Archive for the ‘Tax’ Category

Obama: “American People Voted To Shake Things Up”

November 16, 2016

Yes, that is what Obama said in Athens, Greece, November 15, 2016, about the US vote for Pluto Donald Trump. Yes.

Obama did not shake things up, but, according to Obama himself, Trump, a fixture of the US plutocratic scene since the early 1970s, will? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/15/obama-says-voters-wanted-shake-things-donald-trump/

From the horse’s mouth, says Obama: “The lesson I draw … is we have to deal with issues like inequality, we have to deal with issues like economic dislocation, we have to deal with people’s fears that their children won’t do as well as they have… Frankly that’s been my agenda for the last eight years. The problem was, I couldn’t convince a Republican Congress to pass a lot of them.”

We have to deal with inequality? Wow. That’s news. “Democratic” news. Well, with all due respect, that is was Obama’s agenda, is a misrepresentation: the problem is that there was no SERIOUS plan for SERIOUS change, and no SERIOUS will for SERIOUS change on the part of the Democratic supermajority, crammed with plutocrats and their sycophants.

Then Obama said of the election results, “Perhaps the view of the American people was just to shake things up.”

Wait: where not you, Obama, supposed to “shake things up?” What happened to you? To your shaking?

Obama himself explained that the presidential office grows on you, transforms the beholder… And that it will happen to Trump. Obama gave the example of himself, that he was all disorganized when he got to the White House, and then learned organization. All too organized, I would say, around a few plutocratic principles…

Truth: Obama was a child, a child who thought he was fully grown up. A child who, being at the right place at the right time, posing in the right way with an all-inclusive message, got elected president. However, Obama had strictly no idea what he wanted to do with his presidency. (Whereas Donald Trump is on the public record about some of the things he wanted to do as president since the 1970s…)

G. W. Bush, the self-described “Decider” ordered Obama to the White House, in October 2008, and the ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, Hank Paulson, told Obama what the plan to rescue the US economy from the devastation caused by the financial plutocrats was going to be. Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat heading Congress, had signed on it, after Hank Paulson had gone on one knee in front of her.

Most Of The Newly Created Money Went to Plutocrats. Rest of the West Got “Austerity”

Most Of The Newly Created Money, Above the Trend Exponential, Went to Plutocrats. Rest of the West Got “Austerity”. Most of the Media Never Talks of This.

[In the graph above, notice the brutal take-off under Obama; Quantitative Easing kills commercial banks, thus kills the real economy; at the same time, it fed, & feeds, financial speculators, “investment banking”.]

As a good doggie, of the obedient type, Obama signed on the Paulson plan. After all, when you are going to be president, you may as well sell your soul to Goldman Sachs, no? What about when you are president no more, won’t they take care of you? Navigation, navigation. Then Obama spent his first two years enacting said Goldman Sachs plan, using all sorts of tricks to cover-up was truly being done. And not done. 

TARP, Transferring Assets To Rich People, was then covered-up, in turn, by “Quantitative Easing” and “The Twist”.  That was pure rhetoric, pure dishonesty. In practice, all newly created US money was sent to the richest of the wealthiest. And the same demented, unfair policy was extended throughout the West. Thus it was rather ironical that Obama was in devastated Greece, thoroughly unawares of the devastation he visited on Greece. (And why are not the high executives of Goldman Sachs not prosecuted for what they did to Greece?)

Out of the ashes of 2008 a new, stronger plutocracy arose. Proof? A certain Steve Mnunchin, ex-Goldman-Sachs partner, profited immensely from the Obama’s administration friendliness to financial manipulators (Mnunchin made 40 million dollars personally, thanks to Obama’s financial policies…).

Amusingly, Bannon, another Trump support, and now nominee, in charge of “strategy”, declared that his new boss, Donald Trump was “selling to Wall Street”. It’s a bit complex: if I were Trump, I may nominate a financial manipulator to help “drain the swamp”. In many cases, what matters is not who one supposedly is, but what one does.

In any case, all those who voted for Clinton, the Goldman Sachs candidate, should feel better: their much admired puppet master, Goldman Sachs, knows how to hedge. Mnunchin the munchkin is there to munch them down, the way they like it.

The son-in-law of Trump, the 35-year-old Kushner, is an immensely wealthy real estate developer, himself son of one. Kushner bought his own media at 25 years old. As an observant (!?) Jew, he defended Trump from the grotesque charges of anti-Judaism leveled at him, by the likes of Paul Krugman.

Trump has asked for the high security clearances for Kushner. So, no worry, we are not going to run out of plutocratic targets.

Meanwhile, a smug Joe Biden told the press, next to VP elect Pence, that there was a lot of immensely secret (paraphrasing) things nobody who had not been as high and as long in the system as he, Biden, knew, and know he was telling them all to Pence.

My lashing answer to the Goldman Sachs/Clinton nostalgia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs

The truth is that the left, indeed, has let the left down. It has been corrupted by its corrupted luminaries. Now they are waking up. Nobel Joe Stiglitz, a part of the establishment with Paul Krugman said: ”Eighty percent of the activities revealed through the Panama Papers didn’t actually take place in Panama.” What’s needed is reform in the EU and US. But this reform did not happen under Obama, or the EU governments. “There is a widely shared perspective that these tax havens only exist because the United States and Europe have looked the other way.” Stiglitz suggested that empowered lobby groups on both sides of the Atlantic blocked progressive tax reforms for decades. It is not just this: even the suggestion of progressive reforms have been censored out of the Main Stream Media.

The solution is to establish a world cadastrum, a public registry of the true owners of companies and trusts (I said so, long ago, in connection with old Roman Republic anti-wealth laws; hence the word “cadastrum”). I have suggested this forever, Pickety suggested it last year. And now Stiglitz. Why did it take so long. Why is it suggested now? Because the world, the world of plutocracy, is now in Trump’s safe and trusted hands?

One reason plutocrats have been opposing Trump desperately, is that this Trump adventure makes the control that plutocracy imposes on the whole planet, not just disorganized, but all too obvious.

Patrice Ayme’

Advertisements

Trump A Traitor?

August 2, 2016

This is what French billionaire (and newly found messianic Jew) pseudo-philosopher Bernard Henri Levy (BHL), wants you to think. BHL wants you to think Trump is a traitor and that BHL is just the opposite. Yet, BHL has been part of the powers that be, at the highest level, for his entire life, even more so than Donald Trump. After BHL made an editorial calling Trump a traitor, I was, naturally, titillated. A comment of mine was immediately blocked (censored). The following is a vast expansion of said comment. Basically BHL tries to drown Trump by inundating him with innuendos… Whereas, in truth, Trump’s major crime is that his dangerous rhetoric threatens the politico-financial milieu created by actors such as BHL. To enrich himself, BHL destroyed the African primary forest. Thus BHL has had much further consequences on world ethics, and lying as the new ethics, than Trump ever had. His hold on the media is frightening.

A foundational lie of modern plutocracy is that Obama and the Clintons are dedicated friends of the poor and downtrodden. Nothing of the sort. The government’s own statistics show it (look at the graph below).

If you don’t know what the Gini Coefficient is, that’s not alright.  It may mean you may have a life, but you cannot take an intelligent part in debating what ails the world. Thus, for the sake of general goodness and true progress, let me explain: when a dictator pushes the Gini up, he (and sometimes she) augments the plutocracy, the power of the few, the oligarchs, over the multitude. Here is the sad reality of Obama and Clinton from raw numbers of the Federal REserve Data (FRED): 

The Oligarchs Became Richest Ever Under Leader Obama I. Notice The Colossal Rise of the Gini Under The Satanic Clintons & Their “Democratic” Congress

The Oligarchs Became Richest Ever Under Beloved Leader Obama I. Notice The Colossal Rise of the Gini Under The BelovedClintons & Their “Democratic” Congress. Contrary to repute, Gini stagnated under the evil G W Bush. So why are not Clinton and Bush viewed as even more evil? The ways of the simple are mysterious.

The Gini coefficient is a number between 0 and 1.  It is a number to evaluate how much the richest get (it could be income, wealth, education, health, etc.). A country with an income Gini coefficient of 0 means all income is distributed equally.  And a country with an income Gini coefficient of 1 means one person gets all the money.  This measure was created to show just how skewed goodies distribution was.

Sadly, yet eloquently, despite, or rather precisely because of Obama’s ideologue-strength desire to claim to want to redistribute income, he’s craftily managed to make the rich get richer while the poor got poorer. And this, at record levels. Thus, if you hated Bush that way, you should excoriate Obama.

By 2011, the USA had become one of the top (most unequal) countries in the world in wealth. Just surpassed by four dictatorships. This can be explained by the rise of financial manipulators and conspirators such as Bloomberg, a plutocrat many times the wealth of Trump, who supports Clinton (as his ilk always do).

Obama Cut Taxes On Richest Taxpayers. [He also transferred trillions to the richest under QE, but that's not in the graph above!]

Obama & Democratic Congress Cut Taxes On Richest Taxpayers At The Beginning Of Obama’s Reign. [They also transferred trillions to the richest under ‘Quantitative Easing’, but that’s not in the graph above!]

And this is exactly how many Trump supporters are feeling like: the victims of a giant conspiracy, complete with lying media, pseudo-liberal economists, and pseudo-philosophers railing against We The People. 

'Something Is Going On, And You Don't Know What It Is, Mr. Jones' (Bob Dylan)

‘Something Is Going On, And You Don’t Know What It Is, Mr. Jones’ (Bob Dylan)

The last few times I saw Bernard Henri Levy (BHL) on TV, 2016, he talked to no end about “Jewishness”, and the “genius of Judaism”. He had even just written a book about it. The French audience stayed ominously scornful. When he rose to leave the stage of the famous debate show ONPC, nobody, not even one person in the audience of hundreds, applauded (although BHL was the major guest of the evening). Nobody was amused.

Why? When the ugly face of religious war is surfacing in France again, fanatics of this, that, or the other cult, are intuitively disliked: they don’t seem like offering anything but strife. Many, among We The People, rightly perceive racism, which consists in treating people differently because of their origins.

Indeed, BHL does not like Trump to “emphasize Jewishness“. “Emphasizing Jewishness” is a crime if Trump does it, says BHL, yet a blessing when BHL goes ballistic about it. BHL should read carefully “Night” of Elie Wiesel, where the latter (one of many Jews to do so, including philosopher Hannah Arendt) considers that exaggerated “Jewishness” was a factor in the satanic brew which brought the Shoah. Indeed. There are rarely single causes, most often, web of causes.

The critiques of BHL against Trump, much of them hearsay or wild deliberate misinterpretations, may, or may not be justified. They would be justified if the facts were really as depicted, not just well-founded as industrial strength hearsay. Even then, Trump is a blabber box, who sometimes warns his audience that he may not know what he is talking about, and that his opinion may change in the future. This is an unusual approach for a politician, it strikes many as sincere… And it is. Yes, it’s frightening, but it’s intrinsic to the present system of government we have: a few people, elected or not, fairly or not, have too much power.

The final complaint of BHL against Trump is infidelity. “Infidelity to America.” Whines he:

“The implications of Trump’s election would be truly terrifying. The problem would not only be his vulgarity, sexism, racism, and defiant ignorance. It would be his possible infidelity to America itself. The party of Eisenhower and Reagan has been commandeered by a corrupt demagogue who betrays not only his country’s ideals, but also its fundamental national interest.

American vertigo. Global disaster.”

That’s rich. Eisenhower passed a 93% tax on the wealthiest. BHL himself is the exact opposite: he is one of the wealthiest, stealing wealth from the poorest (Africans, poor French taxpayers). BHL co-opted the entire French state under both Mitterrand and his successor Chirac to extract his father’s company from bankruptcy, and make himself a billionaire. BHL got the help of billionaire Pinault, to intercede with president Chirac, and pass the appropriate law in the French National Assembly. BHL’s life is a testimony to the sort of entanglement of political power and the hyper wealthy, which disgusts so much so many of Trump (and Sanders!) supporters. Ironically, BHL has been in very close, loud and clear relationships with many of the world’s leading politicians, in a way he hints Trump also does with Putin.  

So why does a plutocrat such as BHL dislikes Trump so much? Because Trump said many times that the plutocrats who do not presently pay taxes, for example hedge fund managers, will, should he become president. BHL is scared that this mood, this mood of taxing the wealthy, will propagate (even in France, the wealthiest legally escape tax in many ways made to strike the poor hard). 

Policies Engineered by US Leaders Since Reagan's Reign Are Obviously Wrong. Time For A Vast Change We Can See

Policies Engineered by US Leaders Since Reagan’s Reign Are Obviously Wrong. Time For A Vast Change We Can See. European Parrots May Follow.

In his editorial BHL claims Trump’s call to renegotiate some debt would reduce the US to Argentinian status. Yet, some debt could be renegotiated: after all, president Roosevelt devalued the dollar and cut US national debt by 33%, the day he got to power.

That a pillar, and prime recipient of the present established order, such as BHL, does not like Trump is hardly surprising.  Trump has stated, loud and clear that he would severely modify the established order, making lots of bad actors, and free riders, pay. Trump want bad actors and free riders, from Amazon Inc. to hedge fund managers, to sanctimonious members of NATO who don’t pay for their own defense, to pay for the advantages they enjoy.

That so many of the “vulgum” BHL despises so much, so explicitly, are ready to vote against the established order, is refreshing. I would have preferred Sanders. Individuals such as BHL, who found the money in the coffers of states, they needed to cut the entire forests of some African countries, to buy themselves palaces all over the world, and dominate the media relentlessly, should get their comeuppance.

Trump demolished Jeb Bush by calling him a “liar” about the invasion of Iraq. Bush could not find a way to reply to that. Not just once, or twice, did Trump call Bush a liar, but hundreds of times. And Trump insisted with outright blustering anger that the entire government of Jeb’s brother G W Bush had lied too. And it worked: average right-wing Republicans, by voting for Trump, agreed that the Bush family was a family of liars. It is telling of the sorry state of US  politics that no American politicians had ever made such a furious denunciation of the Iraq invasion prior to that. (Yes, Clinton, as a crucial Senator, voted for the Iraq invasion, to help her friend G. W. Bush; Trump will accuse her to be either a liar or an idiot, or both, on this subject.)

Of this, this alone, real progressives should be grateful. And what of the wall Trump wants to build? Some will whine. Well, the wall already exists. Just look at that Gini above. That’s just the one on income. The one on wealth is way worse. And the one on after tax income jumped after Obama became president, because democrats decided to help the economy by taxing the wealthiest less, and pumping into them trillions through the Federal Reserve (“Quantitative Easing”)

In Africa, huge crocodiles look like friendly trunks, placidly laying there in the water. Lying there or laying there? That is the question many animals are not able to solve. Trump may not be the friend of the common person. However BHL has spent his entire life trying to demonstrate, to himself, that he was a good person. When obviously, he knows perfectly well that he is exactly the sort of crook the world is sick with, doing the sort of things which should be rewarded in the future not with billions, as he was, but with long prison sentences.

I am not for Trump. I am not advocating to be trumped by Trump. The choice between the insufferable Trump and the corrupt Clinton illustrates perfectly well the abysmal nature of representative politics. But I am certainly against liars, and lying in general. Much of what was presented as “progress” in the West since the Fall of the Berlin Wall was actually addictive lying. Yes, GDP went up, in the UK, or the US. But mostly GDP of the rich: watch Irish GDP going up 26% a year, thank to tax evasion.

The lie? That this sort of industrial strength legal tax evasion has nothing to do with most people’s lives getting ever harder. Lying is addictive because, with humans, perception, even perception of happiness, is (nearly) everything. When We The People lives the lie that exploitation is redemption, they live happy.

Increasingly it feels as if lying were most of the industry of the West: contemplate the fact that Obama and Clinton, who brought up the US Gini (on both income and wealth) up to heights never seen before, are really viewed by the losers they stole as their best friends. At some point though, those who do not view We The People as vulgar, may win. A different regime of truth will apply.

So is Trump a traitor? Let’s hope so. He would betray his class, as he already betrayed the Neoconservatives (who were all about invading Iraq).  When one looks at history on the largest scale, one can see that revolutions are often led by plutocrats who betrayed their own class (the Gracchi, and Caesar were from the very top of Roman society; they were assassinated; had they lived, the Roman Republic may well have survived, and progress forged ahead without the Dark Ages; a queen of the Franks outlawed slavery in the Seventh Century; several otherwise vicious Russian leaders propped Russia forward; and so on).

Maybe Trump is a piece of trash. Yet, when he got people to vote for him by decrying the “wrong system” he admitted he was a product of, and he was “wrong” and “part of the establishment”, Trump says important things, and set-up a different mood. A better mood that the one of embracing lies, just because they feel good.

The future is here: it looks just like the past. Lying is its cement, generously provided by the ruling class. Decrying lying is nothing new: the Cathars insisted that most of Christianism was a gigantic lie. Maybe the part of the universe humans lived in was controlled by Evil. That would explain the “Catholic Orthodox” church’s nature. The Cathars were, obviously, and in retrospect right. They were most believed in the most democratic and republican part of Europe, the giant county of Toulouse and surrounding areas. The establishment was not amused, and kill both the Cathars and their books, to the last (millions died, one million in France alone).

At some point, history did not repeat and real progress was made. First by analyzing the past. The time has come to analyze with more subtlety than ever.

Patrice Ayme’

Exit Or Exist, That Is The Question.

June 23, 2016

BREXIT, DRUNK ON SATANIC HATRED

People are ruled by moods first, ideas next. A mood can be defined by a set of neurohormones, themselves produced by organs and subsystems in the brain. In other words, moods are massive things, with lots of inertia, and vast influence: moods create the medium, the nutrients in which neurons grow and prosper. Ideas are much more precise things tied up to neuronal networks (which bathed in the moods themselves). Ideas can be changed by changing a few neuronal networks. Moods need, to be changed, enormous mental changes. And there is worse: moods change genetics. In some species, female fishes without males turn into males, or even super-males. Similarly, many a human without hope turns into a raging lunatic. And much more so when entire tribes have lost hope. As the Brits did. With democracy.

In 1945, the white British population was 40 millions. Their descendants are around 40 millions, to this day. So how come that, in recent years, the British population played catch-up with much larger France? Immigration. Immigration organized by British plutocracy to present endured servants to work for very cheap and enormous wealth, stolen World Wide to invest in exchange for cooperating with this organized, World Wide crime (France had very little immigration in the meantime).

Hence the racial anxiety of the white Brits who are de-whited under their own unbelieving eyes… While being misled about why this is happening exactly. And they, the small, poor, old, all too British impoverished racists swallowed the lie it was all caused by the EU, whereas, in truth, it’s their own plutocracy which made it all possible (immigrants without papers could not work in France or Germany, but could in Britain…)

The World Wide Web of plutocrats is a reality. It’s a community of malevolent spiders busy entangling us in the WWW media they fabricate. Having organized the Brexit vote, plutocrats speculated loudly, with glee, on all the mayhem thus very profitable speculation Brexit, one way or another, would bring. Billionaire George Soros, an ex-Brit, now American, who had forced the British Pound out of the European Currency system, making a billion, recently loudly announced he was returning to trading, because the situation was excellent. He had thirty billion dollars of his own money to entangle with all the juicy action Brexit would bring.  People who think a bit, are full of contempt for the entire Brexit idiocy:  

But First The UK Would Have To Stand At The Back Of The Line, And, Moreover, Would Have Ceased To Exist. Exit Or Exist, That Is The Question

But First The UK Would Have To Stand At The Back Of The Line, And, Moreover, Would Have Ceased To Exist. Exit Or Exist, That Is The Question

Farage, the leader of UKIP, is a commodity broker, son of a City of London stockbroker. Farage, a wealthy man, has worked for two French commodity futures powerhouses. You are talking hard-core plutocracy there. In a  Foreign Press Association speech Farage revealed that over his period as a Member of the European Parliament he had received a total of £2 million of taxpayers’ money in staff, travel, and other expenses. The Farage Family Educational Trust 1654, was set-up in 2013. Farage claimed it to be used “for inheritance purposes”, on the Isle of Man… which, according to Farage was “not a tax haven”, and, anyway, “tax havens are OK”.

Tax havens are not just OK, they are arguably the main industry of Great Britain.

Britons read 13 million newspapers each day. France, with a larger population, only three millions. All these newspapers are pro-Brexit. With the last minutes Times endorsement of “Remain” and the 300,000 readership of The Guardian. This press is so right-wing that it totally censors me (even The Guardian does!): none of my comment was ever published. The hatred of that press extends much beyond Europe. It hates people who dislike fossil fuels or perceives a warming of the atmosphere. And so on.

Why so right-wing racist, pro-plutocratic? Because it is owned by some of the world’s greatest plutocrats. For 30 years, screaming tabloids have told Britons Romanians were coming to steal their houses. In giant capital letters one can read from the other side of the street. Now they believe it.

The reach of plutocratic media is far out: I was walking through a Redwood (Sequoia Sempervirens), reading the Wall Street Journal. A lying graph was exhibit number one: to show how much Socialist france and the Euro Zone were inferior, Great Britain was represented with a GDP more than 20% larger than France’s. Of such lies minds are made. (In truth French GDP is larger than Britain’s and the two countries had the same growth since 2008).  

The Wall Street Journal is owned by Murdoch the very old heir of a media fortune founded by his ancestors in Perth, Australia. Murdoch is now Americans and live in the US. He owns American tabloids and the all-powerful FOX News. Among others things. He has said that British Prime Ministers listen to him, and Brussels does not.

A long litany of celebrities has supported Brexit, from the actress Elizabeth Hurley who played Satan in a movie, to Sir Mick Jagger, a pipsqueak  who, comically enough, thinks he is Satan, although he is just a social climbers anxious to have the advisers of the conservative PM listen to his political advice (probably mostly about tax havens all over) to the Daltrey of The Who,  who called Eurocrats “fuckers”. Well, f… you, efer. 30,000 Eurocrats enable the single market of more than 500 million people. And they are immensely poor, relative to Mr. Daltrey’s fortune. Or Sir Michael Caine, another rich comedian brought back to Britain by all these tax havens, and then having the insolence to whine about Europe… Those individuals who love to bow in front of their plutocrat-in-chief, the Queen, interestingly never complain that said plutocrat-in-chief, the Queen of England, in front of whom they grovel, gets more than 500,000 Euros of European subventions on just one of her many castles, every single year. Of course, I am for reducing those sorts of payments to plutocrats to absolute zero. It is revealing the old super rich pro-Brexit abusers never complain about them.

All these wealthy old fogies are afraid that Franco-Germania is going to crack-down on their English plutocracy, and force them to pay taxes like other people in Europe. The under-35 group is twice more for remaining in the EU than the above 65 old gizzard turkeys.

The Brexit vote should just be the call to arms for those who want an ever closer European Union. Britain wanted to be fence off, and Cameron extracted these concessions. Let them be: isolate Britain, and cut it off. Stat with the British membership in the European Monetary Union, which should be terminated.

Once an individual, or a mass of individuals has opted to be neurohormonally immersed in hatred, their brain, and probably even their genetics, changed (that’s the essence of epigenetics). The Britons who hate Europe have been genetically modified, like the majority of Germans who ended supporting Adolf Hitler. About half Britons who vote are epigenetically engineered robots serving the empire of plutocracy. Let them be, in a safe, remote location.

Patrice Ayme’

Is Britain The World’s Most Corrupt Country?

May 11, 2016

Britain is organizing an anti-corruption conference. Is that a form of British humor, or:

Should the EU Expel Britain From The European Onion?

More than 40 years ago, Great Britain’s population voted to join the European Union. Now it’s voting to see whether it wants to leave. This smacks of the tactic of obstruction through obfuscation, the story of the criminal accusing the police of being violent.  From the point of view of justice and solidarity, it should. Then the European Union could apply sanctions against it for TAX FRAUD.

One third of tax havens of the planet are actually states which have as head of state the Queen of England. That makes the Queen of England assuredly one of the greatest head of organized crime in the history of civilization. That criminal network pervades the USA. Just contemplate this:

Anglo-Saxon Plutocrats Own The Anglo-Saxon Main Stream Media Which Wants You To Not Know That Many Of Said Plutocrats Are Just Tax Criminals (To Start With).

Anglo-Saxon Plutocrats Own The Anglo-Saxon Main Stream Media Which Wants You To Not Know That Many Of Said Plutocrats Are Just Tax Criminals (To Start With).

Let me repeat slowly. One third of the world’s tax havens in monetary volume are British: Bermuda, Cayman Islands, British Virgin Isles, Isle of Man, Channel Islands. If one evaluates the half of the world of entities made to avoid all authorities, including tax authorities, are residents of territories headed by the Queen of England.

That corruption is becoming a problem is not just my opinion. David Cameron thinks that Afghanistan and Nigeria are “fantastically corrupt”. Cameron was caught on tape boasting in front of Queen Elizabeth Cameron that  “some leaders of some fantastically corrupt countries [are] coming to Britain” for his anti-corruption summit”. And he was joking with the corrupter in chief, the Queen!

Nigeria’s President Muhammadu Buhari said he did not want an apology from Cameron. Instead he pointed out that Britain could return assets stolen by officials who fled to London.

Forget Nigeria – David Cameron needs to tackle the tax havens in Britain’s own backyard

Says The Telegraph:

“Certainly Nigeria has a reputation. But the Panama Papers have shifted the focus of corruption far up the supply chain, to the people who make corruption possible – and those people are often rather closer to home.  

The UK, to its credit, has been at the forefront of the movement to make the world more financially transparent. The 2009 G20 Summit, hosted by Gordon Brown in London, created the first blacklist of tax havens that were holding out against sharing information on bank accounts with other countries’ tax authorities.

Under David Cameron’s leadership, the UK also became the first country in the world to require companies to be fully transparent about the people who own and control them. This is the key step towards stopping people squirreling money away behind fake companies they secretly own, out of the reach of the taxman and other authorities.

Other countries have since followed suit, and soon all countries that are part of the EU will have to collect information on who ultimately owns and controls companies and make that available to anyone who can demonstrate a legitimate interest.  So we should be proud of our leadership here.     

But careful readers of the Panama Papers will notice an important fact that should have given Cameron pause for thought before he made his comments to the Queen. More than half of the companies named in law firm Mossack Fonseca files are incorporated in Britain’s own tax havens. In fact, a full 50 per cent of the companies are from the British Virgin Islands.

Prime Minister David Cameron knows this. He said so just a few months ago:

“Some of the British Crown Dependences and Overseas Territories are making progress […]. Others, frankly, are not moving anywhere near fast enough. […] If we want to break the business model of stealing money and hiding it in places where it can’t be seen, transparency is the answer.”

Thanks to unfair austerity, avoiding taxes – whether legally or illegally – is coming to be seen as wrong.  If one wants to live in a society with decent schools and hospitals, no terrorism and an army powerful enough to not have tens of millions of refugees trying to smash through the border, all – rich and poor, small companies and giant ones – should be contributing to the public power. A recent poll for anti-corruption organisation, Global Witness, and Oxfam showed that 80 per cent of British adults agreed with the statement that “David Cameron has a moral responsibility to ensure that the UK’s Overseas Territories are as transparent as possible.”

However, PM David Cameron has whined disingenuously, for years, that “he cannot impose his wishes on independent territories.” So, instead of organizing a referendum on whether massive tax fraud can be perpetrated by the Queen of England, her dependencies, dominions and other minions, Cameron organized a referendum about whether Britain wanted to be in Europe or not. As if, after voting against Europe, it would find itself somewhere southeast of New Zealand.

There are fourteen “British Overseas Territories”. The Crown Dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man are also tax havens, under the sovereignty of the British monarch. When Britain want to exert power on the dominions, it can: Britain forced dominions to abandon the death penalty (1991), or punishments against homosexuality (2000).

Meanwhile any fantastically corrupt rogue official, thief or criminal can come to Great Britain and become a “Non Dom”, a non-domiciliated person, not taxed for at least seven years. Canada and the USA have imitated facets of this program. Some of China’s richest billionaires, anxious to be skewered by president Xi’s anti-pollution drive, have their children in Canada, driving around in cars worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

All this to say that the “summit in London on the struggle against corruption”, May 12, 2016, is a colossal hypocrisy. And the stakes are not small. Not only is civilization is at stake, but the biosphere itself.

How did Rome fall? Rome fell in many ways: it became a tyranny, a plutocracy (all emperors were born from a small clique of families jousting for power among themselves, and exchanging the imperial throne as if was a frisbee). Rome became also anti-technological, and anti-scientific. Later it became a theocracy.

The historian Edward Gibbon was connected to the British plutocracy, so he could not accuse the plutocratic phenomenon to have caused the Fall of Rome. Instead, he accused Catholicism (as did Nietzsche). However, theocracy was the last justification tyranny found for itself. Plutocracy caused the Fall of Rome, and, over the next centuries, piled up the outrages.

So how did plutocracy blossom? By eschewing old Roman Republican law which limited absolutely the size of a family fortune. And how was that accomplished? With all the overseas dependencies and possessions Rome found itself with after the victory of Rome in the Second Punic War (final victory in 201 BCE). Those included North Africa, Spain, Macedonia, Greece… In those territories, it was not clear that Roman law had jurisdiction. The same loophole allowed slavery in the New World after 1500 CE: Frankish law had established jurisdiction outlawing slavery, all over Europe, in 655 CE. But the law could not be imposed in the New World, be it only because those who ruled there had no interest to see to it.

Recent globalization has operated in a similar fashion. This is all the more strange because American and French jurisdiction proclaim themselves as universal (France is presently judging Rwandan civil war criminals).

The explanation? Great Britain and the USA have been milking the tax haven, international corruption trick: trillions of corrupt, dark, criminal money has kept them afloat, by coming from all over the world. France has done so too, but on a much smaller scale  The latter case explains why Frenchman Pierre Moscovici is showing no alacrity to punish Luxembourg.

France and Germany are the core of the European Onion. It’s high time for them to seize their responsibilities. The terrible example of Britain has led to massive tax thievery by the likes of the Netherlands and Luxembourg. High time to get tough on more than retirees, elementary school children, and the indigent.

The arsenals of democracies have become arsenals of corruption. That may give leverage over Putin, since his plutocrats put their money in Western tax havens, but it’s no way to run a civilization.

Patrice Ayme’

Luxembourg, Den Of Thieves

May 8, 2016

Send The Tanks?

Luxembourg is a nothing country. Yet, according to the World Bank and the IMF, the GDP per capita in Luxembourg was $117,000. That makes it the richest country in the world (omitting tiny tax havens such as Monaco). And more than half of it is stolen money. Nasty nothings like Luxembourg are, increasingly and subterraneously enraging We The People, all over.

Idiots say that Trump’s popularity is growing because of the color of Obama’s skin. In truth, the rage is growing because of the likes of Luxembourg. We The People has not understood this, because the Main Stream Media, owned and inspired by plutocrats, has made sure that We The People would not understand that. However, We The People is starting to guess what is going on, and it is my pleasure to help in this understanding. Here is an enraging picture:

Rogue Governmental Tax Thieves Are Stealing The Pillars Of Civilization, To Feed Plutocracy.

Rogue Governmental Tax Thieves Are Stealing The Pillars Of Civilization, To Feed Plutocracy.

For 20 years, J-C Juncker led Luxembourg. Juncker made a business to betray the very foundation of Europe. The very foundation of Europe is the principle of SOLIDARITY. Then Juncker was selected to head the European Commission. The wolf was put in charge of the sheep (as Eva Joly, a Franco-Norwegian European MP who was presidential candidate and magistrate puts it). Unsurprisingly, Juncker himself is used as an argument against Brexit. Juncker is junk, the name of one of the greatest fraud ever.

People such as Juncker are toxic, even lethal: Juncker just re-authorized deadly chemicals such as BPA, an endocrinian perturbator who turns boys into girls, and vice versa, while giving them cancer. Lethal, and in more way than one.

[Computation by Gabriel Zucman in “Taxing Across Borders…”.]

In World War Two, Luxembourg just let itself be invaded, not even with a token 6 hours resistance like Denmark. Whereas France and Britain declared war to Hitler on September 3, 1939. Some will, naively, say that they don’t know why I talk about a major tragedy of history. But the reason I do is that we are going through a major tragedy of history now. The weakening of the tax base of the leading countries of the West has, in particular reduced their might and awe. As a result we enjoy the likes of the Islamist State, Assad… And many other tyrants whose activities are rendered possible, precisely because the leading countries have been weakened… and contaminated by the corruption of the likes of Luxembourg.

Now we are facing Brexit, a plot by financial pirates, brokers and professional tax evaders to have “The City”, an official plutocracy in London, to lead the gullible to tragedy.

We are facing Brexit in great part because of the plutocratic organization of Europe. And that plutocratic organization is gaining ever more power.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the very human (in appearance) and extremely plite and nice ex-Prime Minister of Luxembourg who heads the European Commission. He is the one who organized the

Paradoxically, the “Lux Leaks” scandal made advertizing for the mass, governmental tax thievery organized by… Luxembourg: business has never been better.

In “Lux Leaks” journalists from 40 international media outlets on Wednesday used leaked documents exposing tax avoidance by major international companies — like Ikea, FedEx, PepsiCo, and Amazon — in Luxembourg through secret deals between that rogue state and more than 300 multinational corporations.

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) examined over 28,000 pages of deals with hundreds of multinational corporations. Those allowed the companies to jointly

cut trillions from their tax payments worldwide.

Most of the documents were Advance Tax Agreements, or so-called “comfort letters,” which are rulings determining how businesses will be taxed by the rogue regime’s tax authorities.

Technically, Luxembourg is not an official tax haven, since it… does have taxes. (Places such as British tax havens do not have individual or corporate taxes outright.)

Luxembourg’s government] has developed a system of tax rulings, which are secret agreements between tax authorities and the companies.

Luxembourg has denied the leading countries which defend civilization part of their taxable base. Thus Luxembourg is an active enemy of democracy. Luxembourg is also a paradigm of tax piracy. It is followed by other scavengers such as Great Britain and the Netherlands (who also practice the tax haven trick, industrially). In 1914, and thereafter, the Netherlands collaborated with fascist Prussian-German empire.

A young Frenchman who came across documents of Pricewaterhouse Cooper showing the tax stealing of Luxembourg. He communicated them to a journalist who then contacted the afore-mentioned IJC. Both whistleblowers are on trial in Luxembourg, and they are threatened by ten years in jail. Meanwhile the bosses of the companies who stole billions of taxes are free to operate in, say, France.

This is the world upside down, and inversion of all values. Seeing tapes of J-C Juncker, tapping in the backs of presidents such as France’s Hollande, or Orban, the leader of Hungary, saying, with a big smile:”Hello, dictator!”, kissing other leaders on top of the head, etc. even a movie such as “The Godfather” feels quaint. And, indeed, although inspired by the Mafia, the GDP  used now with Rogue Government organized Dark Liquidity, Dark money, Tax havens, etc are orders of magnitude greater.

Meanwhile, back in the USA, Obama urged at Howard University, an apartheid university for “blacks” to engage into a “more disciplined form of activism”. I guess they should do like him, and collaborate with the powers that be, those who animate the Junckers of this world. Instead of being undisciplined?

Patrice Ayme’

 

Heathen Tax Havens Top World GDP

April 5, 2016

The Prime Minister of Iceland just resigned. The right honorable PM did not have major funds in a tax havens. He asserted this to journalists. That was correct. His very rich blonde wife did have dark money funds in tax havens, though. This has been revealed in Tax Havens. And the PM had claimed she did not. And how did the wife get so rich? Like Chelsea Clinton? Becoming a hedge fund money manager in her early twenties? Just asking.

What’s a Tax Havens? A place with little or no taxes. By claiming residency there, individuals or corporations can escape taxes. Plutocratic corporations can claim their profits there. They do this by charging extravagant charges to their subsidiaries. Thus subsidiaries in high tax countries (such as the leading countries of the West: USA, Germany, France, UK, Italy, etc.) are not “profitable”, because they spent all their money paying a subsidiary in a

According to the IMF, there are around 60 Tax Havens around the world,  50% of world financial transactions pass through Tax Havens, for a grand total of 25,000 billion dollars ($25 trillions).

What Can't Be Seen, Can't Be Taxed. Or Why Dark Liquidity Grows Ever More, As Its Engine, Plutocracy, Grows

What Can’t Be Seen, Can’t Be Taxed. Or Why Dark Liquidity Grows Ever More, As Its Engine, Plutocracy, Grows

One should stop and meditate this number. The established mental order, in economy quantifies the performance of societies according to GDP (not Gross Demonic Product, but Domestic, supposedly). GDP is just the sum of all financial transactions.

So this means that the GDP of Tax Havens is $25 Trillion. By comparison the GDP of the EU is 18.5 Trillion dollars (a trillion dollar higher than that of the USA). It’s promised to a bright future: Dark Pool Liquidity is skyrocketing everywhere: even in Canada.

365 major international banks are involved in just the particular scandal at hand. The British centered bank HSBC alone is involved in 2300 screen societies managed by that law firm, Mossak Fonseca.

The idea of Tax Havens came from Great Britain, and initially was directed to the Anglo-Norman isles.

To be viewed officially as financially clean, that is, not a tax haven, a country has to make 12 tax treaties with other countries. Thus Panama has tax treaties with Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, etc.: tax havens, by signing treaties with other tax havens certify each other to not be tax havens.

Could the great leaders of the great democracies have ignored all the preceding? Sure. That’s what they did. David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, is an expert; he ignored his father’s overseas, false name accounts.

As The Guardian (a paper which censors me!) puts it:

“David Cameron’s father ran an offshore fund that avoided ever having to pay tax in Britain by hiring a small army of Bahamas residents – including a part-time bishop – to sign its paperwork.

Ian Cameron was a director of Blairmore Holdings Inc, an investment fund run from the Bahamas but named after the family’s ancestral home in Aberdeenshire, which managed tens of millions of pounds on behalf of wealthy families.

Clients included Isidore Kerman, an adviser to Robert Maxwell who once owned the West End restaurants Scott’s and J Sheekey, and Leopold Joseph, a private bank used by the Rolling Stones.

The fund was founded in the early 1980s with help from the prime minister’s late father and still exists today. The Guardian has confirmed that in 30 years Blairmore has never paid a penny of tax in the UK on its profits.

The prime minister’s spokeswoman said that Downing Street had responded to allegations about Ian Cameron in the past.

Asked if there was still any family money invested in the fund, she said: “That is a private matter.” She said the prime minister had “taken a range of action to tackle evasion and aggressive tax avoidance”.

The Panama Papers, 11.5m documents leaked from the offshore agent Mossack Fonseca, reveal the details of how Cameron Sr sheltered Blairmore’s profits with a series of expensive and complicated arrangements.”

How was all this possible? How come We The People have become so lenient for the crooks who govern us? How did we become sheep? Panem Et Circenses, the Roman historian and philosopher Juvenal put it, 19 centuries ago: bread and circuses. Distract people with distributions of bread and circuses. This can set a degeneracy of minds which can fester for centuries. Roman citizens did not revolt until the Nika Riots, four centuries after Juvenal. Those started after increasingly violent confrontations, years after years, of partisans of the “Blues” and “Greens” teams of charioteers. Roman citizens had lost all taste for politics. Actually this started a few generations before Juvenal wrote, when a  bunch of major plutocratic crooks such as Brutus (who, before becoming the assassin of Caesar, had been a major corrupt Roman official in “Asia”).

Under the second emperor (or “Princeps”), Tiberius, the Roman national assembly felt so irrelevant, that it fell in disuse. We The Roman People felt that governance had been completely confiscated by the major plutocrats, so why bother?

How not to fall in the same despondency? Well, by mustering some rage, or, at the very least, anger, as Senator Bernie Sanders has been doing, and showing. In a most timely, and wise, manner.

Patrice Ayme’

Global Trade Outlaws Rule

March 9, 2016

FREE TRADE IS NEITHER FREE, NOR A TRADE

Sanders’ surprise victory in Michigan, a big industrial state, is attributed to his attacks against so-called “free” trade (Clinton has never seen a “free” trade treaty she did not love). Ditto for Donald Trump’s victory in the same state (Trump has proposed a 45% tax on Chinese imports). Polls show angry white males and the young (for Sanders) are voting against the system which brought to them the globalization of pauperization. Rightly so.

Let me provide more needed theory:

As it is, globalization means plutocratization.

First, globalization without redistribution implies plutocratization. (As Paul Krugman asserts.)

Second, globalization of trade without globalization of law amounts to trade without law. Thus, organizations, corporations and plutocrats presently engaged in global trade are, technically, out-laws.

Third the immense fortunes gathered by the trade outlaws have enabled them, in turn to pay well their servants in politics and national administration to further the very out-lawfulness which has made them prospered.

Fourth, under the Clintons in the 1990s, the Banking Act of 1933 was replaced by financial deregulation, which spread worldwide, making financiers masters of world trade.

Real Family Income Is Going Down. Real = Including CPI. If One Included Real Costs Beyond The CPI, The Real Income Would Collapse Even More. If I had Put On This Graph GDP or Trade, Both Of These Curves Would Be Shooting Up

Real Family Income Is Going Down. Real = Including CPI. If One Included Real Costs Beyond The CPI, The Real Income Would Collapse Even More. If I had Put On This Graph GDP or Trade, Both Of These Curves Would Be Shooting Up

One of my commenters and friends told me that it is president Carter, a democrat, who had started the degeneracy we presently enjoy. I was surprised, and initially denied. However, I looked and various graphs, and, to my dismay, he turned out to be right. As I learn more about what happened, I will integrate it in my discourse (Carter, of course, attacked, secretly, Afghanistan on July 3, 1979, so he was not highly considered here; but now he is heading evwen lower!)

In other words, we are engaged in a nonlinear process: the global trade outlaws are getting ever more powerful, and, the more powerful they get, the more they advance their plots and breathing together (con-spirare, conspiracies),

Meanwhile, We The People, are getting ever more destitute (the CPI, the Consumer Price Index, does not include LIFE ESSENTIALS such as education, health care, retirement).

Let me give you an example of the degeneracy of US society: I had an insurance agent for two decades, who worked at one of the most prestigious insurance companies in the USA. Last Spring he got sick. Although a well paid professional, he did not get health care in a timely manner. So he died of pneumonia. He was in his forties (basically the age when one gets sick the less). I know dozens of similar stories. Meanwhile, US healthcare is 50% more expensive, per head, than health care in the most performing healthcare systems in the world.

What does that have to do with the globalization of trade? Massive globalization led to massive plutocratization, and that, in turn, led to US politicians and civil servants doing exactly what plutocrats and their corporations wanted them to do (so that politicians and civil servant would make their future income up, as the good agents of plutocracy whom they are).

 Then the one who led us for 40 years, the one who makes more than 200,000 dollars in an hour, giving secret talks to financiers, claims to represent We The People. We The People are earning 10,000 times less (2,000 x 4.5) than she does, per hour. How can she represent, or even understand, us? Is that realistic? No wonder some of us want to protect themselves.

Paul Krugman, the architect, under president Ronald Reagan of “free” trade, presents as self obvious that Sanders’ program is “unrealistic”. Says Krugman: “The Sanders win defied all the polls, and nobody really knows why. But a widespread guess is that his attacks on trade agreements resonated with a broader audience than his attacks on Wall Street; and this message was especially powerful in Michigan, the former auto superpower. And while I hate attempts to claim symmetry between the parties — Trump is trying to become America’s Mussolini, Sanders at worst America’s Michael Foot — Trump has been tilling some of the same ground. So here’s the question: is the backlash against globalization finally getting real political traction?”

Well, I tell you why, Paul: We The People are getting tired of ‘the conscience of a liberal” who got to work engineering Ronald Reagan’s sinister plot to claim that giving to the rich was the best way to give to the poor. Krugie boy is on his best defending his position at the altar of “power”:

Paul Krugman: “The truth is that if Sanders were to make it to the White House, he would find it very hard to do anything much about globalization — not because it’s technically or economically impossible, but because the moment he looked into actually tearing up existing trade agreements the diplomatic, foreign-policy costs would be overwhelmingly obvious. In this, as in many other things, Sanders currently benefits from the luxury of irresponsibility: he’s never been anywhere close to the levers of power, so he could take principled-sounding but arguably feckless stances in a way that Clinton couldn’t and can’t.” 

That’s obviously a ridiculous thing to say: the USA has basically to get accord from just one power, the French Republic, which is all for putting the brakes on soul-less globalization (always has been, for about a century, whether governments are from the so-called right, or left). Then, automatically Germany, Italy and Spain (with, or without a government), will follow. Tax cheats such as Great Britain, Belgium and the Netherlands are going to increasingly feel the whip, and better shut up. (A few days ago, France told Britain that she would open the refugee gates, if Britain left the EU. So Britain is going to have to face unexpected costs, in all ways.)

The World  Trade Organization, prodded by France, already announced that a carbon tax, imposed worldwide, was NOT in violation of WTO rules. So one can start with that, on day one. See what it does for the price of Chinese steel and Chinese solar panels.

In all justice to Krugman, he finishes this way: …”the elite case for ever-freer trade is largely a scam, which voters probably sense even if they don’t know exactly what form it’s taking.

Ripping up the trade agreements we already have would, again, be a mess, and I would say that Sanders is engaged in a bit of a scam himself in even hinting that he could do such a thing. Trump might actually do it, but only as part of a reign of destruction on many fronts.

But it is fair to say that the case for more trade agreements — including TPP, which hasn’t happened yet — is very, very weak. And if a progressive makes it to the White House, she should devote no political capital whatsoever to such things.”

It is a huge “if”. I would be astounded if Clinton made it to the presidency.

After decades of increasingly corrupt, venal, lying politicians whose idea of policy is to do what the world’s richest corporations and their plutocrats want them to do, what could be worse?

Having someone reigning again who got paid a fortune repeatedly for plotting in secret talks with financiers what would be the next move to enrich that elite? Under Bill Clinton, the Banking Act of 1933 was destroyed, bringing the reign of unrestrained finance. Moreover global trade treaties got signed, which allow corporations and their corporations to escape taxation and legislation. How electing Trump or Sanders could make it worse?

When Clinton was asked why she accepted so much money from Goldman Sachs, for so little “work”she replied: “I guess that’s their rate!” She refused to release any transcript to the flood of talks she gave to financial conspirators and outlaws. And you know what? Thanks to the stubborn work of individuals such as yours truly, this sort of rotten mentality is now exposed, and nobody wants to be led by it anymore. Not even the people supporting Ted Cruz.

Paul Krugman’s dream of another cabinet job, 35 years after the one he enjoyed with his boss, Reagan, is fading away…

Patrice Ayme’

Art As Devil Currency, & Clinton’s Fading Worth

November 12, 2015

Why Clinton Won’t Be President Again, And Why Art Is Tax Evasion:

“If you live long enough, you’ll make mistakes. But if you learn from them, you’ll be a better person. It’s how you handle adversity, not how it affects you. The main thing is never quit, never quit, never quit.” [― William J. Clinton.]

This is typical of the sound-good idiocies we have to learn not to take as below our dignity to lash out after. Sophisticated thinking is of no help if the worst thinking is left unmolested, free to grow, corrupt, and rule, most minds

Neither G. W. Bush, nor Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, or Mao Tse Tung, or the Khmer Rouges, or Louis XIV, or Philip II of Spain, or Antipater of Macedonia, ever quit, but it would have been better if they had. And as the Romans had it: “Perseverare Diabolicum”.

Learning from mistakes can go both ways: to profit humanity at large, or profit the learning individual. The latter may, or may not profit the humanity at large.

If one never quits, just to embrace the Dark Side, ever more, methinks matters are not improving for humanity, at large. That Bill Clinton thinks learning made him a better person, automatically, is only the sort of self-indulgence he is famous for, and which will probably cost his wife the presidency.

Dark Currency: Such A Beauty Cannot Be Taxed Or Detected

Dark Currency: Such A Beauty Cannot Be Taxed Or Detected

[That painting was sold at auction for more than 170 million dollars… to a “former taxi cab driver turned billionaire art collector”… I will be even more interested to know his connections to the Triads, the multi-century old Chinese crime organizations. It’s already known that the entire gambling industry on Asia is connected to sophisticated money laundering.]

And why no Clinton again? The sheeple is not that dumb, that it cannot smell something is amiss. The Clinton presidency was as devastating for the (world) middle class as that of G. W. Bush. A difference: Clinton was part of the pre-condition for G. W. Bush.

It’s not just that Clinton deregulated, thus unleashed the financial sharks onto the world (thus making possible the economic crash which followed 2008). It’s not just  that Clinton got away with it. It is that the crushing success of propaganda was blatant: because Clinton was a “Democrat”, he could only be doing good.

Hence Clinton, by succeeding to make the meek, weak proverbial little guys feel that finance unchained was good for them, showed that there were no limits to what propaganda could achieve. The lies of Blair and Bush were just a further little step away.

This is why Quantitative Easing (giving ever more money to banks who had caused the crisis) has been glorified as the way out of the 2008 crisis.

Now there is a new twist. A twist within the twist, after the “Twist” (the Federal Reserve of the USA actually set-up a bank helping scheme it had the effrontery to call… “The Twist”).

The twist has been this: the banks have been slowly squeezed under “Dodd-Frank”… While, discreetly, “Dark Money” in “Dark Pools” or not, has been unleashed, more than ever.

Hence the on-going rise in the price of “art”. “Art is  parallel currency: it’s often not taxed (even in France!). It goes across borders, get stored in other countries, and change hand to hand, without having to be declared to the authorities.  Meanwhile the little guys one thousand dollars (let alone euros!) transactions are scrutinized, and meticulously registered. The currency of the wealthiest people on Earth is a Dark Currency, so dark authorities themselves can’t see, let alone understand it. Why would you want to understand your masters, except to please them?

So what of the Commons in all this? The Commons smell a rat. A rotting rat, and Clinton reminds them of that smell.

So does, by the way Jebb Bush, the latest model from that (Hitler sprung) dynasty. This is why (pseudo) anti-establishment candidates have been running strong.

Yet, the Devil lurks in the ugly, most obscure, worst smelling corners. As long as the Commons are not willing to quit their comfort zone, to relish exploring those disgusting places (as I obviously do), their understanding, thus their action, will not disrupt the oligarchy’s mental order enough to unsettle it.

Patrice Ayme’