From greedflation to stagflation and then slumpflation

“Star liberal leftist economic historian, Adam Tooze was equally affronted by Wolf’s orthodox position. “The angst now is about inflation persistence. Getting it back down to 2 per cent is the battle-cry. As it was half a century ago, this is a profoundly conservative political argument dressed in the garb of economic necessity. So this is where we have arrived in 2023: to bring inflation back to 2 per cent while preserving the banks, common sense insists that we need higher interest rates for longer, plus austerity. And, at this point, you have to ask whether western elites have learnt anything from the last decade and a half.” The call for austerity was “the old neoliberal logic of “there is no alternative”. Tooze argued that “in pursuit of lower inflation, monetary austerity risks the same fate. It is time to steer the stampeding herd away from the cliff edge, for the sake of the financial security of millions of people and the credibility of our policy institutions.”

michael roberts's avatarMichael Roberts Blog

Global economic growth is slowing.  There is a global manufacturing recession already in place: the latest surveys of economic activity in the major economies show that there is an outright contraction in manufacturing in all the major economies – and it is getting worse.

US ISM manufacturing index (score below 50 means contraction)

But inflation of prices outside of food and energy, the so-called core inflation rate, is not falling in the major economies.

Central bank chiefs continue to shout the mantra that interest rates must rise to reduce ‘excessive demand’ in order to get demand back in line with supply and so reduce inflation. But the risk is that ‘excessive’ interest rate hikes will accelerate economies into a slump before that happens and also engender a banking and financial crisis as indebted companies go bust and weak banks suffer runs on their deposits.

The stock markets of the world…

View original post 2,515 more words

Ukrajina: Prigožinov puč ali kriminalka v enem dejanju

Marko Golob

V glavni vlogi : Jevgenij Prigožin,

Stranska vloga: Aleksander Lukašenko ala “Luka”

Statisti: pripadniki PMC Wagner

Režiser in glavni soigralec: Vladimir Putin

__________

Pred dnevi sem na Telegramu (Slavyangrad, Intel Slava Z) zasledil naslednjo novico (v prostem prevodu):

“Viri v stiku z “Wagnerjem, so nakazali, da je glavni del privatne vojne koropracije lociran na teritoriju 465 raketne brigade operativno taktičnih raket vojske Belorusije v Mogilevski regiji”.

Vam to kaj pove? Saj vsi vemo, da se je Wagner “umaknil” v Belorusijo. “So what”, bi rekel naš bivši predsednik Borut Pahor! No, ni čisto tako.

Wagner je stacioniran na območju enot, ki upravljajo z ruskimi Iskanderji “state of the art” kvazibalističnimi raketami z dometom do 500 km (Zahod sumi, da bistveno več), ki jih je Rusija v zadnjem času začela opremljati s taktičnimi jedrskimi bojnimi glavami. Kako to, da umestiš “kriminalce” “upornike” in “izdajalce” iz vrst Wagnerja zraven ruskih jedrskih bojnih glav?

Nadaljujte z branjem

Opcije za Evropo po tem, ko je kolektivni zahod izgubil v ukrajinski vojni: Večna vojna in gospodarski zaton ali miselni zasuk k avtonomnosti?

Samo preberite spodnji odličen komentar Matthewa Blackburna, počasi premeljite v mislih in si čez nekaj dni zastavite naslovno vprašanje. Čas je, da v Evropi zelo resno ponovno ocenimo posledice dolge vojne v Ukrajini, namesto da slepo korakamo za Washingtonom v prihodnost nestabilnosti, večne vojne, zatona in nemoči.

John Mearsheimer: Ukrajina nima niti teoretičnih možnosti za zmago

Kot sem zapisal že po prvih dneh ukrajinske ofenzive, je tisti, ki je ukrajinske sile poslal v samomorilsko ofenzivo, Ukrajini naredil usodno medvedjo uslugo – obsodil jo je na konec. Ukrajinska ofenziva že pred začetkom brez premoči v zraku ni imela niti teoretičnih možnosti za uspeh, kar so zahodni analitiki vedeli. Po dobrih štirih tednih te ofenzive, po uničenih  700+ oklepnih vozilih ter pobiti tretjini armade, ki je bila namenjena za to ofenzivo, je to dejstvo na žalost samo še zapečateno s krvjo. Ukrajinska ofenziva je čisti samomor. Kot da bi se celotna armada postavila na vrh skalnega previsa in se na ukaz vrgla v prepad.

Absolutno ni jasno, zakaj nekdo sili Ukrajince v ta samomor. Ta nekdo namreč, paradoksalno ali zavestno, dela vse, da pomaga Rusiji ne samo zmagati to vojno, ampak Ukrajino zbrisati z zemljevida. Kajti s tem, ko ukrajinske sile dan za dnem sili v samomorilske akcije, v katerih dnevno umre v povprečju 500 mladih ukrajinskih fantov, bo uničil celotno tretjo ukrajinsko armado. In ukrajinsko vodstvo ne bo imelo več zadostnih sil, ko bo nato ruska vojska prešla v ofenzivo – iz juga, vzhoda in iz severja (Belorusije). Kajti natanko to se bo zgodilo. Kot je Putin napovedal pred dvema tednoma v Sankt Petersburgu, bo rusko vodstvo sledilo poteku ukrajinske ofenzive in analiziralo stanje ter se nato odločilo za nadaljnje korake. V praksi to pomeni, da bodo ruske sile počakale, da se ukrajinska tretja armada iztroši na postavljenih neprebojnih ruskih frontnih linijah in ko bo popolnoma zdesetkana, bodo ruske sile krenile v svojo ofenzivo.

Spodaj je dober intervju z Johnom Mearsheimerjem, ki zelo jasno pove, zakaj Ukrajina nima niti teoretičnih možnosti za zmago. Nobena nova oprema (od lovcev F-16 do raket srednjega dosega) Ukrajini ne more pomagati. In nobena ameriška vojno-hujskaška propaganda, pa naj bo še tako masovno razširjena po vseh glavnih zahodnih medijih, ne more preglasiti očitnega – v tej vojni izčrpavanja Ukrajina niti teoretično ne more zmagati. In zahodne države, tudi če se neposredno angažirajo s svojimi silami v Ukrajini, ji pri preprečitvi poraza ne morejo pomagati. Ker nimajo več dovolj lastnega orožja (ker so vojaška skladišča izpraznjena, vsa zahodna vojaška industrija pa ni sposobna v enem letu proizvesti toliko streliva, kot ga ruska vojska porabi v dveh tednih), ker se je ruska vojaška tehnika izkazala kot superiorna in ker je Rusija absolutna jedrska velesila, ki ima povrhu še nadzvočne rakete kot nosilce jedrskih konic, proti katerim zahodne države nimajo obrambe.

Edina rešitev za Ukrajino, da je ostane vsaj še zahodna polovica, so mirovna pogajanja. Problem pa je, da se Putin zaveda ruske premoči in da je nihče ne more zaustaviti. Problem je, da ga v tej situaciji nihče ne more spraviti za pogajalsko mizo.

Najbolj depresivno je vedeti, kaj se bo zgodilo (in kar vemo že od 5. marca lani), pa ne moreš narediti nič, da bi to preprečil, ker tisti, ki bi to lahko preprečili, tega ne želijo narediti.

Nadaljujte z branjem

Evropa v smrtonosnem objemu ZDA ali kolektivni samomor Evrope

The fall of Europe

In 2008, the EU’s economy was 10% larger than that of the U.S.

Now? The U.S. is 50% larger than the EU!

Image

Europe has been Japanified.

This is the price of being a vassal of the US, which has stymied Europe in many ways:

  • The real estate bubble and subprime mortgage crisis from Wall Street, which pulled Europe into the scam. Europe never recovered from the Great Financial Crisis of 2008.
  • Technology: The US made sure that Europe never developed alternatives to the likes of Google, Facebook, Amazon – e-commerce and cloud computing, Apple etc.
  • Europe has also fallen behind in startups, AI, green energy, quantum computing and virtually every critical thing.
  • The number of European companies in the global Fortune 500 list has dropped dramatically as well
  • The US bombed countries and forced Europe to accept millions of refugees from Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia etc.
  • Proxy war with Russia has also forced Europe to become dependent on the US for energy. The deindustrialization of EU continues.

Image

The biggest culprits are the ruling class of EU and individual European countries. Incredible traitors who are destroying their own people.

And the average European citizen is so clueless and brainwashed that this collective suicide is just unbelievable.

Vir: S.L. Kanthan, twitter

Zakaj je Elon Musk omejil branje na tviterju?

V bistvu sta dve najbolj plauzibilni razlagi. Prva je komercialni razlog: glede na to, da je tviter naročnikom začasno omogočil 10-krat večjo količino branja kot nenaročnikom, je možno, da je s to potezo lastnik tviterja Elon Musk želel spodbuditi čim več uporabnikov k temu, da postanejo naročniki (za 8 $ ali € na mesec).

Druga plauzibilna razlaga pa je tista, ki večini smrdi po teoriji zarote: nenadoma se je pojavila množica novih računov, vodenih prek algoritmov umetne inteligence, ki so masovno pobirali podatke iz tviterja. Zakaj? Z namenom detektiranja trendov v konverzacijah in kasnejše manipulacije teh trendov (spodbujanja ali zaviranja trendov). Z algoritmi umetne inteligence se seveda da lepo avtomatizirati manipulacije in cenzoriranje. Kot pravi Mike Benz: če je FBI uspelo vdreti v sistem in cenzurirati 22 tvitov, lahko umetna inteligenca to naredi z 22 milijoni tvitov. To je lahko razlog, da je Musk število branj še bolj omejil za nove, nepreverjene račune. In zato se je ChatGPT pritožil, da nima dostopa do tviterja in zato ne more izvršiti ukaza.

Image

Katera razlaga se vam zdi bolj verjetna?

Nadaljujte z branjem

ZDA so same uničile svoj imperij

It is American diplomacy that is driving Eurasia and the Global South out of the U.S. orbit. America’s hubristic drive for unipolar world dominance could only have been dismantled so rapidly from within. The Biden-Blinken-Nuland administration has done what neither Vladimir Putin nor Chinese President Xi could have hoped to achieve in so short a period. Neither was prepared to throw down the gauntlet and create an alternative to the U.S.-centered world order. But U.S. sanctions against Russia, Iran, Venezuela and China have had the effect of protective tariff barriers to force self-sufficiency in what EU diplomat Josep Borrell calls the world “jungle” outside of the US/NATO “garden.”

Herodotus (History, Book 1.53) tells the story of Croesus, king of Lydia c. 585-546 BC in what is now Western Turkey and the Ionian shore of the Mediterranean. Croesus conquered Ephesus, Miletus and neighboring Greek-speaking realms, obtaining tribute and booty that made him one of the richest rulers of his time. But these victories and wealth led to arrogance and hubris. Croesus turned his eyes eastward, ambitious to conquer Persia, ruled by Cyrus the Great.

Having endowed the region’s cosmopolitan Temple of Delphi with substantial silver and gold, Croesus asked its Oracle whether he would be successful in the conquest that he had planned. The Pythia priestess answered: “If you go to war against Persia, you will destroy a great empire.”

Croesus therefore set out to attack Persia c. 547 BC. Marching eastward, he attacked Persia’s vassal-state Phrygia. Cyrus mounted a Special Military Operation to drive Croesus back, defeating Croesus’s army, capturing him and taking the opportunity to seize Lydia’s gold to introduce his own Persian gold coinage. So Croesus did indeed destroy a great empire, but it was his own.

Fast-forward to today’s drive by the Biden administration to extend American military power against Russia and, behind it, China. The president asked for advice from today’s analogue to antiquity’s Delphi oracle: the CIA and its allied think tanks. Instead of warning against hubris, they encouraged the neocon dream that attacking Russia and China would consolidate U.S. control of the world economy, achieving the End of History.

Nadaljujte z branjem

John Mearsheimer: V ukrajinski vojni bo zmagala Rusija, Zahod bo izgubil, vendar tudi ruska zmaga ne bo popolna

While there is no question Russia invaded Ukraine, the ultimate cause of the war was the West’s decision – and here we are talking mainly about the United States – to make Ukraine a Western bulwark on Russia’s border. The key element in that strategy was bringing Ukraine into NATO, a move that not only Putin, but the entire Russian foreign policy establishment, saw as an existential threat that had to be eliminated.

Of course, the opponents of NATO expansion were correct, but they lost the fight and NATO marched eastward, which eventually provoked the Russians to launch a preventive war. Had the United States and its allies not moved to bring Ukraine into NATO in April 2008, or had they been willing to accommodate Moscow’s security concerns after the Ukraine crisis broke out in February 2014, there probably would be no war in Ukraine today and its borders would look like they did when it gained its independence in 1991. The West made a colossal blunder, which it and many others are not done paying for.

This paper examines the likely trajectory of the Ukraine war moving forward. 1

I will address two main questions.

First, is a meaningful peace agreement possible? My answer is no. We are now in a war where both sides – Ukraine and the West on one side and Russia on the other – see each other as an existential threat that must be defeated. Given maximalist objectives all around, it is almost impossible to reach a workable peace treaty. Moreover, the two sides have irreconcilable differences regarding territory and Ukraine’s relationship with the West. The best possible outcome is a frozen conflict that could easily turn back into a hot war. The worst possible outcome is a nuclear war, which is unlikely but cannot be ruled out.  

Second, which side is likely to win the war? Russia will ultimately win the war, although it will not decisively defeat Ukraine. In other words, it is not going to conquer all of Ukraine, which is necessary to achieve three of Moscow’s goals: overthrowing the regime, demilitarizing the country, and severing Kyiv’s security ties with the West. But it will end up annexing a large swath of Ukrainian territory, while turning Ukraine into a dysfunctional rump state. In other words, Russia will win an ugly victory.

Nadaljujte z branjem