Posts Tagged ‘Elon Musk’

Goldman Sachs’ European Union

July 9, 2016

Goldman Sachs, one of the generous employers of the wealthy Hillary Clinton, has recruited José Manuel Barroso, the former president of the European Commission, as the chairman of its international operations, “a non-exec, advisory role”…. To handle “Brexit” Goldman-Sachs said. (An interesting case of self-dealing: Who was one of the main forces behind “Brexit”? Goldman Sachs, as it cheated on the accounting of Greece, thus enabling Greece to enter the Eurozone, when it should not have, leading to the “Grexit” crisis, which ruined further the reputation of the EU, thus enabling Europhobes to howl their xenophobia even louder, etc.…).

Goldman knows how to employ international bureaucrats and politicians: the previous holder was Peter Sutherland, a former European Commissioner and ex-boss of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Goldman Sachs has plenty of money, because the tax structure of the US makes it so, while, if a young Afro-American wants to make it, he can always enroll to be train as a killer for the establishment… This is not just conspiracy and corruption on a local or national scale, this is corruption on a global scale.

Barroso was the 115th Prime Minister of Portugal for three years, then head of the European Commission (EC) for ten years. The EC is the executive administration of the European Union (EU). It employs 33,000 workers in charge mostly of regulating the regulations embodying European Laws (passed by the European Parliament), to rule the single market of more than 500 million people (that makes it much more efficient than the British government employing 4.5 million people). 

Meanwhile California papers announced proudly that California had the sixth economy in the world in terms of nominal GDP, having jumped ahead of France and Brazil, Italy, India… This reflects in part a surge in the dollar and the pound (which has gone down 15% since the “Brexit” vote). It also reflects the mercantilist strategy of the USA, conducted with brio under Obama.

Let's Plot All Together Now! Obama, Elon Musk, and the Military: Laughing All The Way To The Bank!

Let’s Plot All Together Now! Obama, Elon Musk, and the Military: Laughing All The Way To The Bank!

Take for example Tesla, the poster concept of present-day American mercantilism. It is flooding the world with luxury electric car of dubious ecological merit. All the way to Norway, huge government subsidies are piled up on it (and I would be very interested to know the details on the mortgages and conferences various officials involve take) . Thanks to well-organized propaganda and financing by the US government. In truth, Tesla and the other companies of Elon Musk (Solar City, Space X) are companies massively financed by the US governments (yes, the government of the US and the governments of other states, such as New York, Nevada, to California). Those subsidies on just Solar City and Tesla amounted to 5 billion dollars by 2014. Mr. Musk himself made, personally, 12 billion dollars under the Obama administration: the beauty of the (pseudo) free market.

Why? The South African born Musk, tall and lean, looks good next to Obama, tall and lean. Not that Obama knew what was going on: Chu, the Nobel Prize winning Secretary of Energy of Obama, yanked American Federal Government support for further research in fuel-cell electrics (a US technology, which served us the Moon on a plate). Now Chu is very close to those who invested in battery electrics (fuel-cells are vastly superior to battery electrics in the present state of technology)

The case of Mr. Musk is highly visible, but just the tip of the iceberg (a tip which loves to live dangerously).

Many American corporations have moved their headquarters to tax havens, thus escaping the 33% US tax, something Obama had to loudly deplore, and did loudly deplore. Meanwhile, the full might of the US government is still helping these corporations (diplomatically, through traded delegations, etc.).

Pure mercantilism. The fostering of American business is used to enrich the US by weakening the rest of the world. Just like fostering London as Europe’s financial center brought a weakening of continental Europe (most of the Euro money-changing happening in London rather than in the Eurozone). The USA uses its political and propaganda heft to get its way in business.

For example, Tesla was authorized to let drivers use its “Autopilot” function, while it would be non-imaginable to enable a non-American car maker to do the same. (A Tesla in Autopilot did not detect a tractor-trailer and went below it at full speed, killing the driver.)  

The war of the US mercantilist empire against the barely conscious European sheep is all azimuths. For example, after decades of anti-French propaganda using most American comics, it is very difficult to sell anything in the USA coming from France. Even French cheese is considered to be dangerous biological warfare. One can be arrested for sneaking a French cheese inside one’s luggage: special dogs are out there to get the French contrebandiers, and their hidden Roquefort.

All is fair in love and war? Not really. Especially when one does not know that one is at war. The Europeans love their i-phones, but they should ponder more where they come from, and how.

The USA is behaving, right now, like a traditional European power, at the time when the European powers were jostling for world control. Whereas the Europeans have opted for behaving like traditional European sheep. But even their cheese does not make it in. So what are the European sheep going to do? Die off through low birth rate, and a civil war with Muslim migrants?

The American government has a law forbidding government to buy non-American products, except if nothing else available; the EU does not have an equivalent, symmetric law, thanks to the fact European politicians know that, if they behave well during their European political “duty”, namely if they favor US interests, US oligopolies and financial conspiracies will employ them, afterwards. And “compensate” them very well.

The US behaves like a traditional, aggressive and imperialist European power, but for three caveats. First, the US is a superpower, “the one and only superpower, probably”as a chastened Russian president Vladimir Putin put it recently. That feeling of superiority brings a supplement of hubris. And hubris does not replace soul, as the Ancient Greeks knew, all too well.

The other caveat is that the US, and its institutions, arose in great part from the “West Country Men” mentality, of greed foremost. Four centuries of English North American history have shown that, the more greed, the better, overall, for the empire. What could go wrong? No appetite is large enough, if it can eat entire mountains.

The final caveat is that US mentality did not arise from thousands of years growing among, and learning to live with, disagreeable, incomprehensible, insufferable neighbors. The US is a new country which experiences  itself as a new civilization, on an island-continent.

The “Brexit vote” at first sight, weakens Europe further. The US had fostered, before it attacked, and after it attacked the Prussian Kaiser’s fascist imperial design to take over Europe in an alliance with the US. Later, as early as 1921, American plutocrats led by the maverick racist Henry Ford, and, soon enough, Wall Street’s entire might, American leaders fostered Nazism. And Stalinism too. The result was the world as we know it.

Esteemed commenter Gloucon on this site just suggested that everything American has to be expunged from the US mentality.  He called that Amexit from itself, “exorcism”. It may well be true. However, the policies of various European powers right now enfeeble Europe ever more. In what was a minor crisis (the 2008 greed crisis), the US did not hesitate to run astounding record deficits for years, up to nearly 15% of GDP, well above 10% of GDP for more than four years running. Meanwhile the servants of Goldman Sachs at the European Commission, and in various other European governments insisted, and keep on insisting on the 3% deficit limit. The french commissioner of finance is very strict on this: France has to lower its deficit to 3%. Well, I don’t know if that’s Marine le Pen’s plan, but, considering the sorry state of France, the french deficit should be brought up to 20% (investors would probably pay France for that: the French ten-year bond is basically at zero percent…)

European countries, thanks to European laws, kept their deficits extravagantly low, while their economies sunk. Except for… Britain, which ran much higher deficits that then rest of Europe (the Eurozone). Hence the surge of the British Pound, because, paradoxically, the ability, or, more exactly, effrontery of running high deficit is viewed by money manipulators, as a sign of strength (that’s in contradiction with classics economics of the obsequious type). And this is correct: it’s the friendliness to plutocracy, and the ability to enforce that, which have contributed to the clout of the US and the UK.   

Deficits Don't Count, If You Have The World's Biggest Army: Obama Is A Strategic Genius, Whereas European Leaders Are Mentally Retarded Traitors Of The Vicious Type

Deficits Don’t Count, If You Have The World’s Biggest Army: Obama Is A Strategic Genius, Whereas European Leaders Are Mentally Retarded Traitors Of The Vicious Type

But let’s contemplate the very high deficits of Obama’s first six years. Is not the only excuse for very high deficit, war? Was there a war the US was engaged in. I mean a big war, not this little weapon testing in the Middle East. Of course there is. And the enemy is doing poorly, melting like Camembert. The European Union, ladies and gentlemen, and its increasingly tiny and irrelevant corporations… is not on the winning side. And how could it be?

In 1940, the Duke of Windsor, inspector general of the British armed forces and ex-king, wrote to his friend Adolf Hitler that the weak point of the French defenses was at Sedan (where, coincidentally, the Second British armored division was assigned, but never arrived, conveniently enough, leaving just one French infantry reserve division to block the bulk of the Nazi army). That was high treason. And it served, ultimately, the “American Century”: France and Britain won, but much diminished.

All the high officials of Europe working for conspiratorial plutocratic money manipulators are also traitors, and they serve the same master. Why can’t laws be passed, outlawing such practices before (PM Mario Monti, ECB’s Draghi), or after (Barroso)? Over a lifetime? Or over entire families and acquaintances (immediately after Ted Cruz was elected Senator, Goldman Sachs, which had secretly financed his campaign, made Cruz’s souse into a Goldman Sachs director…).

This is not just an American problem. After all the Russians hired ex-Chancellor Schroeder of Germany to head, nominally, a giant gas pipe line, in an affectionate mark of appreciation to be meditated upon by present and future “leaders”. The bottom line, on this planet, is that too much power is put into too few hands. This is how World War One was launched: five persons, conspiring together, four generals and the grandson of Queen Victoria, decided to launch a world war, within 18 months. (They overruled the two aghast admirals, including Admiral Tirpitz, who knew the Kriegsmarine could not win over the Royal Navy, and thus were against war; the other admiral wrote the secret report, found, more than half a century later, hidden in an attic.)

Some people want to stop hurting animals. Nice. A new ethics is necessary for doing so. More urgently, a new ethics is needed in politics: the simple moral fact that too much power in too few hands is as immoral as it gets. After all, too much power in too few hands was the principal idea of Nazism (the “Fuerer Prinzip“).  And it is also the principal idea of… Islam (which Hitler copied to the point of parody).

A planet whose leaders are the puppets of tyrannical greedsters cannot end well. Greed, cupidity, avarice, the will to dominate others, do not correspond to mental modes of operations, and their attending neurohormones, that we can afford, when the entire biosphere is tottering on the verge of the most massive extinction. Ever.

Why? Because such neurohormonal regimes amplifying the basest instincts, do not correspond to the highest possible states of intelligence. Politicians and financiers, are, fundamentally, of the lower sort (as Jesus and Muhammad themselves convened!)

Patrice Ayme’

Greed X

July 7, 2015

GREAT GREED FROM SPACE TO SCHOOLS IS EXPLODING IN OUR FACES FOR ALL TO SEE. Mr. Musk May Smell Good To Some, But His Corrupt Bucks Can’t Change Physics.

The creed, nowadays, is that greed is good. The screed of greed gave us Greece all over, the lemmings just don’t know it, they are too busy swimming.

Tomorrow, I will try to explain a simple observation on the European debt crisis an esteemed commenter and economist on this site, Partha from India, just made. It’s related directly to the essay below, which is about how superstitious people such as Mr. Obama (“Bless America”) believe all the creed one needs is from greed. Meh (as Paul Krugman would write, and cows have it.) Here she blows:

Greed Creed Scream : Space X Delusion Explodes

Greed Creed Scream : Space X Delusion Explodes

After thirty years of ever more blossoming greed creed, one was ready to extend it to NASA: just let billionaires replace NASA, their greed is greater, that would be better. It’s not just that greed is good: greed is better, say the crocodiles, and they chew. $33,400 to squeeze their palms, and don’t you be eaten, ha ha ha.

(The same philosophy was extended to education, and the president of the USA was seen cavorting with Melinda Gates: hey, when he graduates, maybe she has money for him!)

Some believe 70 virgins are waiting for them, if they just explode a little girl in a busy market place (a technique used by “Boko Haram” (“Book Forbidden”)). In the USA, superstitious politicians believe that 70 billionaires are waiting for them, if they just organize the public powers for them (see banksters’ greed in Greece, where corrupt politicians, some of them outright billionaires, like PM Papandreou, the Pelosi-Feinstein of Greece, just worse, harnessed the state to serve plutocracy). So Obama finished all his discourses by blessing the USA, as if he were the Pope.

And took real public money to finance billionaires. Same story as Greece. Exactly.

Space X has been heavily subsidized by NASA, under orders of the government of the USA, to the tune of billions of dollars. The president has posed with Elon Musk (both of them are so photogenic together, tall and slim). Never mind that Musk is not a rocket scientist: he plays one on TV, just as Obama plays religious figure on TV (“God Bless Amerika!).

Greed creed flows from the idea that if a few individuals can get very rich doing something, they will do it better, smarter, and, most importantly fairer, because money is just, and its servants, holly.

This is a delusion: the success of start-ups, in the USA, has primordially to do with the size of the market in the USA (the USA youth market is about four times that of France, which is the largest in Europe).

When Obama became president, Mr. Musk, after several rocket failures, was broke. Nothing that Obama, who, as president travelled dozens of times to California for private money, could not fix. Mr. Musk does not just have friends, he has an extensive family in charge of other businesses.

In 2015, Musk’s personal fortune reached 12 billion dollars. Mr. Musk creates companies which leverage massively massive government subsidies (electric cars, solar panels). As usual, companies interfacing with the government (Google, Facebook, etc.) are most happy. It is not just Lockheed-Martin and Boeing.

The head of NASA does not make 12 billion dollars in six years, as Mr. Musk did. How can Space X, which pays fortunes in the billions of dollars to its stakeholders be cheaper to operate than one where no corruption is involved. Ah, yes, because when a few guys get paid zillions, it’s corruption.

The idea that greed can overwhelm the laws of physics seems to come from the general creed that greed can overwhelm anything, and is of best counsel. That is assuredly not a scientific idea. It’s a well-known anti-scientific idea. But it’s back, and Space X is the proof.

Euclid replied to King Ptolemy’s request for an easier way of learning mathematics that “there is no Royal Road to geometry.” (According to lawyer-philosopher Proclus, writing more than seven centuries later.)

Rockets are very flimsily built controlled explosions, aimed precisely. To insure that this dangerous contraptions work nevertheless, one cannot spare expenses, and overlook any detail.

The principle of making a cheaper commercial space vehicle is the exact opposite: it is all about overlooking expensive details, cutting corners, obsessing about money, rather than exquisite technology.

The large, and not cheaply built Ariane 5, has made 78 successful commercial launches (although one was sub-optimal for one of the two satellites). Only one Ariane 5 launching two French communications satellites failed (vol14/ of Ariane 5, 157th of the overall Ariane project).

That was the first launch of the new, heavier version of Ariane, with a new giant main hydrogen engine, Vulcain 2.

The reason of that failure is instructive: the main giant hydrogen engine had a partial breach of the cryogenic small tubing which cools the engine with liquid hydrogen at minus 250 Celsius. The inside of the sophisticated Vulcain engine is at 3,000 degree Celsius (more than half the temperature of the surface of the sun). The failure happened at 96 seconds, the rocket became progressively harder to control over the next few minutes, and was destroyed by ground control at 450 seconds.

A thorough analysis made sure that the metallurgy got understood better, before the next launch, which was the Rosetta spacecraft. The next 65 launches worked. Thanks to not trying to cut corners.

The tubing concerned in Vulcain 1 was only .4 millimeter thick. For citizens of the USA that means one sixth of one tenth of an inch. Space X does not have any technology that sophisticated. Space X basically uses the technology invented by the Nazis, 75 years ago (time flies, but Space X does not). Ariane engineers are better, because rocket science is all they do, their lives are dedicated to do their job well. Their creed is not greed, but engineering.

How many different heavy launchers does the West need? The USA has around six launchers right now, either in existence or development. Still, it cannot launch any American in space (Ariane 5 could launch the largest USA command module under development, right away). Russia has launched around 2,000 Soyuz rockets (a much smaller vehicle than Ariane 5). Soyuz is a workhorse. It gets economies of scale, and is presently the only way for the USA to get to space.

Yes, Ariane 5, the safest vehicle around is human rated, and the USA could have bought Ariane rockets (NASA’s hyper expensive James Webb telescope is to be launched by Ariane 5). However collaborating with second rate Russia is safe, whereas depending upon the French superpower is just plain scary: it could prove that the French Socialist system has abilities beyond wine and cheese.

The (large) Space Launch System NASA works on makes sense, because it has unique capabilities. (It’s actually a modernization of Saturn V, using some Space Shuttle motors.)

But nobody needs Space X. And the mentality that just because it’s private, and operated by billionaires, it’s better, does not make sense when said private industry is actually heavily subsidized. Besides, whatever the rather lightly educated Mr. Musk may think, cheaper  physics does not exist. There is no billionaire’s road to physics.

There is no billionaire road to wisdom either. Quite the opposite: being a billionaire assuredly proves that one is not wise. Our greedy politicians and revolving door civil servants believe differently, naturally. Otherwise, they won’t be so greedy.

Oh, and my advice to the Congress of the USA? Forget about Space X, cut all its subsidies. Concentrate on NASA’s Space Launch System, and don’t hesitate to use Ariane 5: a bit of cooperation is not just friendly, it’s good economics.

Patrice Ayme’

Bad Government Economics: The Case Of Hydrogen

November 27, 2014

To foster renewables, the Hydrogen economy needs to be developed. How Government Ought NOT to Act Economically

I am often mean to Obama, all the more as I know that, after all, he is just the president. So he presides over a whole system of oligarchies. Best economic advice? For the “Democratic” establishment, it meant Larry Summers, Bob Rubin, Bill Clinton, Greenspan, etc. Who was he to contradict Summers or Krugman? Those two were within the White House nearly 30 years before Obama got there. They both, and all other very serious economists, told Obama he had to save the banks, no strings attached.

In the matter of energy and science policy, Obama made apparently the best choice: Chu, a Physics Nobel Prize winner who was also the successful manager of the giant Lawrence Berkeley Research Laboratory.

But getting a Nobel in something does not mean one has the best ideas, especially in other fields. It can make one arrogant, stubborn, over-confident in one’s brains.

In the end, the government of the USA intervened erroneous, moving away from fundamental research (both in science and the foundations of technology).

Dr. Chu cancelled all research in fuel cells, while instead diverting money towards… start-ups. He may as well have financed hamburger stands. In particular, Chu decided to finance electric cars. This means, in practice cars made by Elon Musk, an expert on how to get government support.

A French electric car held the world’s speed record, and was first to reach 100km/h. That was in… 1900. So electric cars are not exactly new. Batteries are better than 115 years ago. But still, not good enough.

Battery technology will require a breakthrough: this is why it has been so difficult to make buses, or trucks, using electric batteries. The battery packs tend to be too heavy, the range too limited, the time to refuel, too great.

A number of Asian companies, including Toyota, are leasing Fuel Cell Cars. They work by transforming hydrogen into electricity. The city of Berkeley has been using, for years, Fuel Cells buses. They proudly carry the mention that their waste is pristine water.

Elon Musk called Fuel cell cars, “fool” cars. At best, he does not know how to spell. At worst, he knows no physics (and that’s the case). Fuel cells have enormous efficiency. Musk’s “electric” cars, actually run on COAL electricity for 50% (as the whole USA does). I know Musk talks about the sun to recharge his cars, but that’s not the case. The solar case would have to go through hydrogen!

But of course, this is not about physics, but politics. Musk got billions from the Federal Government, from NASA.

So the fools are those who believe the crafty politician, Elon Musk… without seeing what’s behind.

OK, electric vehicles have their uses, for short commutes. They are great against local pollution. But let’s not run out of lithium? OK? As it is, the Tesla Model S, which gets a $10,000 subsidy per vehicle, is perfect for Californian plutocrats who want to have priority on the roads, while enjoying the money they get from taxpayers for driving in style.

The main problem with renewable energies, right now, is that there is no way to store it efficiently (aside from dams). Cracking water to make hydrogen would be an obvious way. (Another obvious way to store the electricity from  photovoltaics is to evaporate seawater, condensate and store the resulting water. Most cities with access to the sea and a water problem could use that method.)

Liquid Hydrogen has about THREE times the energy of gasoline per mass. As existing fuel cells have twice the efficiency of the hypothetical maximum of a thermal engine (where electric vehicles get their electricity from), one sees that a fuel cell cars, far from being foolish, if the hydrogen were from renewables, would be at least six times more efficient than electric vehicles.

Under Obama, Secretary Chu, in an apparent act of corruption, quit all fundamental research of fuel cells, and diverted money to his friends [1]. But fuel cells allowed Americans to land on the Moon. Now Chu is sitting pretty in Stanford, complete with start-up money, a few miles from Tesla.

Chu in his own words:

A Hydrogen Economy is necessary. See:

This Chu misadventure shows the superiority of Direct Democracy: had Chu’s policies be widely debated over the Internet, and had Obama got a digest of the conclusions, it is highly unlikely that he (and scientifically ignorant, dubiously enriched very wealthy California Senator Feinstein, etc.) would have decided to go along with Chu’s craziness.

Recently Paul Krugman, still uninformed in that respect, was lauding Chu’s policies in the New York Times, and how much money they made (this is not just false, but it shows further misunderstanding of the role of government… Which is not to compete with for-profit companies).

The truth is that, the fundamental research breakthroughs are not coming up at the rate they would be, if the opposite of what Chu did had been, instead, implemented (that is massive more fundamental research).

It’s not just a question of the advancement of civilization, but of national defense.

Hydrogen liquefied or compressed, or chemically transformed in a more amenable fluid form, and then used as storage from energy of photovoltaics and wind, is the best way to make sense of renewables.
…That’s why it was not developed, as our Great Leaders are sold to big oil and its banks.

Patrice Ayme’

[November 2014…]



[1] What else than corruption? Assuredly, Chu is not that dumb. Assuredly, he knew the US made it to the Moon thanks to hydrogen fuel cells making electricity (hence the explosion of Apollo 13…)… because fuel cells are highly efficient, etc.