pioneered by Christian thinkers of the Middle Ages who drew on the moral revolution carried out by the early Church. These philosophers and canon lawyers, not the Renaissance humanists, laid the foundation for liberal democracy in the West.

And there is more here as well.

Trump and his tax returns

Posted on by
Reply

Losing money in business is part of the risk of entrepreneurship. For the left in America to raise tax losses as an example of anything only shows their ignorance, and the ignorance of the people who follow them.

This is Rush Limbaugh: Trump Discussed His Business Losses on The Apprentice!. In fact, he wrote them up in one of his books where he discussed the importance of luck in getting things to turn out right. The left are repulsive in so many ways, with this just one more. The video, by the way, is a treat.

RUSH: I have here a show open from Donald Trump on The Apprentice. I want you to listen to how Trump introduced himself as The Apprentice debuted on the NBC network.

TRUMP: My name is Donald Trump, and I’m the largest real estate developer in New York. I own buildings all over the place, model agencies, the Miss Universe pageant, jetliners, golf courses, casinos, and private resorts like Mar-a-Lago, one of the most spectacular estates anywhere in the world. But it wasn’t always so easy. About 13 years ago, I was seriously in trouble. I was billions of dollars in debt. But I fought back, and I won, big league. I used my brain. I used my negotiating skills, and I worked it all out. Now my company’s bigger than it ever was and stronger than it ever was, and I’m having more fun than I ever had.

RUSH: So the New York Times is breaking these news stories three years ago and then yesterday that Trump lost a billion dollars, that Trump didn’t pay any taxes, that Trump’s a lousy businessman. Trump admitted it all! He admitted it all when doing his intro to the TV show The Apprentice. Trump has never hidden this, by the way.

And yet the New York Times twice now has acted like they have uncovered and discovered the biggest secret Donald Trump wants no one to know, when in fact Donald Trump has bragged about it, talked about it, written books about it. The New York Times has hailed him as the comeback kid. I’ll tell you, folks, the desperation on the part of the left is getting tough to watch here.

RUSH: By the way, that Trump sound bite we just played from The Apprentice in 2004, like 15 years ago. People are making fools of themselves and don’t know it yet, so they’re gonna keep doing it. And we’ll keep monitoring and pointing it out to you.

There is also a discussion of this same idiocy at Ace of Spades: New York Times Bombshell Nothingburger: During the Period When Four of Trump’s Businesses Notoriously Declared Bankruptcy, Trump Himself Suffered Losses and Paid Little Income Tax on the Money He Was Not Actually Making (Due to the Bankruptcies). This comes at the end:

If memory serves, when Twitter and FaceBook-approved Conspiracy Theorist Rachel Maddow announced her BLOCKBUSTER! (nothingburger) Trump tax leak, it turned out that much of the losses in some years was just carried-forward losses from earlier YUGE years of losses.

The idea of this is simple: Let’s say in one year you are absolutely wiped out. You lose one hundred million, and pay no tax.

The next year you earn $100 million.

How should you be taxed? You weren’t taxed that one year you lost $100 million. But should you pay normal tax rates for the next year — say, $50 million in federal taxes.

Or would a rational tax code look at these two years together and say that really, for both years combined, you actually made about zero dollars cumulatively?

Legislators have decided taxing half your money that second year wouldn’t be a fair representation of your actual multiyear-term income, and so they let you take the losses from that one year and carry them over to reduce your income in later years.

But you know, we’re in the End Times now, the Time of Chaos, and Democrats and their media masters (yeah, it’s the media calling the shots now, especially social media tech monsters) will decide that following the law is now against the law.

“No surrender in trying to take back our country”

Posted on by
Reply

UPDATE: With thanks to duncanm who has found the speech online.

Mark Latham unleashes in maiden speech: How did our nation come to this? This is only one passage in a much longer speech.

“Like so many parts of our politics that have changed quickly in recent times, there are voices here who do not believe in the virtues of the West, who do not acknowledge the nation-building achievements of our culture and our country.

“It’s like a scene from The Life of Brian, a case of: What has Western civilisation done for us? Only advanced healthcare and education; architecture, engineering, information technology, free speech and the rule of law.

“ In fact: this chamber, this parliament, in this city, all our public institutions and the material comforts we take for granted — none of them could exist without the greatness of the West. Without the advances that began with the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution and continue to this day.

“Yet still, among the Leftist elites, among the social engineers and cultural dietitians, sneering at our civilisation and its achievements has become their new pastime.

“They preach diversity but practice a suffocating cultural conformity, wanting everyone to be just like them.

“They argue for inclusion but as soon as a Christian, a conservative, a libertarian, a nationalist, a working class larrikin, an outsider from the vast suburbs and regions of our nation disagrees with them, they crank up their PC “outrage machine to exclude them from society. “

They are tolerant of everything except dissenting values and opinions — meaning, of course, they are tolerant of nothing that matters, only themselves.”

Mr Latham said this was a “Leftist curse through the ages: the recurring history of those who so badly crave control over others, they lose control over themselves.”

Lots more along the same lines with this the final para:

“ For those of us who believe in the virtues of Western civilisation, who treasure the advances and values of the Enlightenment … this is the fight of our lives. Our ethos, sir, is simple: No surrender. No surrender in any debate, in any institution, on any front. No surrender in trying to take back our country, That, Mr President, is why I’m here and what I’m fighting for.”

Après nous le déluge

Posted on by
Reply

It’s about when my generation disappears in the next few years: After the Boomers Are Gone, the Bloodshed Begins. It’s not that we have been so fantastic that what follows will be a disaster because they won’t be able to maintain what we left behind. It is what we have done that means that the world that follows will be a disaster, disorder will rule. It’s our fault as well. Here’s the start; you can then read it all for yourself.

The Boomer Age is drawing to its close. When one speaks of this group, it tends to mostly focus on white Boomers (not that others are outside the group, but to such a great extent, it really does mean those of mostly European background, if for no other reason than they have been the largest demographic group). When that age does end, we will see an ever dwindling European demographic majority in many Western nations (Canada and the USA are almost certainly the first, soon followed by a variety of European nations). That significant point of majority will be fading, as the numbers precipitously drop until below 50%. The question looming then is, what is next? Will it be the glorious Brave New World of harmonious multiculturalism or an uneasy balkanization that trends ever more to tribalism and violence? Based on existing evidence and studies, I believe that it will be closer to the latter.

Will just finish off with the author’s bio:

Cam’s a married father of three. Born and raised in Canada, he currently lives on the left coast of Canada, notorious for its milder winters and liberal thinking. He’s a university-educated educator, blogger, former generally indifferent employee within the financial sector, and failed musician. A Christian of what has usually been termed politically conservative leanings, he prefers to be labeled a realist at this time, mostly for lack of a better term, as too often conservatives have been little more than slow-motion liberals.

You might also read the thread at Lucianne.com where the article was found. The optimists are the ones who think they will be able to defend their way of life. The realists are the ones who see a Dark Age coming.

One more example of how vile the left is for our political institutions

Posted on by
Reply

The person being escorted from the venue in AlburyPHOTO: The protester cracked a smile while being escorted from the venue. (ABC News: Adam Kennedy)

They are smugly confident about their own virtue but are, in reality, the cause of most of the avoidable problems in our political world. Which leads from this: Federal election 2019: Woman charged after Scott Morrison egged while campaigning in Albury. She thinks she has struck a blow for something positive but is only making Australia a worse place to live. The judge who eventually sets her free with a token fine or a few hours of community service, will also be contributing to making Australia a worse place to live. The story comes with this:

Shortly afterwards, Australian Council of Trade Unions secretary Sally McManus attacked the PM’s comment.

“How dare you accuse us of this and make the association. You seem to have no respect for the truth or any concern about running down your fellow Australians. We would never support such behaviour,” she tweeted.

And just what had the PM said?

“My concern about today’s incident in Albury was for the older lady who was knocked off her feet,” the Prime Minister tweeted.

“I helped her up and gave her a hug.

“Our farmers have to put up with these same idiots who are invading their farms and their homes.

“We will stand up to thuggery whether it’s these cowardly activists who have no respect for anyone, or militant unionists standing over small businesses and their employees on work sites.”

What a joke. As if there were any circumstances whatsoever that would make Sally or her mates support the PM.

Financial analysts of the world unite

Posted on by
Reply

I know that some of you cannot go to the link which is behind the paywall, but in this case you might think about ways to read the whole article. Head off to some coffee shop or the local library. Perhaps even shell out the $3.00. But this is what you should read, which comes with a title that provides you with little sense of what comes next: Piano’s not the key to wealth. I might also mention that the article might also depress you unless you are in on the scam scheme yourself.

The best pianists, for all their thousands of hours of practice and performances, will earn crumbs compared to even second-tier fund managers. The salaries of the best doctors and barristers’ incomes are dwarfed those of money managers.

That’s because they are labourers, and labour is relatively cheap. Siphoning off a portion of capital income is real money.

And in no country is this truer than Australia, where regulation ensures $30bn flows into superannuation accounts every three months. Indeed, whoever wins the federal election will supercharge that flow as the compulsory rate of saving cranks up to 12 per cent by the mid-2020s. Labor, in one of the greatest transfers of wealth ever, wants a 15 per cent rate.

All this and more are from Adam Creighton’s visit to Omaha to listen to Warren Buffett and discuss money management with a number of the 18,000 who showed up to listen to what he had to say. There is then also this:

In advice to budding financiers, Buffett revealed the second and main swing favour of asset management: don’t become a good analyst, be a salesman. At 1.5 per cent a year, you’ll quickly be rich. The wonders of pay based on percentages can’t be oversold, especially in a world where financial assets are swelling faster than inflation and the population together. Managing $1bn entails no more labour than $10m but, for a fee of 1 per cent a year, the pay differs.

The best pianists, for all their thousands of hours of practice and performances, will earn crumbs compared to even second-tier fund managers. The salaries of the best doctors and barristers’ incomes are dwarfed those of money managers.

That’s because they are labourers, and labour is relatively cheap. Siphoning off a portion of capital income is real money.

And in no country is this truer than Australia, where regulation ensures $30bn flows into superannuation accounts every three months. Indeed, whoever wins the federal election will supercharge that flow as the compulsory rate of saving cranks up to 12 per cent by the mid-2020s. Labor, in one of the greatest transfers of wealth ever, wants a 15 per cent rate.

As wages stagnate and asset prices soar, the division of jobs between those who rely on wages and those whose “wages” entail a hefty chunk of capital income raises questions about the fairness of the tax system.

I’m as against Labor’s proposed interference in childcare wages as the next furious pundit. It is already a bottomless pit of public spending and any extra will be hoovered up by childcare centres. The proposal does nothing to unbutton the straitjacket on workers’ productivity imposed by Labor’s “quality framework”, which mandated maximum child-to-carer ratios among other feel-good imposts that abolished affordable childcare.

The last paras:

Regulation tends to benefit the better off, as it did in Omaha, where low-income Uber and Lyft drivers did a roaring trade. But too bad for them a federal rule in response to Nebraska floods outlawed “gouging” of consumers in emergencies. Without surge pricing, Omaha’s rich visitors enjoyed cheap $US7 rides between high-end hotels and bars.

“Why are you poorer than Warren?” Munger [the $2 billion dollar man] was asked.

“Well, why was Albert Einstein so much poorer than me?” he mused, after a long pause. Becoming a scientist is also a bad idea.

You have now read around a third, so you can decide whether to spend the $3. Nevertheless, it might be the best career advice you ever get. Still, I would rather be Albert Einstein than Warren Buffett, but that’s just me.