Sunday morning music

 

Rock aficionados will instantly recognize Trevor Rabin as one of the lead guitarists for British supergroup Yes, as well as a prolific composer of movie soundtracks.  The name Duncan Faure will bring the Bay City Rollers to mind:  he was their vocalist from 1979-1981.  However, relatively few rock fans remember that the two got their big break together, as part of a South African group called Rabbitt during the mid-1970's.  It was the closest thing South Africa ever had to a progressive rock group.

Rabbitt achieved enormous success in the (relatively small) South African music market, but were prevented from doing the same internationally due to the cultural boycott then being waged against that country due to its apartheid policies.  Therefore, Rabin and Faure had to emigrate to achieve further success, and without them, Rabbitt foundered.  I've often wondered what it might have achieved had it been able to tour abroad as a group, and build its reputation in the international market.

I've picked four songs by Rabbitt as a memorial to the group.  Here, from their first album "Boys Will Be Boys", is "Hard Ride".  Rabin's father Godfrey backs up the group with some electrifying violin playing.

From the same album, here's "Charlie", a whimsical song that sounds as if it's about a girlfriend - but it turns out it's Trevor's cat!

Their second album, and the last to involve Trevor Rabin before he departed for greener pastures overseas, was 1977's "A Croak and a Grunt in the Night".  From it, here's "Hold On To Love".

From the same album, here's a more reflective song, "I Sleep Alone".

The seeds of rock greatness are evident in those selections, and Rabin and Faure would go on to prove that in their subsequent careers.

Peter

Saturday Snippet: Eyewitness accounts of the Great Fire of London, 1666

 

Samuel Pepys was an English naval administrator and member of parliament in the 17th century.  His diary has become one of the chief sources of information about Restoration England.  Many books about his life and times have been written based on it.

Jonathan Bastable is a popular English author, with many books to his name.  One of them is a study of 17th-century life in England's capital, titled "Inside Pepys' London".

The blurb reads:

Inside Pepys’ London reveals a vivid picture of London at a critical point in history, as it was poised to become a major center of international commerce and culture. It provides accounts of all aspects of contemporary life, from the arts and entertainment, to politics and religion.

Samuel Pepys was not a king or a famous general—yet his renowned diary makes him one of the most interesting characters in history. His life encompassed happenings of huge historical and human impact—the execution of Charles I and the Great Fire of London to name but two. This book takes Pepys’ diary, which he kept almost daily from 1660-1669, as its central resource, but also includes a range of other contemporary sources to provide a fascinating and vivid picture of the times.

One chapter is devoted to the Great Fire of London in 1666, which devastated the city.  I've chosen several excerpts from it to describe how the disaster appeared to the residents of the capital.

To the day he died, the baker Thomas Farynor never accepted that he was responsible for the catastrophe that destroyed the greatest city in the world. He insisted that on the night of Saturday 1 September 1666, he had drawn his baking ovens as he did every night. They were not alight when he went to bed at ten, ‘leaving his providence with his slippers’. He was doubly certain that his ovens were dead, because around midnight he needed a candle, and went downstairs to see if there were any embers in the oven he could use to light it: there were none. Though it was undeniable that the fire began on his premises on Pudding Lane, the baker always insisted that it could not have been caused by his negligence. It could only have been arson.

Farynor was woken by his apprentice at about two in the morning. The house was already thick with smoke. The baker roused his wife, his son and daughter, and the maidservant. They ‘felt themselves almost choked with smoke, and rising, did find the fire coming up the stairs’. Farynor noted that the fire was nowhere near his ovens, and that the stack of kindling that lay next to them was not alight – further proof, to his mind, that the fire was started deliberately, by an outsider. Since the stairs were aflame, escaping by the front door was out of the question, so the four Farynors and the two servants made their way to the top of the house where there was a garret window that gave out on to the roof of the house next door. One by one they climbed out and shimmied along the gutter to their neighbours’ roof window. But the maidservant lost her nerve and refused to clamber along the roof. She stayed behind and was burned to death – the first victim of the Great Fire of London.

By now the fire had an audience. Lodgers at The Star Inn, a coaching house immediately behind the baker’s on Fish Street Hill, crowded into the galleried courtyard to watch the show. At about three o’clock in the morning, the roof of the baker’s shop fell, sending a fountain of sparks into the sky. The burning fragments rained down on the heads of the onlookers, sending them running for cover. Some sparks fell on the bales of hay intended for feeding the horses. Instead the hay fed the fire: The Star was ablaze within minutes.

It was about now that the glow of the fire was spotted by Pepys’s servant-girl Jane, who was working into the night to get things ready for the next day’s lunch: Samuel and Elizabeth had guests coming. To her the fire looked serious enough to warrant troubling the master. He disagreed:

I rose and slipped on my nightgown, and went to her window, and thought it to be on the backside of Mark Lane at the farthest. But being unused to such fires as followed, I thought it far enough off. And so went to bed again and to sleep. About seven rose again to dress myself, and there looked out at the window, and saw the fire not so much as it was and further off.

In the meantime Thomas Bludworth, the Lord Mayor, had been called to the scene. He arrived bleary-eyed at about four in the morning, and was evidently none too pleased to have been dragged out of bed at this unseemly hour. No more than three or four houses were afire at this point, and there seemed to be no special cause for alarm. So Bludworth made the remark that damned him in the eyes of his contemporaries and of posterity: ‘A woman could piss it out,’ he said, and then went back to his house, which was far away at the other end of the City.

. . .

On the night that the fire started there was a strong east wind. It had been rattling the shop signs on their hinges and whistling through the chimney stacks since Saturday evening, and in the hour or two before dawn, the high wind drove the flames down Fish Street Hill and Pudding Lane at a rate that astonished eyewitnesses. The swift spread of the flames was abetted by the fact that London had been hot and rainless all summer. The timber-framed houses that made up most of the City’s buildings were as dry as twigs.

Then there was the inaccessibility of the exact spot in which the fire broke out. Pudding Lane, says Waterhouse, was a …

… pitiful little lane, crowden in behind Eastcheap on the west, St Botolph’s Lane on the east and Thames Street on the south of it … [The fire] … met with no opposition from engines or other artifices because it was impossible in such a strait [narrow place] and in such a rage of fire that they should be serviceable. For if all the engineers of mischief would have compacted the irremediable burning of London, they could not have laid the scene of their fatal contrivance more desperately, to a probable success than there where it was, where narrow streets, old buildings all of timber, all contiguous to each other, all stuffed with aliment for the fire, all in the very heart of the trade and wealth of the city. These all concentring in this place put a great share of the mischief upon the choice of the place.

Topography also played a part in the third circumstance that allowed the fire to grow so rapidly. Fish Street Hill led straight down to London Bridge, and to Thames Street, which ran alongside the north bank of the river. The street was lined with warehouses, all of which were packed with highly inflammable goods. It was ‘the lodge of all combustibles,’ said Waterhouse.

Oil, hemp, flax, pitch, tar, cordage, hops, wine, brandies and other materials favourable to fire, all heavy goods being warehoused there near the water side and all the wharfs for coal, timber, wood &c. being in a line consumed by it.

So the first lick of fire to reach Thames Street was like a taper put to a fuse. As soon as one warehouse went up, the next one was bound to catch alight, and so on down the street almost as far as the Tower of London.

By first light on Sunday, the flames were out of control. The church of St Magnus the Martyr, at the bottom of Fish Street Hill, was burning merrily. The fire had also crept on to London Bridge, which was lined with shops and houses like an ordinary street.

. . .

Pepys’s description of the fire is impressionistic and immediate, like pages torn from a journalist’s notebook. But alongside the lively scenes of panic and the memorable image of the dying pigeons, there is a growing sense that this is a personal disaster for Pepys, for he was watching the immolation of the streets he grew up in, and the destruction of the homes of people he knew and loved.

Everybody endeavouring to remove their goods, and flinging into the river or bringing them into lighters that lay off. Poor people staying in their houses as long as till the very fire touched them, and then running into boats, or clambering from one pair of stairs by the water-side to another. And among other things, the poor pigeons, I perceive, were loth to leave their houses, but hovered about the windows and balconies till they were, some of them burned, their wings, and fell down.

Having stayed, and in an hour’s time seen the fire rage every way, and nobody, to my sight, endeavouring to quench it, but to remove their goods, and leave all to the fire, and having seen it get as far as the Still Yard, and the wind mighty high and driving it into the City; and every thing, after so long a drought, proving combustible, even the very stones of churches, and among other things the poor steeple by which pretty Mrs Horsley lives, and whereof my old school-fellow Elborough is parson, taken fire in the very top, and there burned till it fell down: I to Whitehall, and there up to the King’s closet in the Chapel.

So it was that Pepys, having been rather slow to appreciate the gravity of the situation, was the first to bring news of the fire to the king. While he waited to be summoned into the royal presence, he told anyone who would listen what he had seen, and gathered quite a crowd around himself – very much the messenger from the front line and, for a short while, the centre of attention. Charles and his brother heard Pepys’s report and ‘seemed much troubled’.

. . .

Some devout Londoners went to church that Sunday morning – fire or no fire.

Never was there the like Sabbath in London. Some churches were in flames that day, and the Lord seems to come down, and to preach himself in them, as he did in Mount Sinai when the Mount burned with fire. Such warm preaching those churches never had. Such lightning dreadful sermons never were before delivered in London.

So wrote Thomas Vincent, the Puritan preacher who had documented the plague the previous year. He was certain that this was another Biblical punishment – not Egypt this time, but the cities of the plain.

Goods are removed from the lower parts of the city, and the body of the people begin to retire … rather as Lot drew out from his house in Sodom before it was consumed by fire from heaven. Yet some hopes were retained on the Lord’s day that the fire would be extinguished, especially by them that lived in the remote parts. They could scarcely imagine that the fire a mile off should be able to reach their houses … Some are upon their knees, interceding for poor London in the days of its calamity, but … London’s sins were too great, and God’s anger against the city was too hot so easily and presently to be quenched and allayed … And if, by the intercession of some a mitigation be obtained, so that the Lord doth not stir up all his wrath utterly to destroy the place as he did Sodom and Gomorrah, yet none can prevail to call back that wrath and reverse that decree which is gone forth against the city. The time of London’s fall is come … and therefore all attempts to hinder it are in vain.

. . .

[Pepys] went ashore and walked to Whitehall, where he had arranged to meet up with his wife. They caught a boat back home, and so were obliged to make a waterborne excursion through the heart of the fire.

So near the fire as we could for smoke. And all over the Thames with one’s face in the wind you were almost burned with a shower of firedrops – this is very true – so as houses were burned by these drops and flakes of fire, three or four, nay five or six houses, one from another. When we could endure no more upon the water, we to a little alehouse on the Bankside over against the Three Cranes, and there stayed till it was dark almost and saw the fire grow; and as it grow darker, appeared more and more, and in corners and upon steeples and between churches and houses, as far as we could see up the hill of the City, in the a most horrid malicious bloody flame, not like the fine flame of an ordinary fire … We stayed till, it being darkish, we saw the fire as only one entire arch of fire from this to the other side the bridge, and in a bow up the hill, for an arch of above a mile long. It made me weep to see it. The churches, houses, and all on fire and flaming at once, and a horrid noise the flames made, and the cracking of houses at their ruine.

. . .

On Monday, 3 September, John Evelyn went with his wife and son to see the fire. They took a coach to Bankside, across the river from St Paul’s. It was a ringside seat.

We beheld that dismal spectacle, the whole city in dreadful flames near the waterside. All the houses from the Bridge, all Thames-street and upwards towards Cheapside, down to the Three Cranes, were now consumed, and so returned, exceeding astonished what would become of the rest.

Later Evelyn went back without his family to take a closer look. This time, as he wandered the streets north of the river, he was struck not so much by the spectacular horror of a city aflame, but by the many human tragedies that were playing out on the burning streets.

Everyone seemed to be in a kind of trance: The conflagration was so universal, and the people so astonished that … they hardly stirred to quench it. So that there was nothing heard or seen but crying out and lamentation, running about like distracted creatures without at all attempting to save even their goods. Such a strange consternation there was upon them, so as it burned both in breadth and length, the churches, public halls, Exchange, hospitals, monuments and ornaments, leaping after a prodigious manner from house to house and street to street, at great distances one from the other … The fire devoured after an incredible manner: houses, furniture and everything.

A full-scale evacuation was now under way. As London Bridge was impassable, people were trying to ferry themselves and their valuables across the river by boat, and then transfer them to a cart on the far side.

Here we saw the Thames covered with goods floating, all the barges and boats laden with what some had time and courage to save, as, on the other side, the carts &c. carrying out to the fields, which for many miles were strewed with movables of all sorts, and tents erecting to shelter both people and what goods they could get away.

Transport of any kind was of course at a premium, and it was a seller’s market. Vincent was disgusted by the way that carters and draymen used the fire to make a quick profit.

Carts and drays and coaches and horses, as many as could have entrance into the city, were loaden, and any money is given for help: £5, £10, £20, £30 for a cart to bear forth into the fields some choice things. Some of the countries [country people] had the conscience to accept of the highest price which the citizens did then offer in their extremity. I am mistaken if such money did not burn worse than the fire out of which it was raked.

Those who could not pay inflated prices for a cart saved only as much as they could carry. ‘Casks of wine and oil and other commodities are tumbled along …’ continues Vincent,

… and the owners shove as much of their goods as they can towards the gates. Everyone now becomes a porter to himself, and scarcely a back, either of man or woman that hath strength, but had a burden on it in the street. It was very sad to see such throngs of poor citizens coming in and going forth from the unburnt parts, heavy loaden with some pieces of their goods, but more heavy loaden with weighty grief and sorrow of heart, so that it is wonderful they did not quite sink under these burdens.

. . .

Thomas Vincent witnessed the destruction of the Exchange. But it was the terrific noise of the fire, more than the sight of it, that took his breath away.

The flames quickly cross the way by the train of wood that lay in the streets untaken away, which had been pulled down from the houses. They mount up to the top of the highest houses; they descend down to the bottom of the lowest vaults and cellars; and march along on both sides of the way with such a roaring noise as never was heard in the city of London.

No stately building so great as to resist their fury. The Royal Exchange itself, the glory of the merchants, is now invaded with much violence. And when once the fire was entered, how quickly did it run round the galleries, filling them with flames; then descendeth the stairs, compasseth the walks, giving forth flaming volleys, and filled the courts with sheets of fire. By and by, down fall all the kings upon their faces, and the greatest part of the stone building after them, with such a noise as was dreadful and astonishing.

Then, then the city did shake indeed, and the inhabitants did tremble, and flew away in great amazement from their houses, lest the flames should devour them. Rattle, rattle, rattle was the noise which the fire struck upon the ear round about, as if there had been a thousand iron chariots beating upon the stones. And if you opened your eye to the opening of the streets where the fire was come, you might see in some places whole streets at once in flames that issued forth as if they had been so many great forges from the opposite windows, which folding together were united into one great flame. And then you might see the houses tumble, tumble, tumble with a great crash, leaving the foundations open to the view of the Heavens.

. . .

St Paul’s Cathedral rose above the medieval city like a great stone ark floating on a sea of rooftops. It was an immense presence – much larger than Wren’s replacement was to be. Its spire was the tallest ever built while it lasted: it was struck by lightning in 1561 and fell down, never to be replaced. Consequently, the central bell tower was in Pepys time rather squat – it looked ominously like a stumpy little chimney ... But its luck ran out soon after dark. Wooden scaffolding on the tower caught alight, and led the flames upwards to some boards on the roof – stacked there carefully in anticipation of a major renovation, which had been approved the previous week. Vincent saw that the razing of the cathedral began on the roof, and was at a loss to explain how this had come to pass:

The church, though all of stone outward, though naked of houses about it, and though so high above all the buildings in the city, yet within a while doth yield to the violent assaults of the conquering flames, and strangely takes fire at the top.

William Taswell saw the same strange phenomenon from three miles away.

Just after sunset I went to the royal bridge in the New Palace at Westminster to take a fuller view of the fire. As I stood upon the bridge among many others, I could not but observe the gradual approaches of the fire towards that venerable fabric. About 8 o’clock it broke out on the top of St Paul’s Church, already scorched up by the violent heat of the air and lightning too. And before long it blazed so conspicuous as to enable me to read very clearly an edition of Terence which I carried in my pocket.

The cathedral was now a kind of man-made volcano. Chunks of masonry exploded in the intense heat and ‘flew like grenadoes’. The lead sheeting on the vast roof melted ‘as if it had been snow before the sun’. It gushed down the walls of the church like lava and formed a molten lake on the floor of the nave, before ‘running down the streets in a stream, and the very pavements glowing with fiery redness, so as no horse, nor man, was able to tread on them.’ At the same time ‘great beams and massy stones with a great noise fall on the pavement and break through into Faith Church underneath. And great flakes of stone scale and peel off strangely from the side of the walls.’

. . .

Having saved the Temple and Whitehall, the Duke of York went home to his bed: he had had no sleep since Sunday. When he awoke on Thursday morning, 6 September, the fire was effectively over. There were still local bonfires – and embers were found to be smouldering in basements as much as six months later – but the wholesale destruction of London was at an end. The smoking ruins were an awesome spectacle in themselves.

The best and the fairest city in the world was turn’d into ashes and ruins in three days’ space. This was a sight that might have given any man a lively sense of the vanity of this world, and all the wealth and glory in it, and of the future conflagration of the the world. To see the flames mount up towards heaven and proceed so furiously without restraint; to see the streets fill’d with people astonish’d, that scarce has sense left them to lament their own calamity. To see the fields fill’d with heaps of goods. And sumptuous buildings, costly furniture, and household stuff, yea warehouses and furnished shops and libraries &c. all on a flame while none durst come near to receive any thing. To see the King and nobles ride about the streets, beholding all these desolations while none could attend the least relief. To see the air, as far as could be beheld, so fill’d with smoak that the sun shin’d through it with a colour like blood.

But the dolefullest sight of all was afterwards, to see what a ruinous confused place the City was, by chimneys and steeples only standing in the midst of cellars and heaps of rubbish, so that it was hard to know what the streets had been – and dangerous of a long time to pass through the ruins, because of vaults and fire in them.

Eighty-nine of the City’s 109 parish churches had been gutted. Many of them had stood since Norman or even Saxon times, as their lyrically French or robustly Germanic names proclaimed: St Mary-le-Bow, St Edmund King and Martyr, St Michael le Querne, St Peter Chepe, St Benet Sherehog (a shere hog is a ram castrated after its first shearing: this church stood in the heart of the old wool district).

Forty-four of the halls of the livery companies were gone. The halls were the pride of the medieval trades that built them, the very symbol of their professional standing as craftsmen. Some of those crafts were on the verge of obsolescence – broderers, girdlers, tallow chandlers, pewterers, bowyers, founders, salters, saddlers and scriveners – but were no less jealous of their rights as guildsmen for that. Other liveried professions are still with us in some form – the bakers, goldsmiths, vintners, brewers and masons. Eight livery companies came through the fire with their halls intact. They were the armourers, bricklayers, carpenters, cooks, glovers, ironmongers, leathersellers and upholsterers.

Among the other public buildings destroyed were the Exchange, the Custom House, three of the city gates, Newgate gaol (the inmates were evacuated to Southwark before the flames reached them), the Sessions house and four stone bridges over London’s brooks and rivers. To this loss must be added the thousand of pounds’ worth of goods destroyed in the wharves and warehouses. The earliest estimate of the financial cost of the fire was a little short of eight million pounds. Most devastating for the populace at large was the massive loss of the wooden houses, the homes that constituted most of the fabric of the city. More than 12,000 individual dwellings were razed, with the result that the urban landscape was strangely denuded. For the first time since the Romans it was possible to stand on Cheapside and see the River Thames.

. . .

Old London had been swept away. The tangled, organic hotchpotch of sunless alleyways and benighted garrets in defunct monasteries, the teetering Tudor houses like inverted ziggurats, the Norman stoneworks and the Saxon churches on Roman foundations – all this was no more. London was a blank sheet, and here was an unexpected chance to build a new city on the scorched medieval foundations – a metropolis that would be well-ordered, complex and designed to function as the capital of a great nation. Providentially, this chance came at the dawn of the New Science, at the very moment when the world at large was turning away from the dark and twisted alleyways of the medieval world-view, and beginning to explore the well-ordered cosmos, the designed-to-function natural world, the wonderfully complex human body.

So the modern scientific outlook happened to come into being at the same time as the modern city of London. Both were expressions of the new enlightened way of looking at the world, and both were forged by a handful of creative, inquisitive individuals.

The eyewitness descriptions are fascinating in their intimate portrayal of a world long since gone.  The trappings of modern civilization may be very different from those of 1666, but the human beings living among them are still much the same as their distant ancestors - just not as literate, in the main, or able to describe so well the catastrophic destruction of all they held dear.

Peter

Hyperinflation and "Modern Monetary Theory" - a conundrum

 

In our study of inflation on this blog, we've examined hyperinflation in the Weimar Republic in some depth.  We've also referenced, in passing, hyperinflation in other countries such as Zimbabwe, Venezuela, etc.  I recently came across a very interesting article examining hyperinflation in then-Zaire (today the Democratic Republic of the Congo) in the 1990's.  Here's an excerpt.

The Zairian economy had managed to stay afloat during decades of kleptomania, nepotism, and military spending by Mobuto and his cronies due to Western Aid and high prices for the various minerals mined in the Eastern Congo basin. Beginning around 1990, the combination of the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, falling copper prices, and deeper administrative ineptitude buffeted the economy. 

As Gerard Prunier, French journalist and author of the excellent Africa’s World War:  Congo, the Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental Catastrophe, explains:

From sickly, the Ziarian economy turned terminal . . . Because imports remained at a fairly high level for some time while exports declined, the external debt had risen to $12.8 billion by 1996, representing 233 percent of GDP, or 924 percent of export capacity . . .

Perhaps the most preoccupying effect of this collapse was the quasi-disappearance of the monetary system. With inflation rate that the IMF calculated at an average of 2,000 percent during the 1990s, prices shot up in an insane way.

The Zairian consumer prices index moved from 100 in 1990 to 4,130 in 1992 to just under 2,000,000 in 1993. Prunier continues:

The government started to print money as fast as it could, simply to keep a certain amount of fiduciary currency irrigating the economy. Bills were printed in ever higher denominations and put into circulation as fast as possible, and their rapidly shrinking real purchasing value would then wipe them off the market in a way that make even the German hyperinflation of the 1920s look mild . . . In December 1992 the system finally imploded: the Z 5 million bill was refused by everybody and had a zero life span. The government then tried to force it through by paying soldiers’ salaries [with the inflated bills] but the army rioted when its money was refused in the shops.

So far it reads like one of the many hyperinflations throughout history. But then things get interesting. Mobuto, in a panic, demonetized the zaïre and issued the new zaïre, with an initial exchange rate of 1 new zaïre = 3,000,000 old zaïre.

A nation issuing new currency to attempt to staunch a inflationary hemorrhage is nothing new; Brazil did the same thing in the 1990s. However, the new zaïre suffered from the same hyperinflative tendencies as its predecessor except that in certain areas of Zaire, the old zaïre resurfaced and began to be used again as a medium of exchange.  For instance,

Kasai refused the new currency and kept using the old one, which regained a certain value simply by not being printed anymore.

In other words, even though the government and its central bank ruled that the old zaïre was without value and the full faith and credit of the Zairian government backed the new zaïre, the only currency with any value was the old zaïre — and the value had nothing to do with any fiat issued by the government, but instead the understanding of a sector of the population that because the old zaïre was no longer being printed, it could act as a reasonably safe store of value.

Finally, by 1994, the financial sector was operating entirely with foreign currencies.  Meanwhile, Prunier reports,

As for the Congolese population . . . its tax burden increased out of all proportion, reaching a punishing rate of 7.5 percent of GNP outside the oil and mining levies.

The case of the zaïre is provides strong anecdotal evidence discounting the fiat currency-obsessed Modern Monetary Theory (“MMT”).

. . .

The question MMT simply cannot answer is what happens when, due to monetary and fiscal gymnastics, the consumer simply stops trusting or using the currency. The Zairian central bank could not tax the populace enough to reduce “aggregate demand,” and its attempts to force a new currency on the populace immediately failed. Meanwhile, the older currency, which the government had specifically disavowed, was given value by the people — at least for awhile. Under MMT tenets, this should not have happened; indeed, it should be impossible. And yet, it happened all the same.

There's more at the link.

This, of course, is the fundamental flaw in Modern Monetary Theory.  MMT advocates believe they can arbitrarily dictate the amount of fiat currency that should be issued, and that people - the economy as a whole - will simply accept this diktat and use the money accordingly.  Unfortunately, people know full well that something without any underlying value is basically worthless.  Just because an economist or bureaucrat or administrator says that a computer-generated dollar is as good as one produced via economic activity doesn't mean that it's true.  The people of Zaire were wise to that, and savvy American consumers are wise to it today.

It's all very well to promise "pie in the sky", as MMT does:  but sooner or later people want to see, and touch, and smell, and taste the pie.  When a picture of a pie turns out to have none of those attributes whatsoever, they'll look for their real pie elsewhere.

Peter

Is urban "polar bear hunting" making a comeback?

 

A few years ago there was an epidemic of sudden, unprovoked assaults on mainly white pedestrians by mostly black youths.  It became known as "polar bear hunting" or "the knockout game".  CBS reported in 2013:

A violent stunt is growing in popularity among teenagers. The so-called "knockout game" involves assaulting people without warning, and it is claiming lives.

The victims of the brutal game are chosen at random. Defenseless and unsuspecting people are attacked by groups of teens who have one goal in mind: to knock the victim out with one punch.

"One-hitter quitter," "knock em' and drop em," "point em' out and knock 'em out" are all names for a disturbing trend now drawing concern nationwide.

In Pittsburgh, a teacher was punched so hard he collapsed head first into the concrete curb. A man in Brooklyn was also knocked unconscious. And even women are being attacked.

There have been seven recent cases in New York City alone. And the game has turned fatal in at least four documented attacks -- in Syracuse, N.Y.; St. Louis; Chicago; and Hoboken, N.J., site of the latest fatal attack.

There's more at the link.

There are troubling signs that in the current urban environment of increased racial tension and political extremism, the practice may be making a comeback.  The New York Post reports:

An Upper West Side man is cold-cocked in Chelsea.

An unhinged stranger throws a roundhouse at a woman outside a subway station on the Upper West Side.

A Catholic deacon and another man are pummeled in separate smackdowns in the Bronx.

It’s up for debate whether this spate of disturbing incidents is a return of the so-called knockout game, the sick spree of assaults that terrorized New Yorkers a few years ago, but it’s a still a gut-punch to frightened residents already on edge.

One poster to the Upper West Side Together Facebook group put members on high alert two weeks ago after two friends walking past the subway station exit on Central Park West and 87th Street encountered a man dressed in black coming out of the subway.

He tried “tried to sucker punch” the girl, whose boyfriend then chased him off.

“My friend was screaming, ran to a building on CPW (Central Park West) where doorman called police,” the poster explained.

An Upper West Side man responded, “This is happening all over. I was sucker punched by a disturbed man in Chelsea” — and left with two black eyes.

On Monday a stranger punched a 67-year-old man in the face on a Queens subway platform in an apparent unprovoked attack, police said.

The suspect walked up to the man shortly before 10 a.m. as he waited for a Manhattan-bound 7 train at the Court Square station.

“These incidents aren’t happening in front of officers. They are happening due to opportunists taking advantage of the anti-police, anti-accountability era,” NYPD Sgt. Joseph Imperatrice, the founder of Blue Lives Matter NYC and a 15-year-veteran, told The Post.

“It is a dangerous time to be out and about strolling in New York City. The combination of criminals and mentally ill individuals roaming the streets equals disaster waiting to happen.”

Again, more at the link.

If it's happening in New York City, the odds are pretty good it's happening in other cities where racial and political tensions are high.

Friends, if you live in an urban area, keep your head on a swivel.  Be aware of your surroundings, who's near you, who's approaching, and their body language.  If necessary, be prepared to defend yourself.  It's too easy to become absorbed in your smartphone, or a conversation with someone, and ignore danger as it draws near.

As reported above, people have died from this sort of assault.  Others have suffered irreparable brain damage.  I don't want you to be another one of them.

Peter

Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear enrichment plant

 

I'm sure most readers are aware of the explosion(s) at Iran's Natanz nuclear enrichment facility a couple of weeks ago.  Strategy Page has provided more details of what apparently happened there.

Over the last week Iran went public with more details about the April 11th explosion at their Natanz nuclear fuel enrichment facility. Iran now admits the attack took place and that it did major damage to their new high-performance nuclear enrichment (turning uranium into weapons grade material) equipment. There was massive equipment failure and damage on a scale similar to the 2010 attack carried out with software designed to get into the heavily guarded Natanz nuclear fuel enrichment compound, and the computer controlled equipment there. Later analysis indicated that the deep-underground (about 50 meters, or 155 feet) plant was effectively destroyed. The target was the thousands of centrifuges that turn uranium ore into nuclear fuel or, with more effort, nuclear material suitable for a nuclear explosive. Israeli hackers got to the centrifuges in 2010 via a computer worm hack called Stuxnet. A worm is malware (hacker software) that gets into target systems via stealth and physical media like USB thumb drives. Stuxnet was released four or five years before it got to Natanz, apparently via a USB drive containing the normally invisible (to most users) malware. Once that USB drive is used on any local or Internet network connected computer, Stuxnet automatically copies itself onto all computers connected to the network. On each computer, especially industrial microprocessors that are used to control equipment, Stuxnet checked for centrifuge control software unique to the Natanz facility. When finally found in 2010, Stuxnet proceeded to modify the centrifuge control software to mimic known types of equipment failure and did so gradually. By the time the Natanz system operators discovered something was wrong, thousands of their expensive new centrifuges were damaged so badly that they had to be replaced. The 2021 attack on Natanz used a different approach, because the Iranians had spent a lot time, effort and money to prevent another Stuxnet attack.

In 2021 the Israelis first got the technical details of the Natanz electrical system as well as details of the new generation of centrifuges Iran installed there. The Israeli plan was to use explosives placed and detonated where it would shut down the primary and back-up power systems when the maximum number of new centrifuges were powered up and vulnerable to severe damage if the main power and back up power systems failed simultaneously. The explosives were placed correctly and went off on time. The result was Natanz again suffered major centrifuge loss that will take months get back into production again and over a year to completely fix.

Then there are the needed security upgrades, which are uncertain until Iran can find out more about exactly how the attack was carried out. They knew a lot of explosives had been involved but were unsure of how the attacker figured out how and were to place them without being discovered. To aid in solving that mystery Iran went public with details, and the name of a suspected key operative. Iran is looking for Reza Karimi, a 43 year old Iranian who left the country several days before the attack. There are probably other Iranians involved as well as the suspected Israel Mossad agents who came to Iran and worked with a growing number of Iranians seeking to overthrow their current religious dictatorship. The Iranians have been seeking more of these “Mossad Iranians” since the 2018 Mossad operation in the capital when a heavily protected warehouse containing top-secret documents was located by Mossad, covertly entered and half a ton of documents on the Iranian nuclear program were removed and 24 hours later showed up in Israel. Until now Iran denied that the Mossad operation took place and that the documents were real. Since 2018 Israel has allowed foreign intel and nuclear program experts to examine the documents and that led to international acceptance of the documents as authentic.

Iran is desperate to get hold of Reza Karimi and, to help with that, they televised what looked like an Interpol (international police) “Red Notice”. To obtain a Red Notice, a country must provide sufficient evidence that the suspect is indeed so dangerous that Interpol will request that the many nations that work with Interpol will accept the Red Notice and look for and arrest Karimi. The televised Red Notice could not be found on the Interpol website and so far Interpol has apparently not decided whether or not to accept the Iranian Red Notice request. There were no casualties at Natanz, many Iranians support the attack and the many Iranians living outside their homeland openly express their hostile attitude towards the Iranian nuclear program.

The two attacks on Natanz were very damaging to Iranian claims that they do not have a nuclear weapons program. In the aftermath of both attacks it become clear that Iran was using powerful new centrifuge designs to create nuclear material that was far more refined (above 20 percent) than needed for a nuclear power plant. Iran needs a lot of nuclear material refined to 90 percent to make nuclear weapons. The data Mossad made public in 2018 and the aftermath of the 2021 attack demonstrate the Iran is still seeking nuclear weapons.

Blowback in Iran

The growing number of Mossad operations in Iran has led to public criticism, often by the senior clerics who actually rule the country. There has been more of this public criticism in Iran because the government has, for decades, devoted major resources to “destroying Israel.” That effort has consistently, and often spectacularly failed, at great cost to Iran. This makes the religious dictatorship, look like incompetent and frauds because these senior clerics always insisted they were doing God’s Work. In the last few years that Work appears to be finding ways to destroy Iran via corruption, mismanagement and trying to blame it all on Israel and the United States. The latest Mossad attack made a lot more Iranians realize that the Mossad was apparently entrenched inside Iran and finding more Iranians willing to work with Mossad against projects many Iranians agreed were endangering and impoverishing Iran, and a major cause of the declining living standards and growing crackdowns by the IRGC (Islamic Revolution Guard Corps) and police. The IRGC knew that the Israelis had been successful at establishing a clandestine Mossad presence in Arab nations but thought Iranians were too sophisticated for that. That might have been the case for Iranians who trusted their government. That trust began to erode decades ago and even the IRGC, in one of its recent “actual public opinion” reports to the religious leadership, revealed that most Iranians now hated their government and many were also fed up with Islam. Which brings to the present, as Iranian leaders realize that many Iranians are willingly and effectively working with the enemy.

Iran is trying to portray itself to foreigners as the innocent victim of Israeli aggression. Iranians insist that Natanz was only producing enriched uranium suitable for power plant fuel. But recent IAEA (UN inspectors) reports describe evidence that Iran is seeking to develop a nuclear bomb and need highly (to 90 percent purity) uranium for that. The foreigners are not as easy to deceive as before but more questions are being asked about Natanz. Inside Iran the “accidental” fire at Natanz in mid-2020, described as a construction accident, is now being revisited as details of how Mossad agents inside Natanz got 150 kg of explosives into the underground complex and managed to hide them, and their remote control detonators, where they would not be found and would do maximum damage when detonated.

There's more at the link.

Sounds like a major achievement by Israel's intelligence services.  One does wonder why the Biden administration "has informed Jerusalem of its displeasure over recent attacks against Iranian targets attributed to Israel, as well as what it called 'boasting' by Israel regarding these incidents".  It's surely in the entire world's interest to prevent a radical Islamic state, and a sponsor of terrorism worldwide, from developing nuclear weapons;  and diplomacy has signally failed to achieve that.  Given such a reaction, no wonder Israel is worried that "the Biden administration will rush to rejoin the [Obama administration's] nuclear deal with Iran".  Washington's reaction smacks of Neville Chamberlain's surrender to Hitler, with his triumphant proclamation of "peace for our time" - only to have World War II break out the following year.

If Iran has demonstrated anything in recent decades, it's that it is totally, absolutely and completely untrustworthy and mendacious.  I think Israel's approach has been correct;  and, if Iran persists in its attempts to develop nuclear weapons, I think Israel is likely to use them on Iran first - because if it doesn't, it knows beyond a shadow of doubt that Iran will use them against Israel at the earliest possible opportunity.  Israel believes Iran's promises to eradicate the state of Israel from the Middle East.  Given Iran's track record, I do too.  Given such open, genocidal hostility, what response is possible other than a military one?

Peter

Illegal weapons produce some WTF moments

 

Toronto, Canada police have a Twitter account titled "Toronto Police Service Guns Seized".  It provides images of every illegal weapon seized by that force.  Most of them are routine, of course;  but now and then, a picture comes up that makes one do a double-take.  Here are a few of them.  Click each one to be taken to the tweet concerned, and read the responses to them.  (The first one has attracted more than its share of leg-pulling.)

I don't know that I'd dare fire either of the last two, for fear of their exploding when I pulled the trigger!

I know many similar photographs can be found of guns confiscated in the USA, but this particular Twitter account came to my attention, and those images made me wince.  I thought you might enjoy (?) them, too.

Peter

"Every physical silver ounce has been sold up to 1,000 times"

 

Following my article on Tuesday about the safety of money in banks, in which I mentioned that one of my family's financial precautions is to keep a small (very small - we ain't rich!) amount of money in silver bullion coins, a number of readers wrote to agree with that step.  However, some said that they had purchased gold and/or silver shares in so-called "Exchange Traded Funds" or ETF's.  In other words, they don't own physical metal:  instead, they have pieces of paper promising that a certain quantity of that metal is held in their name at or by a central facility.

Swiss asset manager Egon von Greyerz believes that's a very dangerous mistake.  The title of this article is the headline from his discussion of the issue.  Here's a lengthy excerpt.

EVERY SINGLE OUNCE OF PHYSICAL INVESTMENT SILVER IS ESTIMATED TO HAVE 500-1000 PAPER CLAIMS.

The LBMA and Comex clan has sold their physical silver up to 1,000X over.

If a salesman has a demand for 1,000 items of a product of which he possesses the only one available, he will first rub his hands and then perform a victory dance. He knows he will achieve an astronomical price.

And that is exactly what would happen in a free silver market. But since the paper silver issuers know that they are dealing with totally clueless buyers who don’t understand that there is no silver, they will continue to stuff the gullible buyers with more fake silver.

That is, until the buyers wake up and ask for delivery to find out that the silver vaults are empty.

We know that the silver market is very strained already. Retail silver can fetch margins up to 50% and they have been at 100% premium. But at least when people buy retail silver from a reputable dealer and take delivery, they know that they have real silver.

I have warned investors many times not to buy gold or silver ETFs or funds of any kind. The risks are multiple. Here are some of them:

• It is a paper security held within the financial system
• It has multiple counterparty risks
• The gold/silver holdings are not segregated from custodians’ assets
• It owns no gold/silver directly
• The gold/silver is stored within the banking system
• The gold/silver held is probably rehypothecated
• The gold/silver is not fully insured
• Investors have no access to their gold/silver

There have been many reports of problems of getting physical delivery from mints and bullion dealers.

. . .

BUYER BEWARE OF ANY PAPER GOLD & SILVER

It is not easy for precious metals investors to navigate through the jungle of problems in the precious metals market.

• You can’t trust the bullion banks and their paper metals.
• You can’t trust certain mints or bullion dealers.
• You can’t trust gold or silver ETFs or funds.
• You can’t trust futures exchanges.
• You can’t trust banks to hold your metals.

Gold and silver must be owned and held directly in physical form. The precious metals must be stored outside the banking system in the safest vaults and jurisdictions. The investor must also have direct personal access to the vault.

You should never store more gold and silver at home than you can afford to lose. It doesn’t help with a good safe when burglars come to your house and threaten members of your family when you are in.

There's more at the link.

Of course, Herr von Greyerz strongly recommends gold as an investment - that's his business, after all - but one can allow for his motivation in judging his advice.  Based on other articles I've read (see, for example, the prevalence of precious metal derivatives and leasing), I think his comments hold water.  He highlights problems with Australian mints and facilities where investors demanded to take delivery of their metals, but faced delays of many months.  I've heard similar reports from some British investors, and even national banks have sometimes found it difficult to repatriate their precious metal holdings from other nations.  For an interesting perspective on that problem, see these three articles.  (Note that the source is, again, a precious metal dealer, so one has to allow for that bias while reading them:  nevertheless, the factual basis for the articles is referenced if you wish to do your own research.)

Where Has All The Gold Gone? Part 1: The Past

Where Has All The Gold Gone? Part 2: The Present

Where Has All The Gold Gone? Part 3: The Future

Those articles are talking about national gold reserves;  but similar problems exist with private reserves, and with the silver market.  Those who physically possess and/or control the metal can be doing any number of things with it about which you know nothing.  Rehypothecation is a known issue.  Who knows how many times an ounce of gold or silver has been used as security for a different financial transaction?  If anything goes wrong with the latter, the physical metal may be demanded as collateral - and if that happens to be metal you own (on paper, at least, through an ETF) where does that leave you?

Basically, if you want to hold some of your assets in the form of gold and/or silver, whether coins, bars or some other form, I highly recommend that you own the physical product, rather than trust a piece of paper promising that someone else is holding it for you.  To coin a phrase:  "Yeah, right!"  If you believe that sort of promise, there's a bridge in Brooklyn, NYC I'd like to sell you.  Cash only, please, and in small bills . . .

Peter

Are increasing numbers of military weapons being smuggled into the USA?

 

Regular readers will be aware that I have contacts in federal, state and local law enforcement in several parts of the country (not surprising, having worked in an ancillary law enforcement role myself).  On several occasions in the past, as we've discussed in these pages, they've provided tips and insights about what they're seeing and hearing on the streets about our crime situation.  That information has generally proven accurate over time.

I'm currently hearing a number of rumors from them - not just idle chatter, but serious concern - that the number of military-grade weapons being smuggled into the USA is getting seriously worrying.  They report that the Mexican cartels, in particular, are finding weapon smuggling to be a very profitable sideline to their usual dealings in drugs and illegal aliens.  Word is that military firearms - assault rifles with full-auto capability, sniper rifles, machine guns, hand grenades, and possibly a few rocket launchers - are being bought from corrupt troops and/or stolen from militaries in Mexico and points south, and sent north to meet the demand.  There's even one report that shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles have been discussed.

There's a growing supply of such weapons in South America, from nations such as Venezuela (which makes its own AK-47 variant) and China (whose criminals already supply the cartels with most of their fentanyl and other hard drugs, and would find little difficulty in offering weapons as well).  Where there's such a free supply, available at relatively low cost, it fuels demand.  There's also the factor of illegal imports from other nations and regions.  According to US Customs & Border Protection, "Each year, more than 11 million maritime containers arrive at our seaports. At land borders, another 11 million arrive by truck and 2.7 million by rail."  That's 25 million containers a year - about 65,000 per day, 365 days a year - and that figure excludes air cargo containers.  It's clearly impossible to screen them all.  Reports suggest that only about "2% to 10%" are examined in detail.  Who knows what's being smuggled in the other 90%?

Reports of inbound weapons smuggling have been isolated for some time, but now they appear to be more widespread and more frequent.  Informed speculation is that there's a serious demand for these weapons, not just from individuals, but from organized groups.  My informants haven't shared any information on who or what those groups might be, but they say the demand is such that it can't be just random purchases.  A few have surmised that, in the face of organized black crime and politicized crime (e.g. Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and the like) against white communities, hispanic groups are arming themselves to resist such pressure in their neighborhoods, should it happen.  I'd say that's not unlikely.  There's already a lot of tension and animosity between black and hispanic criminal and street gangs.  If the former think they're going to use the current political and social climate to establish dominance over the latter, I suspect they're about to be enlightened . . . forcibly.

There's also the possible terrorist angle.  We know Hezbollah and Iran have been active in Mexico, Venezuela and other parts of South America for years.  It's beyond reasonable doubt that they've infiltrated terrorist "sleeper cells" into the USA through our notoriously porous southern border, and those cells may be "arming up" in preparation for action.  Certainly, their parent organization(s) and nation(s) show much less fear of and respect for the Biden administration than they did for its predecessor.  However, I doubt there are enough of those cells to justify the apparent surge in weapons trafficking.  There has to be a bigger demand from other sources.

I note that Larry Lambert (who's in a position to know) says this about the north-bound weapons trade.  Bold print is his emphasis.

... contrary to what the media asserts, a lot of military grade weapons are being smuggled into the USA to end up in the hands of every-day folks. Most of it is Chinese made. Some of it comes out of the inventories of Central and South American militaries, bought by cartels for their own uses, but also smuggled into the US because of the demand. The demand for military grade weapons exceeds the demand for illegal narcotics.

Friends, I don't know the truth of the matter.  All I have to go on is third-party reports and speculation.  However, those reports and that speculation come from sources I've learned to trust.  In the past, they've given me the "straight skinny" about developments, and subsequent events have confirmed their information.  Therefore, I'm taking these reports seriously.  If any of you have anything to add about the subject, I'm sure we'd all be interested if you'll please share it with us in Comments.

Peter

Sherlock Holmes for the win

 

I came across this quotation from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's detective hero, Sherlock Holmes, on MeWe.  Click the image for a larger view.

I wonder how we could get our politicians, journalists and influencers to absorb the truth of that statement?  When push comes to shove, I reckon a huge proportion of our present troubles in this country could be avoided, or minimized, or mitigated, if only people would avoid that mistake.

Yes, yes, I know - I'm impossibly naïve to think that might even be possible, much less hope for it . . .

*Sigh*

Peter

A blast from the New Deal past

 

I'm sure many readers are familiar with a cartoon from the Chicago Tribune dated 21st April, 1934.  It was widely re-published early in the Obama administration by sources and outlets opposed to its policies, and it looks like it's doing the rounds again as the Biden administration's so-called "Green New Deal" policies are implemented.  Click the image for a larger view.

If you'd like to know more about the background to the cartoon, and the political personages lampooned in it, you'll find a description here.

What I find most apposite about the cartoon is that it's completely accurate in what then-President Roosevelt advocated, and his "New Deal" implemented.  The US government did "Spend! Spend! Spend!" as hard as it could - and it didn't help.  It took World War II to overcome the Great Depression, and while the war caused even more spending, it also brought the antidote to that spending - "Produce! Produce! Produce!"  Economic output soared, and that output absorbed and (in due course) paid off all the extravagant expenditure that had preceded it.  Note the national debt before, during and after the war years (click the image for a larger view):

The whole point about the massive debt incurred to win World War II is that the USA's economy grew to match it, and produced its way out of the debt and paid it off.  Since the so-called "great recession" of 2007/08, we have not grown our economy's production;  rather, we've imported more and more from other economies, using the "funny money" dollars created out of thin air by the Federal Reserve.  They've benefited from that:  we haven't.  Our domestic economic activity and production has not supported those "excess dollars".  They didn't produce sufficient additional economic activity to justify their creation.

That's why the 1934 cartoon is so apposite to our present situation.  We're spending like there's no tomorrow, but in the absence of equivalent growth in our economic output, there's no guarantee whatsoever that tomorrow's economy will be able to pay off today's debt.  That's what the "New Deal" looked like in 1934, too - and it took the most destructive and widespread war in the history of humankind to change that.

Will we need something similar to balance our books this time?  God forbid!

Peter

Thoughts on the Derek Chauvin trial

 

Now that it's over (at least, now that the first trial is over - I expect it to be declared a mistrial) I can comment on some aspects of Derek Chauvin's trial for third-degree murder in connection with the death of George Floyd.

First, I've never seen so politicized a trial in this country since I came to America more than two decades ago.  Consider:

• While jury selection was in progress, the city of Minneapolis settled a lawsuit by George Floyd's family for over $20 million.  The prospective jurors could hardly help but be affected by this politically correct and very public admission of guilt, as the trial judge noted.  That alone should have been grounds to terminate the trial proceedings on the spot, and move it to a more neutral venue with prospective jurors who would be less likely to be influenced by such news.
• During the trial, there was a constant bombardment of biased analysis of proceedings in the mainstream media.  Many journalists and outlets appear to have pre-judged the outcome based on their own perspectives and prejudices.  Given that the jury was not sequestered, it's inevitable that some of this propaganda must have reached at least some of them, and may have influenced their decision.
• Politicians - notably Maxine Waters, but even including President Biden - disgraced themselves by openly advocating for a "politically correct" verdict.  The judge was moved to comment that their interference would be a strong card in the hand of the defense to move for a mistrial on appeal.  Even after the verdict, some continued to disgrace themselves by their partisanship (take a bow, Nancy Pelosi).
• The jurors were partially doxxed by a local newspaper while they were deliberating - a crystal-clear instance of attempting to influence their deliberations.  In so many words, the message appeared to be, "If you don't reach the politically correct verdict, we'll make sure people know enough about you to track you down and punish you".

Second, there's the question of the evidence presented by the prosecution.  Its own witnesses confirmed many of the defense claims, so much so that the defense indicated it might call some of them back for further testimony.  Stymied on the facts of the case, the prosecution proceeded to place more and more emphasis on emotional appeals to the jurors, rather than relying on verifiable evidence that could be cross-examined.  This, IMHO, is one of the worst aspects of the American justice system.  Emotion has no place when you're deciding on a defendant's guilt or innocence.  The facts of the matter - what was done, not what might (or should) have been thought or felt or emoted - should decide the issue.  To whip up emotion, over and above the facts, is to obscure and obfuscate the reality of the case.

I'm not going to comment on Derek Chauvin's guilt or innocence.  I don't know all the facts of the case, and I'm not qualified or entitled to judge.  I can only say that, on the basis of the evidence as presented at the trial and reported in the mainstream news media, I would not have voted to convict him.  There was substantial evidence of at least negligence, if not callous unconcern, in his actions;  but there was also a reasonable doubt about that evidence.  Given that doubt, I could not have voted for a guilty verdict.

I hope the prison authorities in Minnesota will ensure Mr. Chauvin's safety behind bars.  I daresay there are many inmates who will be motivated to try to kill or injure him, secure in the knowledge that they'll be hailed as heroes by the politically correct establishment if they do.  Given the hyper-partisan views of Minnesota's Attorney-General, they may even think they could get away with such a crime scot-free.  It's an open question whether Mr. Chauvin can be protected in prison, or whether he should be moved to a different state where emotions over the Floyd affair are running less high.

I expect that this first trial will be overturned on appeal, and a mistrial declared.  That means we get to do it all over again.  I'm not looking forward to the prospect.

Peter

Will GPS be there when you need it?

 

Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation is ubiquitous today.  Almost every smartphone can access a map system (e.g. Google Maps) that uses it;  almost every military vehicle (and many individual soldiers) have access to it through issue or personal devices;  and many companies couldn't function without it.  (For a start, imagine all the online commerce deliveries that could not be made in time if the drivers of the delivery vans had to rely on paper maps instead of GPS!)

Trouble is, GPS is also used by "the bad guys", whether nation-state enemies or guerrilla organizations.  It's commonly used by terrorist unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV's or "drones") to navigate to their targets.  Individuals use it to avoid known security installations.  Some enemies will deliberately jam it, to confuse navigation and other systems and cause accidents.  Therefore, a new generation of inertial navigation systems is under development, to supplement and even replace GPS if necessary.  They're complex and expensive at present, and largely restricted to military applications, but I'm sure they'll penetrate the civilian market in due course.

Strategy Page reports:

The new INS tech can now be used to more effectively monitor GPS and alert the operator that their GPS has either developed a problem or is being jammed ... Another urgent chore for INS is to more effectively deal with the growing use of GPS spoofing (misdirecting). This involves EW (electronic Warfare) equipment that can mislead rather than jam without alerting the victim that their navigation system might not be reliable ... That has led to smaller, cheaper and more accurate INS systems. Aside from airlines and commercial shipping, there is not much of a mass market for these new INS systems because for most users, GPS is reliable enough to keep the INS gear out of the more cost-sensitive markets. But the demand from the airlines, shipping companies and the military is huge. INS tech is becoming a popular feature for high-end smartphones and other consumer items, because some smartphone and smartwatch manufacturers seek to use INS to automatically fill in if the user temporarily loses the GPS signal.

. . .

Despite the secrecy about GPS disruption, since 2017 there has been growing evidence that Russia has been frequently jamming or spoofing GPS signals, mainly to hide the exact location equipment that allows GPS tracking. Developing equipment like this is easily within Russian capabilities. In early 2019 a report made the news revealing that there had recently been nearly 10,000 instances where someone, apparently Russia, had been jamming or spoofing satellite navigation signals. Not just the American GPS, but also signals from non-American satellite navigation systems (Chinese Beidou, EU’s Galileo, Japan’s QZAA and even the Russian GLONASS). Much of this activity was not outright jamming but the harder to detect spoofing.

. . .

GPS spoofing equipment has also found a market among criminal gangs. This was first encountered during 2018 in Shanghai, China where local gangsters were found to be using technology for spoofing GPS signals. Shanghai was just the beginning because this spoofing tech was subsequently encountered in twenty other Chinese coastal cities where gangsters ran profitable smuggling operations ... The Chinese government denied responsibility for this GPS spoofing and blamed it on smugglers who apparently use the spoofing device to avoid being caught by the police while a smuggler ship was carrying illegal cargo ... GPS spoofing declined during 2020 but China revealed no details about what happened ... One thing that was noted about the “Shanghai Spoofer” was that the spoofing often took place around oil terminals where ships smuggling oil for Iran or to North Korea often operated. The governments of Iran and North Korea also noticed this and could have received useful information on how the Shanghai spoofing gear worked.

There's more at the link.

This is likely to be widely useful to civilians, as well as military personnel.  I've always believed in the time-honored concept of "belt and braces":  in fact, I've often told people to take that further, and use belt, braces and a piece of string.  I'm a firm believer in Murphy's Law:  "If anything can go wrong, it will".  For that reason, I'm enthusiastic about a technology that can back up - and, if necessary, take over from - GPS.  Can you imagine the chaos on our roads if all the drivers who currently rely on GPS were suddenly "blacked out", and had to complete their journeys without it?  I'm old-fashioned enough to keep a map book in my vehicle for use on long journeys, but how many people do that today?  How many even bother to look up the route for a road trip?  They just switch on their GPS navigation and follow its directions.  They no longer know how to get where they're going.  If you asked them to name the towns between their departure point and their destination, they might not know them at all, because they don't use navigational waypoints.  They just drive, and let the talking box tell them where to go next.

I'm therefore grateful for the prospect of a better INS to back up GPS.  If only I could be sure that the battery powering either or both devices wouldn't run flat . . .

Peter

A very good question: where is your bank's money?

 

Bruce Wilds makes a very cogent point about the whereabouts - and the safety - of our money and our wealth.  Are we sure we know where it is, and whether or not it's safe there?

The ugly truth is that there are many places your wealth could vanish into and multitudes of ways it could seep away. Remember, wealth zips across borders at the click of a button and just because you deposit it with a local institution does not mean it stays in your community.

We witnessed how wealth could be "transferred away" decades ago during the savings and loan crisis when huge beautiful buildings were constructed in certain areas from wealth transferred in from other parts of the country. Needless to say when the dust settled the big winners were the areas with the new buildings and not those forced to pay for them when the loans used to build them went into default.

Today some market watchers claim that the stock market is being held at lofty levels while the smart money is rushing to the exits. Today tens of trillions of dollars are sitting in offshore banking accounts in places such as the Cayman Islands. Today government and businesses are borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars each year by issuing bonds some that will not return investor's money for decades. Today homes, apartments, and buildings are being built, some poorly constructed, with loans guaranteed more or less by the American people. Today America's national debt stands at over 28 trillion dollars and is rising. Today currencies such as the euro and yen are even more fundamentally flawed than the dollar. I could do this a bit longer but I suspect I've made the point.

We have all heard about how the Caymans have become a popular tax haven among the American elite and large multinational corporations. This is because there is no corporate or income tax on money earned outside of its territory. This has made the Caymans especially popular among hedge fund managers. I hate to blow a hole in the idea that you can safely tuck their money away in an offshore banking account, the reality is, we have no idea where all the money deposited in the Cayman Islands really is. Banks do not just sit on deposits and keep them safe, they loan them out.

We must never forget the world is full of crooks, evil politicians, greedy bankers, and that we have judicial systems that make true justice a rare commodity. Returning to the focus of this article, the thing that is important is what or how much wealth survives an economic crisis and in what form. That is because when that wealth comes out of hibernation it will soak up all the tangible assets on the planet. This will be the determining factor of whether we face inflation, deflation, or some crazy mix of the two. Remember it is the nature of those in charge to throw the masses under the bus when things go sideways.

The average person is foolish and silly if they expect to be protected when the next financial crisis hits. Those counting on a stimulus check for survival will someday most likely find it will not buy them diddly-squat. The shelves will be empty or the value of what they receive will simply not be enough. The economic landscape we face following such an event will without a doubt be shaped and depend on what wealth survives and how much vanishes following a tsunami of defaults and /or a monetization of debt where government debt disappears and inflation takes its place. A word to the wise should be sufficient and cause any person prudent or interested in protecting their wealth to consider the many ways wealth can vanish and that it can without a doubt happen to you.

There's more at the link.

It's precisely that concern that makes me keep our money in more than one place.  In the event of a banking crisis or some other emergency, we may lose some, but we should be able to access some as well.

• Our family account is with a smaller local bank, not one of the national finance houses.  In the event of a systemic breakdown, it's less likely to be taken down.
• We also have a backup account with a credit union, which is a different sort of financial institution from a bank, and is (in theory at least) not subject to the same pressures.
• We have a small family reserve of emergency cash which isn't in a bank at all.  (Don't rely on a bank safety deposit box for such cash reserves.  If the bank closes its doors, you won't be able to get at either your accounts or your safety deposit box.)
• We have a small investment in precious metals (mostly silver one-ounce coins such as the American Silver Eagle, Canadian Silver Maple Leaf and South African Silver Krugerrand).  It's not much, but in a pinch we can sell them to get cash, or use them to buy goods from vendors who'll accept them.

I highly recommend that you consider doing something along those lines with your own money.  The rich can hire experts to protect their wealth, but the rest of us have to do it ourselves.  In today's economy, prudence and caution are watchwords we should all be observing.

Peter