Posts Tagged ‘Mafia’

Britain’s Mafia State

September 16, 2015

It’s good to see a famous journalist confirm what I have been saying for many years: the West is turning into an organized crime state of affairs. The world’s greatest Mafia, ever.

In Britain’s Mafia State, George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 9th September 2015, ponders:

Where does legitimate business end and organised crime begin?

Be reasonable in response to the unreasonable… Accommodate, moderate, triangulate, for the alternative is to isolate yourself from reality. You might be inclined to agree. If so, please take a look at the reality to which you must submit.”

Accommodate, moderate, triangulate, and especially “NAVIGATE” (the word he explicitly uses) is the essence of Barack Obama’s philosophy of life (at least so he claims in his memoirs). Too much navigation by those hungry to lord over others is toxic to civilization, though. By the 1930s, throughout the West, the notion of “plutocracy” was familiar, and in wide use. This is how President Roosevelt was able to change the USA for the best.

From Germany to the USA’s Wild West, All Knew Who Plutocrats Were, In The 1930s

From Germany to the USA’s Wild West, All Knew Who Plutocrats Were, In The 1930s

This does not just go all the way back to Reagan, an ex-democrat who learned to thrive under McCarthyism and his consequences: become a secret FBI informant, big on “Unamerican” activities. Thanks to his Dark Side, Reagan ended up as president. So did Nixon, Clinton, the Bushes… Collaboration with infamy (Crusades, Nazism, Stalinism, etc.) always starts as navigation (even Saint Bernard, who made a show of destitution, was actually from a plutocratic family, thus Saint Bernard’s Dark Side started well before he became the real pope, and main force behind the Second Crusade… And the cause of the death of millions)..

Here is Monbiot describing Britain:

“It’s not just that the very rich no longer fall while the very poor no longer rise. It’s that the system itself is protected from risk. Through bail-outs, quantitative easing and delays in interest rate rises, speculative investment has been so well cushioned that, as Larry Elliott puts it, financial markets are “one of the last bastions of socialism left on earth.””

It is nice to see a mainstream, left wingish journalist

Public services, infrastructure, the very fabric of the nation: these too are being converted into risk-free investments. Social cleansing is transforming inner London into an exclusive economic zone for property speculation. From a dozen directions, government policy converges on this objective. The benefits cap and the bedroom tax drive the poor out of their homes. The forced sale of high-value council houses creates a new asset pool. An uncapped and scarcely regulated private rental market turns these assets into gold. The freeze on council tax banding since 1991, the lifting of the inheritance tax threshold and £14 billion a year in breaks for private landlords all help to guarantee stupendous returns….Agricultural land has proved an even better punt for City money: with the help of capital gains, inheritance and income tax exemptions, as well as farm subsidies, its price has quadrupled in 12 years.

But it gets better than that. As related here for many years, and confirmed even by the New York Times in the case of New York, both the USA and the UK are the top organized crimes destinations of the world. Organized crime money gets a refugee status in these two countries (France and Switzerland are bit player and has been, respectively). Says Mr. Monbiot:

“Property in this country is a haven for the proceeds of international crime. The head of the National Crime Agency, Donald Toon, notes that “the London property market has been skewed by laundered money. Prices are being artificially driven up by overseas criminals who want to sequester their assets here in the UK.””

Why? Because in Great Britain, organized crime is well received and well protected. The monarchy is its very symbol.

Not only is this a system, but it is a very old system. Now, it’s just becoming the only system, and, flush with hubris, it’s running amok. Monbiot:

“It’s hardly surprising, given the degree of oversight. Private Eye has produced a map of British land owned by companies registered in offshore tax havens. The holdings amount to 1.2 million acres, including much of our prime real estate. Among those it names as beneficiaries are a cast of Russian oligarchs, oil sheikhs, British aristocrats and newspaper proprietors. These are the people for whom government policy works, and the less regulated the system that enriches them, the happier they are.

The speculative property market is just one current in the great flow of cash that sluices through Britain while scarcely touching the sides. The financial sector exploits an astonishing political privilege: the City of London is the only jurisdiction in the UK not fully subject to the authority of parliament.”

The status of the City of London is actually astounding: very officially, it is a plutocracy. Monbiot:

“In fact, the relationship seems to work the other way. Behind the Speaker’s chair in the House of Commons sits the Remembrancer, whose job is to ensure that the interests of the City of London are recognised by the elected members. (A campaign to rescind this privilege – Don’t Forget the Remembrancer – will be launched very soon). The City has one foot in the water: it is a semi-offshore state, a bit like the UK’s Crown dependencies and overseas territories, tax havens legitimised by the Privy Council. Britain’s financial secrecy undermines the tax base while providing a conduit into the legal economy for gangsters, kleptocrats and drug barons.”

What is happening is that the UK is now parroting what the USA long did. Monbiot again:

“Even the more orthodox financial institutions deploy a long succession of scandalous practices: pension mis-selling, endowment mortgage fraud, the payment protection insurance con, Libor rigging. A former minister in the last government, Lord Green, ran HSBC while it engaged in money laundering for drugs gangs, systematic tax evasion and the provision of services to Saudi and Bangladeshi banks linked to the financing of terrorists. Sometimes the UK looks to me like an ever-so-civilised mafia state.

At next month’s Conservative party conference, corporate executives will pay £2,500 to sit with a minister.”

Well, in the USA, during the reign of Barack Obama, one can pay $37,500 to be in the presence of the president. That makes Obama’s presence roughly ten times more valuable than a minister of Cameron. I have yet to come across an opinion maker in the USA which finds this habit of Obama regrettable, and a sort of selling of democracy to the immensely wealthy. Monbiot tries sarcasm:

“Doubtless, because we are assured that there is no link between funding and policy, they will spend the day discussing the weather and the films they have seen. If we noticed such arrangements overseas, we might be inclined to regard them as corruption. But that can’t be the case here, not least because the invitation explains that “fees associated with business day & dinner are considered a commercial transaction and therefore do not constitute a political donation.”

“The government also insists that there is no link between political donations and seats in the House of Lords. But a study by researchers at Oxford University found that the probability of so many major donors arriving there by chance is 1.36 x 10^38: [ a ten followed by 38 zeroes: one chance out of one hundred trillion trillion trillion] roughly “equivalent to entering the National Lottery and winning the jackpot 5 times in a row”. Why does the Lords remain unreformed? Because it permits plutocratic power to override democracy. Both rich and poor are kept in their place.

Most members of Cameron’s government are very wealthy. Cameron himself is a plutocrat with inherited wealth. Such a government is busy re-engineering society to make it a haven for plutocrats. Such a metamorphosis happened before, say when Directly Democratic Athens was turned into a plutocracy, thanks to Aristotle and his Macedonian goons, or when Republican Rome turned into Plutocratic Rome, or the more or less egalitarian politics of the Franks turned into the Feudal Order. Says Monbiot:

“Governed either by or on behalf of the people who fleece us, we cannot be surprised to discover that all public services are being re-engineered for the benefit of private capital. Nor should we be surprised when governments help to negotiate, without public consent, treaties such as TTIP and CETA (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement), which undermine the sovereignty of both parliament and the law. Aesop’s observation that “we hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office” remains true in spirit, though hanging has been replaced by community payback.

Wherever you sniff in British public life, something stinks: I could fill this newspaper with examples. But, while every pore oozes corruption, our task, we are told, is merely to trim the nails of the body politic.

To fail to confront this system is to collaborate with it. Who on the left would wish to stand on the sidelines as this carve-up continues? Who would vote for anything but sweeping change?”

Much of the preceding is known. Even in Great Britain. Still, nothing is done. And plutocracy keeps on metastasizing throughout the political establishment. Why? Because the mood has not revolved back to dignity enough to push us to action. The exactions of the super-rich, from their very existence, have not become glaring enough, in a way that is revolting enough.

Is it reasonable to be reasonable in face of the unreasonable? Sure.

But the reasonable way to answer the unreasonable is with what the unreasonable will call unreasonable, if it is directed to their unreason.

When things go too far, revolution is not just the most reasonable solution, but the most economical one.

That time has come. Let’s not wait until it’s gone. Plutocrats want us to learn to live with inherited princes and princesses. Let it be known we are not five years old, yet.

Patrice Ayme’

High Finance Mafia’s Ultimatum to Greece

February 17, 2015

Moods rule the world. When the mood was tolerant upon making fortunes from overseas slavery, fortunes were made in Europe and the USA.

George Washington inherited ten slaves at the age of ten, when his dad passed away. When he died he and his wife had hundreds of slaves. Washington spent a last few weeks of his life making great efforts to catch a slave of his wife, the 22 year old Ms. Judge, who had escaped to the north. Washington never freed one slave, in spite of the huge pressure from his friend Lafayette.

Lafayette to whom, after all, Washington owed his presidency: Lafayette persuaded Louis XVI to go to all-out war to create the USA; on the way, he disobeyed the King’s orders, and the monarch sent him to prison.

Enough Games With High Finance, Time For War

Enough Games With High Finance, Time For War

At Thermopylae, 300 Spartans blocked an army of several hundred thousand savage slaves of plutocracy for days, before being literally stabbed in the back. However, the Spartan delaying action allowed the Athenians to evacuate Athens and prepare for the battle of Salamis, where the giant Persian fleet (composed in great part of captive nations), was sent to the bottom of the sea.

That was in 480 BCE. A time when the Greek invented, and defended a new civilization, Direct Democracy. That time is with us again. The despicable suspects of the Eurogroup are the new savages. They have to be fought, and for that, the mood has to change. Enough tolerance for High Finance.

Lafayette was a mood changer. Later, given the order to fire on We The People, as commander of the National Guard, he refused, and made the Revolution of 1789 possible.

Slavery was a mood. A satanic mood.

What are today’s satanic moods?

Moods depend upon moods. Putin’s mood depends upon the fact he has seen Western plutocrats getting away with murder and ridiculous assertions.

The mood, in the world, is that those who create, and get to play with, money, rule the universe.

Unbelievably, the “Eurogroup” (all the finance ministers of the governments of the Eurozone) sent Greece an ultimatum.

“The Greek authorities committed to ensure appropriate primary fiscal surpluses and financing in order to guarantee debt sustainability in line with the targets agreed in the November 2012 Eurogroup statement. Moreover, any new measures should be funded, and not endanger financial stability.”

As Paul Krugman puts it: “Translation (if you look back at that Eurogroup statement): no give whatsoever on the primary surplus of 4.5 percent of GDP.

There was absolutely no way Tsipras and company could sign on to such a statement, which makes you wonder what the Eurogroup ministers think they’re doing.”

Krugman is right on that one.

What the Eurogroup ministers are thinking is that, if they want their careers and retirements to advance nicely, they better abide by the mood of High Finance.

Varoufakis replied with: ”No Time For Games In Europe.”

He starts this way: “ATHENS — I am writing this piece on the margins of a crucial negotiation with my country’s creditors — a negotiation the result of which may mark a generation, and even prove a turning point for Europe’s unfolding experiment with monetary union.

Game theorists analyze negotiations as if they were split-a-pie games involving selfish players. Because I spent many years during my previous life as an academic researching game theory, some commentators rushed to presume that as Greece’s new finance minister I was busily devising bluffs, stratagems and outside options, struggling to improve upon a weak hand.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

If anything, my game-theory background convinced me that it would be pure folly to think of the current deliberations between Greece and our partners as a bargaining game to be won or lost via bluffs and tactical subterfuge.

The trouble with game theory, as I used to tell my students, is that it takes for granted the players’ motives. In poker or blackjack this assumption is unproblematic. But in the current deliberations between our European partners and Greece’s new government, the whole point is to forge new motives. To fashion a fresh mind-set that transcends national divides, dissolves the creditor-debtor distinction in favor of a pan-European perspective, and places the common European good above petty politics, dogma that proves toxic if universalized, and an us-versus-them mind-set.”

I sent this letter to Varoufakis (the New York Times published an abridge version):

Dear Mr. Varoufakis, Finance Minister of Greece. Civilization is not a game, indeed. Game theory assumes selfish players (as you, an academic with a career in Game Theory says). Civilization is not about selfish players exclusively. High Finance is, though.

Civilization is just the amplification of human nature as it is meant to be, at its best, inside a tribe. However the peaceful life of a tribe depends upon the fundament of humanity, and that is love.

Without love, no human baby would ever survive more than a few days. We are born out of love. So is civilization. Sustainable civilization, that is.

In the past century, Germany had a pattern of atrocities that rested on the meta-principle of obeying orders from authority, no matter what.

That is in Kant, as Eichmann pointed out for his “defense”. Anything else was “Schuld” (debt, fault).

So Germany had a pattern of finding “right” only what fit its leadership. So far the banking crisis in Europe has brought Germany 40 billion Euros in profits it would not otherwise have made (as investors flocked to German sovereign debt). Something similar has happened with France (making lots of money from the crisis).

What authorities are German authorities now evoking, to act as robots anxious to keep Greece as a “debt colony”?

Obviously those who escaped after extending the loans that could not be repaid, private bankers from such nations as Britain, France and Germany.

The world is still under the order of High Finance. For High Finance, Greece is an example that needs to be made. For those who want to break High Finance, the new Greek government shows the way.

Because “right” has to be defined according to the Greek people, not a world of High Finance, which has long gone completely mad.

To check for madness, see the $800 trillions of financial “derivatives”, more than ten times world GDP. Contemplate also France, which has four banks that, should any of them fail, would bring down the world financial system.

You suggest to target “large-scale corruption” instead of the Greek middle-class with its privately owned pharmacies. However, the largest-scale corruption in this world is High Finance itself, the authorities German authorities abide to.

Greece saw worse, at Thermopylae and Salamis. Sometimes, it is right to fight, just because it’s right, no matter what.

If one is to die, one better die, standing up in defense of the right principles.

Patrice Ayme’


Who Wanted Kennedy Dead?

November 22, 2013

For 50 years, many theories have come up about Kennedy’s termination. It may be good to recapitulate what’s certain.

First it’s certain that we are strangely uncertain. The president of the USA is assassinated, and we don’t know for sure why, or even how. History helps. In 98 years, three presidents of the USA were assassinated. For the first two, Lincoln and McKinley, we know exactly whom, how and why. Not so with JFK.

To get a perspective, look at a much older country. In 15 centuries of continuous governance, France had two leaders executed. One was a long reigning Frankish queen, Brunhilda, at the end of a long civil war; the second one was ex-Prime Minister Laval, for collaborating with Hitler too enthusiastically.

France also had two kings assassinated. Yes, in 15 centuries. Two. For basically the same reason. One after the other. The great Henri III, and his hand-picked successor, the just as great Henri IV.

The cause? Overall, the cause was the religious wars of the Sixteenth Century, seven of them in quick succession, involving the fanatical Catholic League, financed by Catholic fascists in Spain (themselves of Bourgogne origin)… and sometimes nearly as fanatical Hugenots.

We know exactly who killed the kings. Extreme attention was given to find out whether there had been conspiracies behind the hands of the killers. Enough was found to reveal that both killers fed on the atmosphere created by a number of Catholic grandees. No direct links sufficient enough to convict was found, but enough to steer the mood in France, for centuries to come. Making both leaders, and the people, very suspicious, and then pro-active, against religious fanaticism. There is a direct logical chain between Henri IV’s death, in 1610, and the expropriation of the Catholic church, in 1905.

Both assassinations were no surprise. There had been at least 17 attempts against Henri IV. Clearly his bodyguard was incredibly at fault for allowing Ravaillac to come close.

In the case of Kennedy, there was just one attempt (compare with the many attempts by the CIA to kill Castro). And it was just perfect. Supposedly three shots by one man, in six seconds, with an old bolt action rifle, two of them lethal. Captured after killing a police officer, Ostwald was asked if he killed the president. His first words were:“It’s for you to figure out.”


Jack Ruby knew everybody at the police station, and everybody knew him, a French journalist found out (he talked to Ruby before the assassination, and was interviewed by the Warren Commission!)

The verdict, in the case of Henri III and Henri IV, was that the fanatical mood of the worst Catholics drove the will to kill. Both the fanatical Dominican friar, Jacques Clément, and Ravaillac evolved in an atmosphere of extreme zealotry fed by their entourages.

The (very educated, but Catholic fundamentalist) family of Ravaillac was actually condemned very severely, as it was viewed responsible for having fostered a mood of religious hatred. Catherine Henriette de Balzac d’Entragues, Marquise de Verneuil, who had two children with Henri IV, was revealed as having been involved in at least one conspiracy against the king. She was exiled forever. Her motive? Henri had married Marie de Medici, a banker.

In any case French authorities, in 1610 CE, recognized that a mood could be culprit.

Was there such a similar killing mood involved in JFK’s death?

Of course. An obvious set of suspects offers itself.

Who would have wanted Kennedy dead? The same mood and galaxy of conspirators that has been involved in the Plot Against France.

John Kennedy had refused to support the Bay of Pigs Invasion (revealing called Operation Pluto) with regular troops. Instead, he compromised the CIA, the Mafia, and more than 100 Cuban plutocrats (many of whom Castro gleefully executed).

Who headed the CIA? Allen Dulles, the brother of Eisenhower’s Secretary of State Dulles, the man who told Ike what had been done on his behalf.

The Dulles Brothers represented up to 800 Nazi firms before the Second World War, and kept on managing Nazis after the war (the one who created the CIA was head of the OSS bureau in Berlin in charge of de-Nazification, immediately after the war). When Kennedy started his crack-down on the CIA and the Mafia, the Dulles were not amused.

Don’t forget that, at the time, the 100 top engineers of NASA were Nazis. And not small Nazis. Big, large, genuinely ultimately vicious Nazis. Look at the esteemed Werner Von Braun: a full SS commander, who was not just decorated by his friend Hitler, but managed some of the most deadly death camps (slaves built the “Vengeance Weapons” underground, in the worst conditions).

(By the way, irony of history, that Von Braun’s space program was excellent for the Allies: Albert Speer (top Nazi in charge of industry) estimated that the V2 program cost as much as the construction of 24,000 fighter planes… and had little to show for it, except for exasperated democracies determined on, well, vengeance.)

The Dulles brothers themselves came into that line of business as lawyers employed by their masters, top American financiers. The very financiers, instigators, and incubators of Nazism itself.

John Kennedy knew the music. His father, having pulled out of the market before the 1929 crash, lent money to the Mafia during the Prohibition. The Senior Kennedy, nominated by FDR, ambassador to Great Britain, had to be recalled after he declared, on the record, that “democracy was finished” in Britain and the USA (and had to be replaced by a Nazi-like system).

Why did the Senior Kennedy declare this? He misjudged the new mood. Until 1936, the Nazis were engaged in a quiet coup in Britain, involving the king. A proof? The 1935 Nazi-Britain treaty deliberately violating the Versailles Treaty (and especially its secret informal protocols, or why the Nazis attacked Poland).

After that disaster, the French had to work hard to get the British leadership to regain its senses (something that went on between 1936 and 1939; the first move of the British anti-Nazis was to kick the king out; that was facilitated because his future American wife was known to be spying for… Hitler)

Similarly, Kennedy’s son misjudged the mood of the upper crust of American society, and, especially, that of its racist, violent, greedy, ruthless, darker underbelly. JFK had deeply annoyed a lot of mighty, ruthless organizations by 1963. JFK also knew there were bodies buried, why, and where (at least figuratively speaking).

Kennedy expected to be assassinated. He spoke of this to his wife everyday. So it is likely that he knew he had crossed the thin red line to messianism.  JFK, and his Jesus Christ attitude was a Damocles Sword over the plutocratic establishment. After calling businessmen “son of bitches”, what was JFK going to do next? Rant against Foundations?

For the nastiest plutocrats, it’s much better to have clueless presidents, such as Reagan, Clinton, or Obama.

50 years later, the same nastiness is firmly in control. It promises to keep the USA in Afghanistan another ten years. It has dismantled FDR’s Banking Act of 1933. It has instituted a new health system same as the old one, that promises to increase further the profits of health plutocrats in the USA. it has launched the USA on an energy policy of fracking its way into bankruptcy, same as the “subprime” mess, just bigger.

Don’t ask who killed the Kennedys. Ask instead: who could have profited from it?

Patrice Ayme


February 24, 2009

Abstract: The grip of the plutocracy on the USA is astounding. Right now the economy is collapsing mostly because the Plutocracy has been punishing the People by putting the credit system in deep freeze.  The Plutocracy, this Mafia second to none, has every reason to be angry: as 10% of the People is paying mortgage reluctantly, if at all, the super giant pyramid of derivatives that made the Plutocracy so rich has collapsed. Ever since the Plutocracy has endeavored to make the People pay. The Plutocracy controls the bank holding companies, which control the banks. To appease its friendly Plutocracy, the government and its Geithner have been sending the People’s money directly to the Plutocracy. (The New York Times even revealed that the Obama administration had a plan to guarantee hedge funds returns of 20%, if they consented to invest in their little scheme).

Obviously, the government knows something we don’t, so, as a precautionary measure, since the original US Constitution had the word “people” capitalized, giving us “We The People“, I should capitalize Plutocracy too. We The Plutocracy? It goes without saying that European countries, those socialist paradises, blinded by their own Peoples, have not been exhibiting the proper respect for the hyper rich. Thus Great Britain has already nationalized 100% several big banks (nearly a year and half ago for “Northern Rock”). Yet, Great Britain’s Plutocracy, this Mafia second to none, holds the British People into a trance symbolized by the “rule of one” (“monarchy”).

Frankly, this is painful, and it is with a heavy heart that one has to look at the truth. But what else is there to look at, when the going gets tough? Sometimes in history things do not turn out as expected. They turn into their opposite.

As the Great Depression gripped Germany, millions of honest to goodness, socialist minded Germans, revolted by “plutocrats”, voted for Adolf Hitler, thinking he would bring change for the best (as the Nazis were protesting plutocracy… while secretly bankrolled by said plutocrats!).

Average German voters had no idea that Hitler, far from being a socialist devoted to the Volk, was a pawn of the plutocracy. It was inconceivable to those good Germans that most of the greatest backers of the ultra nationalist Hitler, of this anti-American nationalist, were actually American (!) plutocrats. As Hitler started to reign, those (American!) plutocratic influences guided Hitler’s every step.

Certainly most Germans who voted for Hitler, and they voted many times, would have been amazed, as they cast their votes, at how badly things would turn out. They would have been astounded that the radical change that they had voted for, with the most audacious hope, would bring, in the fullness of time, an immense, incomprehensible disaster for Germany. (More than ten million Germans, 10% of the German population died, among other problems.)

The Obama economic team is confronting a difficult situation. Interestingly, though, in its previous incarnation under the Clinton administration, more than ten years ago, most of that economic team did more than contribute to it: it started the disaster, with fanatical market extremism. Moreover that team has not been taking the right decisions. It is as in a plane crash: too little too late can be as bad as completely wrong in all ways. The stimulus, as a stimulus, was a joke (the real stimulus was no more than 100 billion dollars; not even all the bridges scheduled for collapse are supposed to be fixed! See addendum 2).

Certainly if taxpayers voting on November 4, 2008, for Obama had know that it meant the policy of Transferring Assets to Rich People (“TARP”) would have continued unabated, even as the economy collapsed, they may have paused. As it is democracy does not have enough mechanisms to protect itself. TARP has been extremely unpopular all along. But people have no say in extremely bad decisions. The decisions are taken by 3,000 political “appointees”. Appointed by one or two elected officials.

The government of the USA has to lift the toxic assets from the banks, and remove the liabilities from the banks. Then the banks will be able to function again. As it is, the banks do not function, and credit is completely frozen. As credit is frozen, the entire world economy is suffering hypothermia. Complete freezing is not far away. The continual drop in economic activity is a disaster that mixes all of society in exploding fragments. Just an example: the city of San Francisco (750,000 inhabitants, and relatively few children) just announced that it would fire more than 500 teachers. The city of San Francisco does not have the money to keep their jobs going. It is like that all over.

The situation seems to be this: there are banks, the banks in turn are owned by bank holding companies, which are themselves in turn owned by hedge fund managers, private equity and other elements of the worldwide plutocracy, a Mafia of a size which overwhelms understanding. The Obama people are trying to save the later, the richest of the rich. The view me as a fool, because I think beyond myself. Meanwhile, the world economy needs the banks’ core functions to be restarted. Or there will be a catastrophe, within weeks.

The credit system is frozen because the banks themselves are insolvent, their capital requirements are completely violated, they cannot lend without getting deeper in the hole. Actually, they cannot lend, by law. The rescue of TARP money has been given to the bank holding companies, which transmitted very little of it to the banks themselves. The bank holding companies kept most of the money for themselves, the salaries and bonuses of their plutocratic officers, and organized the usual happy events such as mergers and acquisitions. During these events, money splashes all over to the rich and happy class.

When banks are insolvent, or when banks simply cannot function because they have violated capital requirements, it is very well known what to do. One separates the banks from their bad assets, and give them enough capital to operate. If Bank of America was cleaned of its bad assets, and given 80 billions, it could lend a trillion (this tremendous leverage is the advantage of nationalization, as I pointed out many months ago). Since it would be a profitable business by then, private capital would come in, even from normal people themselves, and the bank could lend even more. In any case, by doing this with the handful of giant banks that need it, the lending crisis would be over. (Two-third of the banking system is owned by ten banks in the USA.)

This is the traditional way to do it. It is traditional to do it even in the USA, where it has been done for thousands of banks before. As Paul Krugman puts it, it is “as American as apple pie”. Bill Seidman’s resolution Trust Corporation did it for 747 banks. Actually apple pie is a dish enjoyed all over the world. This sort of quick solution to the bad assets problem was done all over Scandinavia, and in many other places. One speaks of “nationalization”. But it is a TRANSITION TO LIBERATION of the banks. And these are the words that ought to be used.

So, as Professor Doctor Nobel Krugman wonders, why is this not happening? (New York Times, Feb. 21 2009.) Why is the Obama administration leaving the entire world economy in free fall?

Well, people advising Obama have worked for banks (Emanuel was making more than eight million dollars a year, in a bank, for example). One can assume that they intent to work for hedge funds, private equity, etc., when they come out of the administration. So they want that system to still be out there when they come out. Geithner was the boss of all the banks in New York. So the Obama advisers are desperately trying to please their once and future masters. It’s a mafia at work, as simple as that. They did not reinstate the short sell rule, so that their friends the hedge funds can keep on organizing bear raids as the stock markets collapse. They keep on having their friends the masters of the financial universe be taxed at a maximum rate of 15%. It’s socialism for plutocrats. Let secretaries and teachers pay the high tax brackets!

The Obama economic advisers come up with mumbo-jumbo lip service and weird semantics to hide the plot, conscious or subconscious, to which their nature has fatally led them to. Their plot is that they use the pretext of the banks’ failure to transfer more taxpayer money to their relations, the private equity, the hedge funds, and various overseas investors, all very friendly. So taxpayers send money and the trusted economic advisers send the money to the richest of the rich, and, lo and behold, more has to be sent, because the banks still did not get any.

It does not seem to matter too much to Obama’s “outstanding” advisers what happens to the world economy as they try to contrive a way to send a lot of money to their plutocratic friends and colleagues, past and future. When you stand out, nothing compares.

But the truth is simple: those “geniuses”, the “outstanding” friends of the Obama advisers, contrived the greatest pyramid scheme, the greatest Ponzi scheme of all times, the derivative system, with a peak value of 600 trillion dollars. The world is worth much less than 100 trillion dollars. No taxpayers of the world can fill that hole for the rich. But still the hyper rich try to have taxpayers fill it for them. The hyper rich had it so good for so long, that is all they know.

Let’s notice in passing that some modern and well balanced states, such as France have wealthy capitalists and industrialists, but they do not have as thick a plutocratic layer as the USA. French banks are generally profitable (with profits in the billions for the big ones in 2008). The largest of these banks are as large as large USA banks. The still profitable insurance giant AXA owns the USA’s Equitable, among others, But the CEOs of these French giants are paid 5%, a twentieth, of their USA colleagues.  Thus the American plutocratic situation is not a necessity of a modern economy (the French economy is at least as diversified in high technology as that of the USA, and arguably more).

The world economy is getting so damaged by the refusal of the Obama administration to fix the banks that a bellicose issue is to be feared. Maybe the vested advisors subconsciously feel that a good war in the future would be the best of distractions. It is so abysmal, abysmal explanations are only natural.

The USA needs a new Resolution Trust Corporation, run the banks through it, clean them, and get them out of their zombie states. We are out of time. If still nothing much happens, it may be time for people to push for RICO. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act covers several of the activities that seem in plain sight. People can be convicted under RICO, not for specific acts, but for a pattern of behavior. There are 35 of those. One of them is bankruptcy. Another is securities fraud. Others are obstruction of justice, money laundering, theft, fraud…

The hyper rich in the USA have led the democracy by the nose with their plutocracy. They established for themselves fiscal paradises, places where their money was channeled to escape the IRS. Channeled by the very bank holding companies that have been getting TARP money. Not only is the People getting fleeced, it pays for getting fleeced. What we are facing, what we are contemplating, maybe the world’s largest criminal organization ever, the greatest Mafia, ever . Yes, time for RICO.

Patrice Ayme

Addenda: 1) At the peak the part of the derivative system known as Credit Default Swaps, that Summers, Rubin and Greenspan obstinately refused to regulate, were “worth” 64 trillion dollars. (They are particularly sensitive to the collapse of housing.) The reasoning that Rubin and Summers were following was that if derivatives were regulated in the USA, they would go somewhere else. Those guys know some financial words, but they clearly do not know geography. The other great economic power in the world is the European Union, and the EU is cracking down on the plutocracy and fiscal evasion. If the USA and the EU agree, everybody else with (except in outrageous cases like the 300 billion dollars of USA-EU agricultural subsidies). So the truth is very different: derivatives made USA plutocrats hyper rich. No other country was crazy enough to develop derivatives to that extent.
Anyway, back in 1998, according to Newsweek, proceeded to “dress down, loudly and rudely” the chairwoman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (because she wanted regulations). Literally an old boys network.

2) The stimulus comprises many expenses that are not so, like the AMT (70 billion, always budgeted, and not a stimulus anyway), and huge payments to states to compensate in part for collapsing state budgets.  There is eight billion dollars for high speed rail, enough for 100 miles of one high speed line in a flat plain. For the entire USA. That was added at the last second, to look good.