Defaultgeddon, the bright side?

With a US default looking increasingly likely in the face of the Tea Party rejecting Operation kill all poors. What are the benefits of this, not for non-millionaires like you but for the politicians who'll be fine whatever happens?

We'll leave endemic corruption aside because apart from "they're being paid to shit on us" what more is there to say?

The reason the Tea Party want a default is fairly simple, they think big government is bad thus they causing it to shut down will be great. They assume the treasury will be forced to maintain debt payments thus everything else will take catastrophic cuts and free market magic will fix everything. Of course if anything goes wrong (and hoo boy will it) all the right wing press and politicians will scream how willing to make a deal they were but Obama just wouldn't be reasonable.

Obama wants a default because while the President will take the blame for a bad economy it looks like the economy is going to be bad whatever. At least this way he'll be able to point to GOP intransigence and the fact he made huge offers of compromise (which he also supports because he really doesn't care about the poor) which might just work. Polling consistently shows the US public hate congress more than the president so having a tangible way to put the blame for the economy on congress would be no bad thing for him.

Democratic congresspeople to my mind have the most to lose, their constituents are going to blame them directly for the loss of vital services and reductions in social security and medicare /medicaid. If there were anything like justice in the world the tea party members of the house who are making default seem ever more likely would be the ones to be punished for that but that is rather a weak reason for Democratic congresspeople to want a default.

Now the big problem with these positive scenarios is that while maybe politically one faction or another may gain somewhat from a default the nation as a whole loses so badly the political loses will be far greater.

For the Tea Party their arguments for small government will be undermined by a recession that may well become a depression. A weak and faltering economy simply will not be able to handle the sudden withdrawal of the direct contribution public funds make to the economy and the indirect contribution public institutions and the spending power of public sector workers bring. I have no idea if the super rich assholes behind the Tea Party will benefit economically or otherwise but in terms of politics the GOP will not be vindicated.

For Obama the ability to blame congress for the economy would be nice but the collapse of US prestige and power after the dollar stops being the reserve currency ( I don't honestly know what will replace it, maybe the Yuan?) will give his opponent in 2012 ample chance to attack him on nationalistic grounds. As will the increased price of borrowing for the US, foreign wars will become even more expensive. Plus presiding over a major economic turmoil doesn't tend to make voters like you much even if they do blame congress.

I don't tend to think Democratic congresspeople have any reason at all to want default so there's little contrast with for them.

I think the Tea Partiers may actually want a default whereas Obama sees some benefits in it for him so as to prevent him caving in completely. Still though, what a silly mess we're in that a wholly artificial accounting process, the debt ceiling, is coming so close to causing a global economic crisis.

Europe's sweaty palms moment

I would argue that while the EU's problems are potentially much worse than those of Americas, there is greater scope for action while the intransigence of the Tea Party refusing to raise the debt ceiling could end the dollar's status as the global reserve currency and that really could be catastrophic for America. Hence sweaty palms rather than pooey pants

Sauce for goose is sauce for gander so here is an excellent article regarding Europe's debt problems. While the short term solution to the EU's problems aren't quite so simple as just raising an arbitrary cap on borrowing it would seem the self interest of German elites and to an extent German voters could badly harm the EU just as Tea Party self interest could badly harm the US.

The article also highlights the growing sense of lacking economic agency most citizens of Europe have. The flip side of the coin is the assertion of the elites and their lickspittles that essentially democracy works and thus it is everyone's fault and everyone has to face the consequences of that. The contrast of the self congratulation elites chorused when things were going well to this egalitarian approach to blame is probably the most crass case of "socialise the risk, privatise the reward" I have yet to see. Still the way things are going I doubt this is the most egregious case we're going to see.

One complaint I have about the article (and something I hope Tony will comment on) is that it fails to mention the nature of the Euro as a currency peg rather than an actual currency. There is no central control mechanism for borrowing (or at least there wasn't, I don't think this has changed but it might've) so countries like Greece could use the value of the Euro as imbued by big economies like France and Germany to borrow on much more favourable terms than their own economies would allow. That is to say Greece could borrow with Euros but was only able to pay back in (metaphorical) Drachma.

I really hope there is a reason other than cynical self interests that such a glaring oversight was made in the creation of the single currency.

Tony's Response
"For the most part you're correct, but it's important to note that while there is a single currency, the mechanism by which sovereign debt is accrued varies by state and unlike the US there isn't a single entity who can reign it in.

The question the Euro sought to answer was "can a unified currency work with a bunch of different entities essentially managing the back end?" As France and Germany will likely find out, they're going to be footing the bill for every country that doesn't have enough cash to meet its obligations. Either they do it or the currency itself gets weakened in ways that no one can really predict. Right now things aren't so bad, but if Italy goes or Spain, well, that's going to be the test because at a certain point the Germans aren't going to be able to keep up with large but faltering economies.

Within a country, sovereign wealth generally has to support the weaker, depressed parts of the country. That's just the way it has to be. In the Eurozone it's difficult to see how that's going to fly when the wealthier countries aren't responsible for and don't answer to the weaker countries but still have to act in a way that primarily funnels money to the countries that need it in order to support the entire system.

This is uncharted territory, really. There isn't any historical data on how this will play out to my knowledge, but my guess is that France and Germany won't be able to shoulder the burden for long and something will have to give either politically or economically. It's worth watching.

(FWIW Europe isn't worse off than the US economically, but the political realities involved will likely create a crisis in Europe before the US. The US has the benefit of simply being able to falter on it's own rather than having disparate parties who could precipitate collapse by actions that they might not be able to avoid. Europe's situation is definitely better overall when looking at the numbers and they're willing to address the actual balance sheet problems whereas the US simply never will, but the uncertainty over how Europe will play out makes it riskier now than it is in the US.)"

America's Pooey pants moment.

One of my favourite teachers introduced me to the concept of a pooey pants moment. She described how her son in an A-level exam had described Lenin's position after the October revolution as such. He got an A in that exam and not unreasonably. While the term is crude it does rather accurately reflect the nature of having a military of around 500 dedicated amateurs (the red guards) against standing remnants of the Tsarist military numbering about 20,000 men who have much more material and expertise. On top of that even the majority of the left intelligentsia / political class that had emerged following the February revolution opposed the Bolshevik seizure of power. The Bolsheviks eventually won out, mostly because of how badass a dude Trotsky was, although there were of course other factors. Nonetheless early on in the civil war if I were in Lenin's position my pants would likely have been rather pooey.

But why should America's pants collectively be pooey? The absurd argument over the raising of the debt ceiling of course!. As you are likely aware this is not a thing most other countries have, it should be linked to the budget with the amount of debt the nation takes out linked to the budget that was passed. But America is exceptional

But others have commented on this and far better explanations exist elsewhere. This shouldn't be a pooey pants moment but it is because of the nature of Republican Party at this moment in time. 538 lays out the nature of this very well.

Most commentators and economists and so on aren't very worried about a US default, technical or otherwise because logically it is very much in the GOP's interest to raise the debt ceiling, sure they'll push for cuts that'll hurt the poor, that's what they do, but at the end of the day they'll compromise and the ceiling will be raised. The problem is the Tea party is so far to the right and so ideologically driven it doesn't appear to be looking to its' own (or big business's) self interest anymore. Indeed Nate Silver demonstrates that the ideological gap between the House GOP and GOP voters is bigger than the gap between GOP and Democratic voters.

So why are they so far out in to right field? Do they have some strategy to bring down Obama that the mainstream media hasn't picked up on? It could possibly be, but as Silver points out it is very difficult to predict who could win out of this. Given how Gingrich's shutdown in 1995-6 didn't play out well for the GOP, either their strategists have some amazing insights everyone is lacking this time around or they're not behaving in a sound manner.

So have the lunatics taken over the asylum? Is it time to poo our pants and eat the barrel of a gun? Well maybe but the GOP's behaviour isn't quite as mad as it may seem or at least it isn't aimless madness. The article about the ideological gap between the House GOP and GOP voters is mildly misleading because the gap between likely GOP voters and the House is much smaller. As this third article explains the GOP are not in a position to compromise. Jonny linked it me last week and my only response was welp.

Essentially the GOP is seemingly on the ropes it has haemorrhaged the middle ground to the Democrats (whatever the hell the middle ground in the US even is these days) and the only thing that allowed them to win so comprehensively in the 2010 midterms was a motivated minority of extreme right wingers and the apathy of the larger more moderate groups of voters. They are just trapped in a morton's fork (Catch 22) situation, they can't alienate the Tea Party because if they do they seemingly face extinction but appeasing the Tea Party drives them further from the mainstream and leads them to take absurdly hard lines on issues they have no public support on.

Will the debt ceiling be raised in some form before August 2nd? Probably. The calm assurance it will happen is definitely misplaced however.

Man this fucking sucks.

http://www.rainn.org/statistics seems like a useful if depressing website but they only have one supporter (Rachel Bilson) in the entire fucking world? Never have I been so ashamed to be human!

Whoa there, back up a moment.

I know you're all Ron Paul 2012 boosters but I think maybe voting for him might be a bad idea

"To wit, damaging a truncheon."

Alife Meadows, a student who was beaten up by the police to the extent he needed brain surgery has been charged with violent disorder by the police.

LENIN'S TOMB summarises it better than I could. Its a fucking farce the amount of deference and respect the Police are given.

Florida is now formerly disqualified from the worst state in the union competition.

They're cheating I'm not sure how they are but they are. No state can be this terrible without deliberate effort.

That'll show em.

In response to a leaked cable in which the British High Commissioner in Malawi said the country's ruler is increasingly autocratic and intolerant of criticism said ruler is kicking the High Commissioner out for daring to criticise him.

Also this article has a frankly unnerving picture of William Hague for no apparent reason. So enjoy that.

You know how people say Feminism has already won and those ladies should shut up?

Turns out they don't know jack. The same old 50s style women hating beliefs that the woman should feel bad for being raped live on. They live on with the support of the lower federal courts too! Still this particular story is almost surreal with the whole being required to cheer for your rapist thing. Attractive women really are public property it would seem.

I'm pretty glad I have external genitalia all things considered.

A case study of a corrupt occupation.

John Dolan is one of the good ones. He is a bitter and pessimistic man but such are the wages of speaking truth to power. People far better informed than me have suggested he has a further curse, he is an unrecognised artistic genius, doomed like Van Gogh or Nietzsche to have his literary work recognised only after his death. I mean sure you can be high minded and stuff but I'd imagine all things being equal those with gifts would like to be recognised in their lifetime, especially by young attractive people and rich people of any shape size or colour. I mean damn, who wouldn't?

He was one of the main people behind The Exile and is still an occasional contributor to The Exiled. While he did a lot of good work under his own name his most popular stuff was probably when he posed as http://exiledonline.com/cat/war-nerd/>The War Nerd where he did quite probably the best analysis of modern conflicts you're likely to read, stripped of jingoism and bolstered with the context we're seldom provided with. To actually make a living, for the powers that be make sure dissent isn't profitable, he worked in academia all over the world until a few years ago while at the University of Victoria he was fired for encouraging students to criticise George Monbiot. Now I'm not sure of the specifics and since I like Monbiot I'd like to hope he didn't personally push for the dismissal but who knows. He wrote of the trials of extreme poverty in North America and one can thus understand how he came to be employed at the corrupt right wing institution that is the America University of Iraq.

He got fired after working there for little over a year but he experienced enough to write a lengthy article about how messed up the place was. I feel little need to criticise a formerly destitute man for selling out in order to eat. The way things work you either sell out or start off rich enough not to need to worry about an income, the game is rigged. Indeed the concept of selling out seems to me to mean you get nice and rich off of betraying your ideals but you don't go into academia to get rich (except maybe if you're an American sports coach):


Bear that in mind when reading the article for if an institution like a university which one generally wouldn't associate with a bonanza of graft ("suck on it losers, I got three of my monographs bought by the library!") you can begin to guess how terrible the corruption and fraud is in occupation institutions that are associated with fabulous wealth. That is not to say the American University of Iraq is simply a cautionary hint to the wider Iraq situation, it the people who are paying considerable amounts of money to learn there are being shafted by the cronyism and blind right wing ideology touting of a faculty so cowed and intellectually timid as to no longer really be able to call themselves academics.

Still when it comes time to bomb Iran we will likely sell the Kurds out to gain Turkish support, and dead Kurds wont need universities.

Oregon congressional candidate thinks law is more of a guideline.

pretend I made an Oregon trail joke here, something about only being able to carry 15lbs of illegal funding back to the wagon or whatever

A Republican candidate for a Congressional district in Oregon has received mysterious support to the tune of $150k from anonymous donors which if it is from a single individual is extremely illegal. He appeared on the Rachel Maddow show to... well allegedly to address this issue but mostly to rant and gurn like a crazy old man. What clear message he did give was that because his Democratic opponent has around a million dollars of funding (to his ~$350k) and because Maddow can't account for every penny said Democratic candidate has spent (which is not really relevant as long as it was donated legally) then him receiving $150k of highly suspicious funding is of no consequence. I suppose he sees campaign funding laws as a kind of handicap system so the less likely you are to win the less they apply to you.



To save you from having to watch the later parts of the video, he is quite uncomfortable to watch, I will point out the guy is... how should I say it? Adamant in his claims he is a scientist but in possession of insights and views that the majority of the scientific community is not. To wit, he is fucking crazy. Hes a Republican so his denial of global warming and Evolution aren't especially shocking. Nor is the fact he supports home schooling (he has home school curriculum business) but his vehemence is noteworthy, he believes the public school system should be abolished:

He also believes Women and African Americans don't have the mental capacity or inclination for science and that the best place to store nuclear waste is in the foundations of buildings, why? because it is good for you!

Robinson is an advocate for nuclear power and a proponent of radiation hormesis, a theory claiming that very low levels of radiation can be beneficial to humans. He writes in a 1997 issue of Access to Energy, “The most sensible use of low-level radioactive waste is as a concrete and insulation additive in residential homes — especially in areas where there is insufficient natural radiation for optimum health.” He told EW that a state like Oregon, with its lower radiation rates, suffers from higher cancer rates than Colorado, which has higher background radiation. The damage done at a very low level of radioactivity keeps the immune system in shape, he says. In response to a question regarding whether this is similar in principle to homeopathy, he says, “Homeopathy is so strange; it’s outside of my field of specialization.”

Both the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation say there is no evidence to support the theory of radiation hormesis. What has been proven is that high levels of radiation are indeed pretty bad for our health.

So really I suppose his disinterest in the law is unsurprising, he seems pretty disinterested in reality as a whole. But after a few depressing posts of late I can bring you a ray of hope in regards to this guy. As things currently stand he has a 0.0% chance of winning the election. All the more reason to cheat I suppose.

The study of myth and legend to be promoted in British schools.

The Tories have decided to follow the American propaganda method of only teaching national history in schools. In a way I shouldn't care after all everything in school is a lie to children anyway and anything of worth is taught at degree level or learnt by people off their own back, school gives you the foundations to learn more and nothing else really. But damnit I like history and while yes the overwhelming focus on WW2 is perhaps a problem but it is a subject separated to some extent from national identity and children can be encouraged to explore the range of potential reasons for the start of the war in the face of the perception it was all Hitler's fault. But with British history, especially for children up to the age of 13 parents will likely feel compelled to complain and attack teachers that send any other message than Britain was good.

This of course leaves aside problems such as inability to empathise with other cultures and the insularity only knowing your own history causes but that is very likely the aim of the Tories in doing this. Now lets look at a few quotes:

He attacked the current approach to history teaching, which he said denied children the chance to learn "our island story" in favour of a mix of topics at primary level and a brief study of Henry VIII and Hitler at secondary.

Why on earth would one want children to learn about anywhere other than a small island, who gives a shit about the vast majority of the earth and its' population?

Gove said: "Our literature is the best in the world – it is every child's birthright, and we should be proud to teach it in every school."

Following on from the previous quote one really gets a clear view of the level of nationalism going into this decision, it is a clear step backwards in understanding the rest of the world. But this is a right wing government so not really a surprise. Also if anyone can tell me how one can define how one culture's literature is better than another's please do let me know, I am keen to learn.

It is a source of dismay to Conservatives that Winston Churchill is currently left off the history curriculum for 11 to 13-year-olds, while two anti-slavery campaigners, William Wilberforce and Olaudah Equiano, are the only historical figures mentioned by name.

Not that freeing the slaves was a bad thing or anything, just really people seem to focus on it a bit too much. I mean yes human beings were stripped of all their rights, treated as property and generally abused in every manner possible but that isn't going to indoctrinate children into liking the Tories now is it?

I am very keen to know what children will get to learn about Winston Churchill, will it be his support for gassing Kurds (that which nasty old Saddam was hung for)? His desire to turn the BBC into a state propaganda organ during the General Strike? Or perhaps his (at best) total indifference to the deaths of four million Indian colonial subjects due to an avoidable famine during WW2?

LOL

Gove also said he wanted GCSE maths and science exams to be made tougher, adding: "We urgently need to ensure our children study rigorous disciplines instead of pseudo-subjects.

"In Massachusetts, 16-year-olds are asked in their science exams, to identify the shape of a carbon tetrabromide molecule as predicted by the valence-shell repulsion theory.

"In England, 16-year-olds are asked in their science exams whether we sweat through our lungs or our skin."

In both Britain and Massachusetts there aren't different levels of science exams nor are there questions weighted with different marks to acknowledge some questions are easier than others. This is a scientific fact.

Oh and the history expert who is advising on all this just happens to be a TV historian who did a rather flattering history series about Britain's history. The best person for the job was obviously chosen.

Nuclear Artwork

Jonny linked me this ages ago and I've consistently intended to but not actually managed to link this It is a piece of Artwork created by Isao Hashimoto which using simplistic images and sounds shows when and where every nuclear explosion occurred on earth between 1945 and 1998 and who caused each one. It is well worth a watch even if you do get the impression at the end of it that the leaders of powerful industrialised nations have a great deal in common with Chimpanzees that screech and fling their poop when angry or threatened.

thanks jonny

Legality has nothing do with right and wrong.

It is a wise person, a legitimate person, who looks upon the world and only respects that which is worthy of respect. This is such a person.

"Look at us, look at what they make you give."

Alternative title: Too much is never enough.

So serving in imperialist wars lost you limbs? Stop being such a big baby and get back to it, the super rich elite need more profits! That is to say "the Pentagon says 41 American amputee veterans are now serving in combat zones worldwide." So pretty soon Republicans are going to getting very angry about anyone claiming disability benefits, if these brave men and women can do their part in spite of their injuries why should we give any money to the free loaders eh?

Coming soon, combat wheelchairs that allow IED victims to return to convoy duty.

A better class of News.

thanks jonny

Super special Papal visit prelude summary!

With the imminent arrival of the absolute monarch of a European microstate (as Stephen Fry would describe him) in the UK that is costing Britain £12m + policing costs (so a lot more than £12m) theres been a fair bit of mention of Catholic stuff lately such as:

The Catholic Church in Britain said they'd kick out any priest found guilty of abusing children. But they didn't obviously it takes more than raping a few kids to stop being a messenger of God's word to the laity.

One of the Pope's aides has sadly gotten a rapid onset case of gout and can't come to Britain. The Papacy would once again like to assure you the Cardinal's recent comments to the press that Britain is a third world country has absolutely nothing to do with his decision to withdraw (which of course every good Catholic should) from the visit.

Curious about what a Papal head of state visit will entail? Well the Guardian have done a "tongue in cheek" guide that holds some decent information if it all does feel a bit forced.

If you are a British worshipper of Cathol do be aware there are still plenty of tickets still available.

However in a bit of positive news for the Catholic Church one of the worst men alive Ian Paisely is vehemently opposed to the Pope's visit so at least there will be someone more despicable than the Pope around as a nice distraction.

The practice of Simony by the early modern Catholic Church was one of the key causes of the reformation. Happily the Catholic Church has stated this isn't simony. Good news for all those Catholics who love tat and are on the verge of becoming protestants I suppose.

And to round us out we travel a few dozen miles across the North Sea to Belgium where their Catholic Church has recently become the latest to admit to large scale systematic abuse of children by Catholic Clergy.

The 2010 Republican Candidate for Governor of New York:

Paladino beat his mainstream Republican rival by about 2:1. Though there is some good news in that by securing 30,000 signitures state wide his rival Rick Lazio will also be on the November ballot as the Conservative Party candidate which should split the Republican vote to some degree. Of course theres always the happy chance right wing Democratic voters go over to the Conservative party or something.

Unemployment benefits are federally taxed in the US.

Thanks Reagan

thanks jonny (hes not responsible for federal taxation, just for linking this)

Bitches, you want a raise? Clean your goddamn cunts!

Alternet covers this issue with the sarcasm it deserves but basically a full page ad in a woman's magazine claims the best way for a woman to get a raise is to make her special area extra special clean with their products.

Laugh or cry at the absurdity of it here