Refugees or Illegal Imigrants

I just saw a TV broadcast where a Syrian 'immigrant' to the Greek island of Kos, just off the Turkish coast, complained that the facilities to receive them were inadequate. I could not believe my ears when the angry man went on declare that "If this is Europe, then I'm going back to Syria."

Greece may seem wealthier than the country he has just left behind, but by European terms Greece has great problems of its own and is not equipped to cope with the volume of people fleeing distressed countries. But in general Europe as a whole has not estimated the sheer numbers of people attempting entry. One thing is clear though is that the rules prohibit economic refugees, in other words those illegal immigrants simply seeking a more affluent existence. That said if the protester in question can even think about returning, he has a realistic option, then he is by definition an economic refugee, and so should be deported. But the arrogance of him is amazing, no understanding for the country he has just entered, and high expectations.

In another broadcast a man complains that he has crossed ten counties, enduring great hardships, only to be left to rot in a make-shift camp on the outskirts of Calais while being denied entry to the UK. Clearly the message has not gotten through to him that his destination regards him as an illegal immigrant, not a refugee, as the international treaties say that he is supposed to claim assylum in the first country he encounters. Thereafter he will be allocated to a country, and has no right to choose the country of his desire.

The Calais authorities like those in Kos do not have the finances nor facilities to cope with the volume. It is not the fault of the local authorities. The EU as a whole has not been prepared for this swarm over the last two years. But it should have been. There is no reason why Italy, Greece, Malta, nor the town of Calais should have to cope with this without a coordinated plan and resources from the EU.

What does the Greek Bailout Mean?

According to the BBC "Chancellor Merkel told (German) MPs the deal was hard for all sides, but it was the "last" attempt to resolve the crisis"

The deal presented means many things, and there is no easy answer. One thing is that there is an attempt to use EU funds to easy an Euro problem. Something that non-Euro countries are resisting. After all they did not sign up for the Euro particularly anticipating such problems, countries like the UK.

But mostly the solution is neither one thing nor the other. The 'deal' is a typical fudge EU committee decision, who feel they have to do something, yet are afraid to do what is necessary for political consequences within their home constituencies. As such Frau Merkel is wrong, this will not be the last attempt to solve the Greek problem. In three years time we will be back to square one, discussing yet again what to do about Greece.

Why? Simply because as the IMF says, the measures do not go far enough in economic terms. Greece needs debt write-off and directed capital injection into targeted infrastructure project that will boost the GDP. In order to secure the further loans (bailouts) necessary to survive, Greece needs to prove it is serious in reforming its economy and mentality, this is why the deal terms are so stringent (a historic factor brought about by previous Greek governments who took conditional loans, without implementing the conditions). But you do not need a Labrador dog to see that such measures are recessionary, leading to contracting revenues which would otherwise be needed to repay these new loans.

The former Greek Finance Minister, still in Parliament, Varufakis, voted against the new deal, calling it insane. While his Marxists views may cloud his vision, he is largely correct. Basically, piling more debt on an already debt insustainable economy while imposing recessionary policies can only lead to catastrophe. Therefore in three years we will still be discussing the Greek issue.

The situation comes about because of internal politics within some Euro countries. Greece should not receive more loans without proving it is going to reform and pay them back. Greece should not get its debt written off, because that is our tax payers money, and they can work and earn for themselves. Hard talk for a country whose mentality seems to be that it deserves a Rolex, while earning enough for a Timex.

So, the deal imposes tough recessionary austerity, while expecting repayments on an increased debt that was already un-repayable.

The alternative, was to let Greece go from the Euro. Let them arrange their own monetary and fiscal policies to their own liking. Unfortunately the Greeks did not have the stomach for the Drachma, and they said so quite vocally in a referendum.

This left European creditors with little choice but to offer the 'half-measure' terms that they did. They could not plausibly offer less, nor politically more. But these are doomed to fail. It should either have been the full package, with monitored, verifiable, reforms, and an investment package similar to the Marshal Plan - Or Greece should have been allowed to arrange its own economy.

Unfortunately many Greeks seem to be very emotional concerning the affinity between the Euro and the EU, a confusion that may prove costly in the long run.

Greek Referendum

Queues at Bank machines during Capital Controles

Today Greeks voted in a referendum, on whether to accept or reject further Government loans and a collection of economic and structural reforms. Overwhelmingly they voted NO to the reforms, commonly known as Austerity, but chose to stay within the euro currency.

What people were asked to vote on was a set of structural and fiscal reforms that had already expired at the same time as Greece defaulted on its IFM repayment. From the this view point the vote was pointless, something that semms to be lost the present leaders the PM, Szipras, and FM Varoufakis.

The Honourabke Mr Szipras has been calling the result a triumph for democracy, and resistence to anti-democratic measures from its creditor organisations, the IMF, ECB, and EU. Saying that Greek honour has been salvaged in this rejection of oppressive austerity measures.

In matters that concern all its citizens Demoracy extends accross Europe, in a case like this the arithmetic is simple, 80 millions Germans out-vote 11 million Greeks, which could be interpreted as Mr Sipras should sit down and mind his toungue. There are no challenges to the way a country arranges democracy within its borders, but where international affairs are concerned let the majority rule. Some might argue that honour is preserved when ones repays ones debts.

Not this this picture shows it, but Greeks turned out in 1000s to vote, 63% of them

Austerity measurs have been rejected which would have released funds it needs to repay other debts. Unfortunately, you cannot reject poverty, you have to work your way out of it. Those reforms should have put Greece back on a viable track. Rejecting them does not leave a lot of manouvering space. In 2012 €105 Billion of Greek debt was written off on the condition of implementing measurs that should have returned its public sector balances to normal levels. These funds are not just figures in a computer, but real money that tax payers have contributed to the emergency funds. German tax payers, and other countries, are not likely to accept another write-off without austerity measures guarenteeing that there will not be a third, or even later a fourth write-off. And there are those countries that have ungone austerity such as Portugal and Ireland, would coomplain if Greece were let off the hook.

To put this another way other, European leaders such as Mrs Merkel have to convince their electorate, and/or parliaments, that the taxes they pay from the wages that they work for are well spent in writing off more Greek debt.

Time has overtaken events, and the Greek economy has deteriorated further in the meatime The consequence of this is that the next set of austerity proposals from the Euro-group are likely to be tougher, demanding even more spening cuts, privatisations, and reductions the number of public sector workers.

What will Happen Next?

The ECB has no basis to reactivate flotation of the Greek Banks, as there is no change in the circumstances indicative of the insolvency of Greeks Banks (IMF default, no refinancing) - any deal is days, possibly weeks off. This means the Honorable Mr Varoufakis promise to reopen the Banks on Tuesday 7th cannot be met. But the economy is suffereing, and crisis point will be reached by Wednesday 8 July. To reactivate the economy, and peoples daily lives, the Drachma will have to re-introduced.

Part of the referendum was peoples desire to remain in the Euro, but once the Drachma hits the streets how can this be done. It is not clear if the Drachma can be used internally and the Euro still for International trade, or whether the Drachma would only be a temporary measure. What is certain is that the Drachma would devalue rapidly on International currency markets leading to huge internal inflation and consequent hardship.

One thing I will predict is that if this senario plays out the Szipras/Varoufakis duo would not accept blame for the predictable circumstances, but rather point the finger at the EU creditors. The duo are playing on EU humanitarial simpathy to avoid putting their economy in order, and continue expecting gifts from them at the same time.

How now does Greece intend to repay its debt obligations when it is refusing to rectify is efficiency and effectiveness deficiencies?

With a NO vote to austerity effectively being a vote not to repay the countries debts Mr Szipras will have to come away from the next round of negotiations with tougher more intrusive reforms to the Greek economy to ensure that it will be in a future position to repay those debts, but with extensions to its repayment plan, and possible interest write-offs. This package he will sell to his electorate as a victory....Err.

At the end of the day, a debt 180% of GDP cannot be sustained, but if Greece expects help from other peoples earnings then they will need display real conviction in working toward getting themselves out of a mess that they created. The Greek government is right in its protection of pensioners living standards, but although they were very vocal in protesting against suggested cuts to pensions they did not actively restructure the creditors conditions in consiliatory ways, instead preferring to leave this as a battle-cry.

There have been faults on both sides, but certainly the Szipras/Varoufakis insistance on Marxist economic strategy in a Capitalist world, together with an unfounded expectation of negotiating flexibility on the part of creditors, and an insistance on tapping every assistance resource possible, has exacibated the situation.

One creative way to massage the debt repayments would be to make all loans interest free as a humanitarian crisis measure, and back date that, so that previous interest repayments can be considered as reducing the principle amount, and thus the total GDP% of debt. I do not have access to the figures, so cannot assess whether this amount to a substantial figure, but a guess it might amount to 10% of GDP. Lengthening the repayment terms is also inevitable.

Addressing the debt side of the problem is a one-sided approach, what is needed is a good old fasioned German pincer movement! The other side of debt to GDP, is to raise the GDP, which, ploitically, has to be done without giving money to the country for use at its own discretion. What is needed is cash injections targeted directly at infrastructure or manufacturing projects similar to the post War Marshall Plan, we could even call it the 'Merkel Plan'. Over five or six years this might boost GDP sufficiently to reduce the debt ratio to the commonly accepted sustainable level of 120%.

QED

ESC - Eurovision Song Contest- 2015

Last night provided the World with a veritable festival of vocal delight.
The quality of vocal ability on display cannot be denied.

European wide Audience judging by electronic voting systems could not be based on vocal talent, there was not one bad singers among the group. Differentiation between the participants had to be based on other values. The overall mood and tone of entries was morose and depressing, the contribution from the UK and 'Australia' were notable upbeat exceptions. Australia did well, UK's effort lacked punch at critical points, and were it better produced could have merited better than a bottom five placing.
So what was the judging criteria on the night. Perhaps the current economic crisis affected the ambiance, for to my taste even the Swedish winner with a seemingly optimistic title of "We are heroes of our time" was delivered in a down-beat tone. Many contributions echoed Operatic themes, Italy did well. Considering the overall mood of the competition, one thing was remarkable for viewers witnessing the voting progression.
After the initial grapple in the early votes Russia suddenly took the lead, and were consistently consolidating that lead as the votes from various countries were disclosed. At one point it looked like a certain Russian victory. What Happened? Well into the completion those countries within the top 5 appeared guaranteed some points, but suddenly several countries awarded Russia zero points.

As a speculative point could it be that as voting progressed the juries of various countries were accessing the Internet to find out what could be learned about the various contestants. It really was a remarkable turn around in the voting practice up to that point. If there persists a prudish tendency among the voters the pictures surfacing from Russian Maxim magazine may not have infused the public so much.

Suggestive pictures may be on the limit for some people, perhaps the voting public are mostly of an older generation, but more revealing Maxim pictures could have tipped the balance against her.

Interesting was the German perspective on their 'zero' point accomplishment. Quote, "this was totally undeserved, the girls voice was good, she is good looking, and the song was catchy." Well, setting aside the German national conviction that they have to win at anything they take part in, finishing outside the top ten is a national catastrophe, finishing with no points is outside of comprehension. In all fairness the German singer was not bad, at least as good as average. What the Germans fail to understand is typified by the pre-show and post-show bands vitrified by the live standing public in Hamburg, those bands were, judged on the world stage, average and bland. The German compare asked a commentating pundit what went wrong, and he answered "the competition was too strong," and the camera quickly cut away from him.

V E Day - Victory in Europe - Shame on Germany

To the relief of whole Europe Germany unconditionally surrendered on 8 may 1945.

This is something that future generations should feel to their bones, and not simply dismiss as history. Only One Hundred years before the First World War had Europe rid itself of its previous would-be Dictator, Napoleon (incidentally for anyone who has ever visited a French Museum he is still, curiously, lauded as a national hero, rather than the demonic democratic anti-Christ the rest of sees him as). History is easy to dismiss without personal involvement. As a child of the 60s, WWII was just 15 years behind us, but we felt the austerity, we had nothing, and were happy with nothing.

As children, we knew no better, austerity was commonplace, everyone had it, and we knew why! As the greatest alliance we had just defeated humanity’s greatest enemy - Germany! We were still recovering from WWII. In school we learned a lot about WWI, from teachers who had experienced that pain, which had only ended roughly four decades earlier. What I am saying is that without personal involvement, WWI was as ancient history to us as the pyramids. In retrospect I feel sorry for those soles sacrificed during the WWI conflict because we do not in this modern world pay them the due respect for their supreme effort bringing us to the freedom we enjoy today. It may seem ridiculous to say, but without these soldier’s laying down their lives, WWII would not have been possible. Think about that! We owe our freedom to the conclusion of WWII, but in turn to WWI.

So, our personal involvement with WWII drifts away from us, as does the tax declaration of two years previous. We should regret that, because our grandparents or parents gave their lives for our right to defend that indifference.

Where does that leave us today in regard to WWII?. Perhaps we should think about how the Americans celebrated VE Day, which was widely perceived as not they’re was war.

But never the less, they were there with us to the end! And we could not have done it without them.

Seventy year after VE day, there are mass celebrations on the anniversary, in London, in Paris, in Poland, in Ukraine, huge in Washington and huge in Moscow.

There was rumoured to be something happening in Berlin, but no-one could find out what was happening when or where.

The man who made it all possible, for without his Will and determination, there would not have been a resistance to Germany to fight WWII, Winston Churchill, was complacent about the victory.

To Germanys greatest modern day shame, it commemorations of VE Day, were held in closed ceremony in Germanys Reichstag Parliament building with orchestral classical music.

Huge, Huge! Shame on Germany that the end of suffering for millions at the hands of Germans was not commemorated in public and on nationwide television, for the World to see that Germany is eternally sorry for its crimes against humanity.

Almost every journalistic reference these days panders to political correctness as Nazi Germany. Undoubtedly Hitler’s Germany was of that political bias, but to placate the events of that period to a Nazi minority is to negate the mass involvement. The words Nazi and German were synonymous. At that time Germany was Nazi, it was not against Nazis that we fought, but against Germans!

Man Bites Dog

This Morning I woke up feeling, with all deference to the animal, sick as a pig :-(

In my misery I crawled to the sofa and switched on the TV to veg and find out whats happening in the World. The first news article I see concerns an outbreak of Asian Dog Flu in Boston, USA.

Perhaps I should struggle into the street and bite a nearby dog!
But take care theres a film crew passing at the time!

At What count Genocide?

The President, and former Prime Minister, of Turkey Recep Erdogan has recalled the Turkish envoy to the Vatican following Pope Francis Easter Mass reference to the massacre of Armenians upon its one hundredth aniversary as genocide. Further, the Vaticans ambassador to Turkey has been called to Ankara to explain the statement. Turkeys response has been to accuse the Pope of inciting resentment and hatred with baseless allegations.

One definition of genocide is a deliberate and systematic mass murder of a definite group of people, whether based on cultural, ethnical, nationality, political, racial, religious, or any other categorisation. The definition does not place any figure on the number of those exterminated, but the figure concerned during the Armenian genocide is reckoned to be around 1.5 million. Certainly a figure that cannot be ignored.

Turkey has persistently denied a genocide occurred, citing that many Turks also died in the conflict at the beginning of World War One. At that time Turkey was ruled by the fading Ottoman Muslim regime. However, since 23 countries including Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and Uruguay, and a variety of international orgaisations such as the European Parliament, have formally recognised the genocide and the Ottomans have little to do with present day Turkey why does the Turkish Government so vehemently deny the issue?

Firstly, the Turks estimate the deaths at a much lower figure, although historians state that the Ottomans destroyed much condemning evidence at the time. Mostly reasons for the denial are related to Erdogans attempts to portray Turkey as a majestic regal power by identifying with the Ottoman Empire. Thus criticism of the late Ottomans is perceived as criticism of the present regime.

The major phase of the genocide started in late April 1915 with the first part being the round up on Turkish soil and massacre of able bodied Armenian males, and the second part being enforced death marches through the Syrian desert of the remaining women, children, elderly, and infirm while deprived of food and water. Taken together with the Pontic Greek genocide the events appear to be systematic, using the advent of World War One as a pretext. Further corroborating this is that the 1915 massacre was just the culmination of a protracted campaign of atrocities, beginning with documented Christian persecution dating back to the 1830s, and the massacres of 200,000 in 1896, and 22,000 in 1909.

Present day Armenia lies to the Eastern border with Turkey on the strip of land separating the Black and Caspian seas. Together with the former Pontus region of the south eastern Black Sea coast it forms a belt of land along northern Turkey. The Pontus were a Greek speaking Christian Orthodox people, inhabiting the region since biblical times, who also suffered at the hands of the Ottomans. A reasonable estimate of the number of Pontus suffering similar fate to the Armenians is estimated to be around 700,000.

The autrocities did not end in 1915. There were a further 130,000 Armenians killed between 1915 and 1918. From the end of 1937 into 1938 roughly 65,000 Kurds were massacred in four waves in a central region of eastern Turkey known as the Dersim campaign, which is also widly debated as genocide. There is also the Assyrian genocide in south eastern Turkey resulting 275,000 deaths. All consistent with the policy of 'Turkification' - an ethnic cleansing policy extolled by Turkish statesman Ziya Goekalp from 1908. A Turkish court, in March 2011, ruled that the actions of the Turkish government could not be considered genocide because they were not directed systematically against an ethnic group.

To date the UK remains one of those countries not officially recognising the Armenian genocide. In 2009 Geoffrey Robertson QC disclosed Foreign Office documents showing how the British Parliament had routinely been misinformed and misled by Ministers who had recited previous reports without questioning their validity. A 1999 Foreign Office briefing for Ministers stated that recognition of the Armenian Genocide would provide no practical benefit to the UK, and that "The current line is the only feasible option" owing to "the importance of our relations (political, strategic and commercial) with Turkey". So again politics outweighs truth.

Better the Devil you know than the Devil you Dont

We hear that Greek PM Tsipras is visiting Moscow for talks with Russian President Putin. The talks will be regarding alternative financing for Greece's huge National Debt. The question to ask is why would Mr Tsipras do this? He is well aware of how Greece's EU and NATO partners would view the prospects of Russia having financial interests in Greece, the potential to call the shots and pull the strings.

While aggravating tensions over Greeces East - West allegiances, at the same time Mr Tsipras is determined to annoy the EUs largest contributor, Germany, with a demand for War Damages. Earlier Greece had a better chance with its demand for the return of €10.3Bn funds seconded from Greek banks during War occupation. But Germany had even denied responsibility for this. German budget spokesman Eckhardt Rehberg, stated that "the reparations issue is for us closed, politically and legally - the same applies to the so-called forced loan". Now comes the demand for €278.7Bn.

The German position remains unchanged, that the matter of War damages was settled internationally decades ago, and German finds itself under no further legal nor moral obligations on the subject. Mr Tsipras would know that ploy is leading nowhere, so why has he done it? This lies together with his Finance Minister Varufakis, policy of game theory tactics. Taken together the moves of talking to Russia while aggravating the Germans over War damages is only designed to try to increase Greece's bargaining position.

But such childish tactics won't work with seasoned senoir politicians, who also know that Mr Tspras knows that Greece is better off with the Devil they know!

Eurozone Deflation

We hear that the Eurozone has fallen further into deflation in January 2015 to the tune of -0.6%, a further slide from -0.2% the month before. Deflation is perceived as an evil, since once people recognise its effect in the economy, they are reluctant to purchase at present in anticipation of cheaper prices in the future. Meaning business comes to a standstill, with resultant economic collapse. Deflation is seen as something like cancer, it has to be stamped out early, before it takes a death grip on the economy.

This appears to be true, but its counterpart inflation, when allowed to run unchecked, leads to increased wage demands to maintain a standard of living, which in turn fuels inflation. The social cost is to those who cannot wage bargain, and whose living standard inevitably deteriorates. Therefore modern economic theory has tended toward moderate inflation as the optimal way to manage an economy, this was reckoned to be the best way to achieve economic growth without overtly damaging inflation. Somehow I remember economic history lessons from my childhood describing how inflation since the Roman times was the scourge of society. What we need as humans is a stable platform on which to plan for the future, without the rug being pulled from under us. One thing that recent history teaches us is that economic growth surges in cycles. We rejoice in the boon times and relent in the recessions. Just perhaps if we aimed for zero inflation with moderate economic growth we might avoid the damaging downturns of the cycles that have afflicted us so far.

See no, hear no...

A friend of mine brought up a an interesting topic recently regarding the National bias in news reporting. I had sent him some transcripts of BBC World Service articles, and he commented that they appeared surprisingly neutral in comparison to home based news, UK. Surprisingly, people seem to think that just because they live in a democracy, and freedom of speech is a cornerstone of that, that therefore everything they hear in the media reported news in like gospel, or as others might say like Tablets of Stone. We say that there is no censorship of the news in Western Democracies, look at Charlie Hebdo. Russian citizens are currently being fed dollops of state orchestrated propaganda to justify Putin's actions. The result, is that this all they hear, nothing else. They are brain washed into believing the West is evil, and is out to ruin Russia by subversive means. Confront the average Russian in the street and he will likely regurgitate the state line, he cant do anything else, he doesn't know anything else, their media is not reporting anything else. Explain the situation to him, that he has been brain washed by spoon fed state propaganda, and he will retort how do we in the West know that the converse is not true, and that our media is not manipulating our thoughts. Its a hard argument to counter, and you will probably try by stating that our press is free, and also reports issues that are critical to our governments. He will persist that this is subtle manoeuvring to make plausible that greater lies that our media projects. In your stomach you feel that this is wrong, but it is difficult to counter without getting into a protracted debate for which you don't have the stomach. Mentioning stomachs there is a small gnawing feeling in yours that western media, although not state censored displays considerable bias in what 'they think' the public should hear.

Hence your noticing that the BBC World service is taking a different slant on the news than possibly that portrayed to homeland UK. But we already know from decades ago that media vassals are bias, this was why I had mentioned that the contrast in left politically motivated National news to conservative orientated ones. They may direct the reader to a different conclusion than the same story reported elsewhere. There is noticeable National biases in News reporting. I view much American CNN TV news reporting, simply because the BBC World TV news seems to be directed into a sedative effect upon its audience. But I do switch between the two, for comparisons, and well enough German to catch their news broadcasts, and also these days I read news from Greece in English. The differences in National perspectives can be quite startling, forget news is news, fact is fact, its not only the spin that's put on the news but the silent censorship by omission. It is difficult to get an unbiased view of the world when one only has access to a single media source. I remember as a tot, my father saying to me the wisest words anyone has ever said to me 'never believe anything you read in the newspapers', in todays language media. The next thing an enquiring mind asks is 'if you can't believe the media, what can you believe?' But that's a whole other philosophical debate!

The Death of Nostalgia

What is nostalgia?

I like to think of this as fond memories of the past. Where for some people their recollections of some past events are not wholesome, then this is not what nostalgia is about.

However once nostalgia's warm beginnings wain, then the once started train may lead not where one originally envisioned.

Such are my adolescent recollections.

I suspect that many peoples school day memories evoke mixed emotions. These were a hotchpotch mixture of good and sad experiences, perhaps regretfully some of our own deeds best forgotten, yet, yet again dredged up among the collection of minds net.

But our experiences and memories thereof are what make us what we are today, for better or worse. We cannot escape our past, it is always there to remind us.

Regarding myself, two phases stick out as prominent among the reefs negotiated by my younger self on his was to maturity.

One is the combined infant/junior school from age 5 to age 10. I have many fond, and some not so fond, memories of my experiences during my stay there.

But whatever the value to these memories, they are torn from the page because that building was burning down in 2008, and replaced by a modern anonymous impersonal flat roof construction.

For example, resisting the compulsory afternoon nap because I was just not tired, climbing the ropes in the infants gym, in the juniors learning to slide on two feet down an icy slope in the winter. If you think about it for an eight year old this was a formative experience, for the first time voluntarily putting yourself in jeopardy for the thrill of sliding at high speed.

Why was the school burned down? Curiously there was spate of school burnings in the Rhondda dating from the mid 1970s. initially it was claimed this was due to disgruntled pupils, and that in subsequent years in became a fashion or trend with the youth. Another idea is that over three decades the aging Victorian schools were just accidents waiting to happen. Just here's a conjecture, those aging fire hazard schools could not have been replaced until they had been involuntarily demolished, even though many in authority perceived the nee to replace them.

I attended my old Porth Grammar Technical School from age eleven to age nineteen, I entered full of trepidation and awe, nervous of the hundreds of years of tradition into which I was suddenly initiated. I left world wise, head high looking around for what the world had to offer. I had many happy and tragic times during these formative years. In any case many memories. Sadly those memories are now a housing estate. The old grammar school was pulled down, and with it many memories that still play in my dreams to this day, happy, sad, and somewhere in between.

This is my school photo from 1977, in all my time the only school photo ever made. I was in the lower sixth form at the time, so none of my comrades' from forms one to five are captured, their memories fade, no school photo was made during that time. I'm easy to spot, I'm the one looking slightly our of place, as though I descended from Mars the day before and still don't know quite what to make of the World. This is just far left picture of four pictures in total.

Nostalgia is a thing we cherish in memory, even though it may not be historically accurate, and may be a past we can never revisit, even if we could go back physically to those places concerned.

Happy memories. D

Mohandas Gandhi - Gandhism

Born October 1869 in what we refer to today as British India until his assassination in India in January 1948, aged 78. At that time British India encompassed much of present day Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Burma. The name ‘Mahatma’, meaning venerable, was giving to him in 1914 during in time in South Africa.

An ethical ideological, moral, and political leader of India, contrary to popular belief Gandhi was never in charge of the country. Following independence from Britain the first elected Prime Minister was Nehru, from August 1947 until May 1964.

In striving for a united independent India something he perpetually had to contend with was the religious divide within British India. Counter to his wishes the larger Indian State was divided up into the countries of Pakistan in the West for Muslims, India (mostly Hindi dominated), Bangladesh (Muslim) to the east, and Burma (Buddhist) further east. As a Hindi it was his support for fair-play and equal treatment for Pakistan that led to his assassination by the Hindu nationalist Nathuram Godse.

Background

Gandhi was born of the ‘merchant caste’ and his parents arranged a marriage for him at age 13, his first child was born when he was 15, surviving only some days, afterwards the couple had four sons.

He was admitted to study Law at University College London, UCL, in 1888, qualifying as a barrister in 1891, and immediately returned to India. In 1893 he accepted a twelve month job seconded to South Africa, part of the British Empire, to work as a legal representative for the Muslim Indian Traders. He subsequently spent 21 years there, where his political, ethical and political views developed, that ‘Indianness’ transcended religion or caste. As a Hindi he witnessed Muslim discrimination against his own religious group, and counter to his experience in London he also faced white discrimination directed against all coloured people.

Gandhi returned to India in 1915, taking with him an international reputation as a leading Indian nationalist, theorist and activist. There he met, was influenced by, and subsequently influenced Indian politics, by Gokhale a key leader of the Congress Party, best known for his British style Whiggish restraint and moderation, and his insistence on working within the system for change and reform. Gandhi took Gokhale's traditional liberal approach and transformed it into something appearing completely Indian.

Gandhi appears to have adopted different postures at different times, to reconcile this it is necessary to consider this as partly due to his pragmatism and partly that over several decades his ideas were still evolving. During the 1900 Boer War he formed an ambulance corps of Indians to prove they were capable of ‘manly’ work. In 1906 he organised stretcher bearers during the Zulu War, to help legitimise their claims for full citizenship. In June 1918 he supported active recruitment within India for the British army. To this end National Defence presupposes individual pacifism, he did state that he “personally will not kill or injure anybody, friend or foe,” pragmatically progressing toward his ultimate aim. It was during 1918 that his ideas of nonviolence and non-cooperation crystallised, culminating in 1919 with in a speech advocating his principle that all violence was evil and could not be justified.

From 1919 onward Gandhi made steps to incorporate Muslims into his practices and policies.

Gandhism

Gandhi developed the practise of nonviolence and truth in all situations, advocating that others do likewise, including Satyagraha (devotion to the truth), mutual tolerance among people of different creeds; and ‘syadvad’, the idea that all views of truth are partial, a doctrine laying at the heart of Satyagraha. From Hinduism he gained the central concepts of man as the battleground for forces of virtue and sin, and of the potential of love as a moving force. From Jainism, Gandhi took the idea of applying nonviolence to human situations and the theory that Absolute Reality may only be comprehended relatively in human affairs; which another way of appreciating the subjectivity of each person’s viewpoint.

Gandhi also adopted Christian-Islamic ideas of equality, brotherhood of man, and of turning the other cheek. He stated that the most important battle to fight was overcoming one’s own demons, fears, and insecurities. He wrote: “There must be no impatience, no barbarity, no insolence, and no undue pressure. If we want to cultivate a true spirit of democracy, we cannot afford to be intolerant. Intolerance betrays want of faith in one's cause.”

Toleration is a cornerstone of his ‘religious pluralism’ ideology, regarding respectful co-existence of diverse religious belief systems in society. But religious pluralism goes beyond toleration it includes acceptance that one's own religion is not the sole and exclusive source of truth, and thus the acknowledgement that at least some truths and true values exist in other religions, and the concept that two or more religions with mutually exclusive truth claims can be equally valid. This was not difficult for Gandhi as pluralism is a natural part of Hinduism.

Gandhi’s behaviour was often noted for humility, which is also basic to the Hindi faith, where the word ‘Amanitvam’ is a fusion of pridelessness and the virtue of humility. Gandhi interprets the concept of humility broadly as an essential virtue that must exist in a person for other virtues to emerge. To him Humility cannot be cultivated, it has to be one of the starting points, and “humility cannot be an observance by itself. For it does not lend itself to being practiced. It is however an indispensable test of ahimsa (non-violence).” Humility is how one feels inside, a state of mind. A humble person is not himself conscious of his humility, Gandhi stated.

Regarding the Indian standard of living Gandhi said, “Poverty is the worst form of violence.” And on morality and humility, “The marks of a man are who wants to realise Truth which is God. “He must reduce himself to zero and have perfect control over all his senses.”

Most significantly Gandhi once said of himself “there is no such thing as ‘Gandhism’, and I do not want to leave any sect after me.”

Once a Greek always a Greek

Yesterday Mr Tsipras accepted an invitation from Angela Merkel to join her in Berlin to talk with each other rather than about each other.

Mrs Merkel wanted to hear details of the Greek Governments plans for economic reform. As a condition for the last round of the rolling bailout plan the Greeks were required to outline their plans. The next rolling instalment is due mid-April and the Germans are saying that the money will not be released without seeing details. The total level of Greek debt does not change, every seven weeks or so a mini-instalment is due for repayment, for which embarrassingly Greece needs a loan to cover. Previously transparent, but now a painful process.

At the news conference following the meeting both parties expressed their mutual concern for the plight of the average Greek people, reducing unemployment, youth unemployment, and poverty. Noticeably what was not said was the differences in either sides ways of achieving those aims. What we also did not hear were the previously missing details.

Interestingly what we did indeed hear from Mr Tsipras was the first public statement of Greeces concern for the return of funds misappropriated from Greek banks during their WWII occupation. Note, this is not a regurgitated claim for war damages (reparation, or compensation - as has been erroneously reported elsewhere). Greece along with the rest of the World signed off on that decades ago, otherwise a war torn German economy would never be able to repay its debts. On this note a substantial response from Mrs Merkel was also absent.

Germany’s reticence to discuss repaying the stolen funds is understandable from the perspective that the War ended 70 years ago and many feel disconnected from it in the sense that it had nothing to do with them. Further the current German leader’s East German roots should not be forgotten. The Easterners were taught that the former Fascist German regime had nothing to do with their modern Communist system.

Unfortunately for Germany no-one is re-writing the history books, and the country remains responsible for the Second World War.

All is Fair in Love and War

13 February 1945 saw the large scale bombing of Dresden close to the end of World War II by 1249 combined RAF and USAAF bombers.

60 years later these German ladies chose a topless protest in Dresden in support of "Bomber Harris" the British Air Marshall who orchestrated the campaign.

This was a dark day for Dresden, destroying over 1600 acres of City center and killing an estimated 25,000 civilians, but could have exceeded 100,000, many of them refugees trying to escape the advancing Russian army. Locals have been appalled by the protest, Kai Schulz the City spokesperson said "Nice breasts but a really stupid message."

But these days we are more used to protests against Bomber Harris. The Queen Mother was surprised by jeers during the unveiling of a statue of Harries in London's Strand in 1992. Subsequently the statue was guarded 24 hours per day for three months.

Harris received high decorations from British, Russian, and American authorities at the end of the War in regard of his efforts having substantially shortened the War and therefore the suffering for many millions of people. Others see him as a blood thirsty War Criminal. The mass 'area-bombing' attacks indiscriminately included civilians in the targeted areas, as 'casualties of war.' This was distasteful to Churchill, but reluctantly he condoned it as part of the policy of 'Total War.' There is some evidence that not avoiding civilian casualties during strategic bombing was started as an accident by lost German bombers, and German command having realised that the gloves were off continued with it deliberately, and that Allied bombing of German civilian targets was just tit-for-tat. I am not sure how much of that is true, the idea of 'area-bombing' was conceived by Churchill's scientific advisor Professor Frederick Lindemann in 1942, and approved by the British war Cabinet. However the German 'Blitz' over London started in September 1940, where subsequent fatalities were also high.

The bombing of Dresden can be likened to that of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but without the nuclear weapons: intended to demoralise the fighting populating into accepting an inevitable defeat, and thus speeding the end of the war. It was known that German atomic research was ahead of the allies at the start of the war, so the sooner it was ended without atomic bombs on European soil the better for all.

Cut off thier tails with a carving knife...

Phew, who thought that was going to happen?

A deal, pathway forward, has been agreed tonight, between Greece and its creditors. Typically its a compromise, and no one should speak of who has won or lost, because there has been flexibilty on both sides.

Greece had asked for a bridging loan of six months to formulate concrete plans on how to cope with its debt in ways that would be acceptable to all sides, but also basically reversal of the austerity which has been constricting the Greek economy and causing social hardship to its people.

The end result is an extension to the current terms of four Months, not six, its not called a bridging loan. Greece has committed to continuing the bulk of austerity conditions while being given the chance to draft its own proposals for debt repayment. Greece has confirmed its obligation to debt repayment in full, although some people had thought they were intending to partially default.

The Greek plans may include proposal promoting economic growth as a way of finding the funds to repay those debts, rather than measures which contract revenues making it harder to make those repayments. These sentiments are closer to statements recenty expressed by the IMF and ECB than those of German officials.

Economic Suicide

Reports today are that the Greek financial crisis talks have broken down, with creditor consortium chairperson Jeroen Dijsselbloem declaring in exasperatoion its up to Greece now whether they want to accept help or not.

Greek Finance Minister Mr Varoufakis appeared to contradict himself within minutes after the meeting ended by saying he was ready to do "whatever it takes" to reach agreement, but adding that he was prepared to agree a deal under different conditions.

Greek chiefs maintain that they have a mandate from their electorate to reject austerity, and this prompts them to reject extensions of the current bailout terms. Should Messrs Tsipras and Varoufakis persist with this line as responsible leaders they would in effect be confirming the right of the Greek people to decide for economic suicide.

The Great Brain Robbery

Russian Sucurity company Kaspersky, and the Dutch consultancy Fox-IT, have reviealed the existance of a Bank scam whereby it is estimared that about $1 Bln have been siphoned off.

Roughly 100 Banks mostly though Russia, China and Ukraine, but also UK and USA, are said to have been affected. The initial hack has been deterined to have been purpurtrated via malware likeley to have been transmitted in unsolicited or fraudulent emails. Once the malware had been unitentionally installed by bank staff it allowed the hackers remote access to Banks networks so they could transfer funds to bogus accounts that had been setup remotely. The frauds were also enacted by remote manipulation of ATM machines, which could be set to spout cash like waterfallls into the hands of waiting accomplices.

The attack have been facilitated by the lack of cyber secuity awareness on the part of the Banks and their personel at all levels including their IT staff. Effective spam filters should be in place stopping the majority of unwanted emails, anti-virus software at all computers and servers involved should be uptodate including malware filters blocking suspicious and fraudulent but genuine looking websites, operating systems should be modern and secutrity flaws patched uptodate. Further than this one would expect network monitoring and Intruder Detection sytems to be in place. But most critical is the awareness and security training of the front line staff involved.

One would expect that recognising their high attack profile Banks were amoung the leaders in cyber protection, not amoung the lagards. ATMs still using out of date Windows XP is a very unfunny joke.

Birds of a Feather

We hear in the news today that Eurozone talks concerning the future of Greece have ended their first day of talks fruitlessly. When the unstoppable force meets the immovable object what else should one expect.

The talks were presumably Angela Markel's attention to concrete economic structural and financial reforms to be proposed by the new Greek government. Mrs Merkel displayed open-mindedness in not dismissing Greece's ditching of bailout/austerity until the new government presented their strategy in concrete. Head of the Eurogroup Eurozone finance ministers, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, after the meeting said that no discussion of detailed proposals had taken place, "We simply tried to work next steps over the next couple days. We were unable to do that."

If that was the case what do IMF chief Christine Lagarde and Greek Finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, photographed just after the talks, have in common? They both see the necessity to boost failing economies in times of depression. The ECB under Mario Draghi also view things similarly, hence their recent announcement of Quantitative Easing which will inject roughly One Trillion Euros into the Eurozone Economy over the next 18 months in an effort to counter deflation. These are Keynesian ideas which are opposed to the more Friedman monetary policies employed by Mrs Merkel Germany. Not surprisingly the ECB and Mrs Merkel have disagreed on the need to implement QE.

What seems to have gone wrong in these talks was that both sides are speaking different languages. Mrs Markel's scientific mind, a PhD in physical chemistry holder, leads her to suspend judgement until examining all the evidence; but considering their fundamental differences on policy Mr Varoufakis would have to present a neatly worked out mathematical formula where every contingency had been allowed for which shows an incontrovertible position outcome in order for her to overturn her current value system. Not surprisingly this did not happen.

As far we know what was on the table was a request for a bridging loan, 3 to 6 months, while the larger debt over 4 years was renegotiated, and retention of 70% of the structural reforms imposed, while implementing a 10 point economic boosting plan in place of the rest. The likelihood of a bridging loan was always extremely low as so far the European Financiers have never instigated such bridging loans and that would be new territory for them, and this would constitute a short term uncertainty based on a further long term uncertainty - this is not Banking language. The 10 point plan would have to be so tightly formulated, with every i and t, as to be self-evident and contradict current German monetarist language.

The problem is that Keynesianism can only work when a government has monetary and fiscal control, and for Greece, monetary control resides in Brussels. I found an old economics text book of mine from 1980, Nevin pp 495, commenting at the time on the EEC single currency proposals, "member states retain some degree of freedom in their power to alter the exchange rate if and when thier domestic price levels get out of line. The power of each country to infate or deflate independently is lost."

Put simply the European heads of state cannot inform their tax payers that yet more of their money will be loaned to Greece with little hope of it being returned. It would be naive of the Greek government not to appreciate this position, despite their own electoral mandate. Returning to the sick relative with an addition problem, you only support them as long as they are on a rehabilitation program otherwise it will be a never ending drain on resources. If they fail in the rehab, then at some point you have to let them go, and since 2012 that is what the European states have been preparing for - making contingency plans for Greece exiting the Euro, so that this will not be so damaging as was once feared.

This is a new Greek government who distance themselves from previous ones follies, but still is expected to comply with its predecessors commitments. If there is there a path out of the recession for Greece its not going to be an easy one. In the mean time it is average Greek in the Street who is suffering though no fault of their own.

Suggested Reading
contrast neo-Keynesianism with monetarism.

The Poker Player

Seconds out! Ladies and Gentlemen please pick up your cards for, Round One!

A recent BBC article describes Greek PM Mr Tsipras promising to raise the minimum wage, pay a pension bonus and re-hire public workers. And goes on to say that so far EU officials have rejected his efforts to renegotiate Greece's bailout.

On Sunday, in his first major parliamentary speech since becoming PM, Mr Tsipras said the government's "irreversible decision is to implement in full our pre-election pledges", namely, a gradual rise in the minimum wage to €751 (£557; $850) by 2016, a bonus payment to low-income pensioners, reinstatement of public sector employees "fired illegally", and a pension fund using revenues from natural resources. Notable were the more fund raising aspects, a new tax on large properties, and special measures fighting against corruption and tax evasion.

In a clarification during a CNN television broadcast tonight Mr Varoufakis explained that the government planed to reinstate illegally dismissed public workers, only about 1% of those made redundant.

ANALSIS
He also repeated claims that Germany should pay World War II reparations and repay a loan the Nazis had forced the Bank of Greece to pay them during occupation. Greece had "a moral obligation to our people, to history, to all European peoples who fought and gave their blood against Nazism", he said. Following his diplomatic tour earlier this week aimed at reassuring Eurozone leaders of Greek plans, Mr Tsipras added in his speech that Greece wanted to service its debt. "If our peers want so, too, they are invited to come to the table of dialogue so we can discuss how to make it viable."
But the Eurogroup, made up of Eurozone finance ministers, chairman Jeroen Dijsselbloem had said on Friday that Greece needed to apply for a bailout extension should it want continued Eurozone support, "We don't do bridging loans."
The Greek Finance minister, said on Italian television on Sunday that the euro was as "fragile" as a house of cards. "If you take out the Greek card the others will collapse."

COMMENT
This is pure brinkmanship by the new Greek government, Mr Varoufakis, a Professor of Economic Theory at the University of Athens, and author of several books on 'game theory,' has laid out the tactics quite clearly.
1. annoy your opponent - remind Germany of its War liabilities
2. appear conciliatory - reassure other leaders of your good intentions
3. aggravate your opponent - indicate their previous transgressions
4. appear reasonable - declare willingness to discuss matters, but on your terms
5. use veiled threats - exaggerate the fragility of the opposing position
6. use coercion if necessary - Seeking alternative funds from China or Russia has been mentioned

Something has to be done to help the typical Greek citizen, I'm sure its not funny living off an average wage of around €650 (Note the intended rise of the minimum wage). Not many of us in Western Europe could do that, sure rents have fallen, but prices in the shops remain higher than they are here. Mr Tsipras has to implement radical reforms of the kind that previous Greek governments have been unable or reluctant to do. Revenues have to be collected from the countries large corporations which so far have been able to evade taxation. Apparently a recent meeting of Officials and corporate bosses resulted in their threatening to relocate outside of Greece should there be moves to enforce taxation, even though enevitably this would cost them more. So Mr Tsipras has some not easy choices ahead of him.
Let us assume that to maintain a clean sheet Germany complies with its war Time obligation and repays the afore mentioned loan, this will not help Greece greatly, its only about €8 billion, compared to the total debt of €320 billion.
Referring to the Euro falling apart, if Greece reverts to the Drachma, voluntarily or otherwise, Messrs Tsipras and Varoufakis should not assume that the Euro leaders are unwilling to accept these consequences. Depending on Greece's behaviour they will be calculating the comparative costs to the Eurozone of having Greece in or out. Messrs Tsipras and Varoufakis are well aware of the consequences for Greece of a Eurozone exit. Should they be referring to Italy and Spain, then certainly these countries leaders will be observing what will happen to Greece after such an exit, but no one is expecting it to be pretty sight.
Greece is a former communist country so in retrospect either China or Russia would not make such strange bedfellows, but should they really decide to go down that road then the current Greek powers would be well advised to remember that he who pays the piper calls the tune!

So much for the PR battlefield, if we want to anticipate Mr Varoufakis next move we may gain some insight by reading one of his books, but there again Mrs Merkel may just refuse to play. Never forget what your uncle told you, "don't try to teach your Grandmother to suck eggs!"

Whats a Greek Urn

Well the answer to that is that you can probably pick them up pretty cheaply these days.

But a clever Greek would only sell one to you with a buy back clause, say 105% the purchase price in 12 months on his calling. In other words he would be paying you a small amount for you hold it for the specified period, but in the mean time he holds a substantial amount from you hoping to use it more cleverly than you had anticipated. This is the principle of the bond, but the European Banks have just declared Greek bonds worthless, and wont be buying any of them in the foreseeable future.

Today saw the Greek and the German Finance Ministers meet to discuss the Greek financial problem. What has been happening over the last five years is that every 3 months when several Billion of Euros were due for repayment, the triad of European Banks have leant Greece a sum equal to that about to be repaid so that the repayment can be made without trouble. This seems like playing with numbers, but that's how they play on the books, which effectively just extending the previous load repayment date. The hope was that at some point Greece would start being able to replay more than the quarterly figure and slowly chip away at the overall figure until it was fully repaid. Sounds like a good plan but how is Greece supposed to raise more than the repayment figure?

Schaeuble today effectively reiterated the German position that Greece should not have entered into debts that they cannot conceivably repay, and Germany expects the full amount to be repaid. In return for loaning Greece large sums of money Germany expects Greece to undertake structural reforms setting it on a course to be able make those repayments (This example may not be wholly appropriate, but consider your younger brother has an addiction problem and needs money for food. You wont see him starve but you also allow him to spend the money you give intended for food on his habit. You may decide to give food directly, further to prevent him selling it, you may insist on seeing him eat it. Further you may take things a step further by monitoring his progress on a rehabilitation program).

Varoukakis point is that that program has only led to a worsening of the Greek situation. The program is called austerity, and over the last five years has led to 25% reduction in Greek GDP, and a rise in the debt from 130% to 170% (round figures) of GDP, and a substantial reduction in standard of living for the average Greek citizen where to typical wage is reckoned to be around 600€ at the moment. Clearly a slide that has to stop. How can the Germans have got the management of the Greek economy so wrong?

The first point on this is the fault of the previous Greek Government who, for whatever reasons, declined to tackle the countries rampant corporate tax evasion. This was obvious when one of the conditions of the previous loans was structural tax reform and effective tax collection, stipulating not raising extra taxes on the population. In other words the Germans constitutional could not have the necessary control. What happened was the previous Government raised more tax on an already beleaguered work force. The new government has promised to reform this. The second, probably more fundamental, is a clash of political ideology between German and modern Greek politicians. Broadly, Germany believes in monetary polices, if you are spending 1500 per Month and earning merely 1000 per month, then you cut your expenditures to 900 per month, leaving you a margin of +100 to slowly repay previous debts. Without being explicitly stated, the new Greek government favours Keynesian policies along the lines of investing in the economy so the your income grows to, say, 1600 per month, with a margin of +100 to repay pervious debts. Neither policy, monetarist or Keynesian, is right or wrong, both have a place in particular circumstances. Monetary policies help slow down a booming economy and avoid destructive inflation, Keynesian policies live economies out of recession.

The clash was seen in this meeting to day.

YouTube

Varoufakis explains that Germany has to take into account policies voted for by the Greek electorate, but Schaeble retorted that the Greek government also has to take account of the greater number of German voters! He also said that Germany will do everything possible to ensure a strong Europe, but he did not define what a strong Europe means.