Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘Financial multinationals

Who are the Upper Middle Classes? The most powerful class politically and financially?

The  Upper Middle Class in the USA (UMC), those earning more than $120,000 per year (20% of the population), vote massively in their districts (80% of the time) and barely move out of their district, kind of implanted in their secluded quarters with all the amenities (security, facilities, schools, clean environment…). They are the obstacle for useful society mobility.

No politician in the UMC district will ever attempt to rob them of any privilege, woo other classes, or touch on any of their acquired “rights” since they are virulent, engaged and hold the power of opinion. Yes, they are most active, educated, and write opinion letters to politicians and newspapers.

A third of the mass demonstrators in Occupy Wall Street were from UMC. As soon as the government and financial multinationals agreed to give them a few guarantees on their acquired financial privileges, the massive UMC dis-assembled and left the other marchers prey to the police forces and their dogs.

The right-wing (Tea Party) and kind of left-wing parties are packed with UMC members: They know how to hold and maintain their power.

In fact, the UMC occupy most of the key positions in the public services, universities, media, municipalities, sciences, survey institutions, all kinds of traditional professions… and No Senator or Congressman will ever antagonize the UMC financial privileges and tax bracket. (Any such law is doomed to Not Pass, actually they are born-dead)

And how Donald Trump managed to circumvent the UMC?

Trump managed to flatter the values and “culture” of the working classes against the ascendancy of the UMC in journalism, mass media, bureaucracy, favoritism in public services and private companies.

Yes, the working classes have no grudge against the richest 1% whom they dream to become one of them and because they are never in close contact with them in any of their daily activities in the public sectors (read government)

The working classes have a gut feeling that their children are practically denied to move out of their parents’ status in society because of the tight-niches of the UMC in every sector in the community.

And why the UMC are so reluctant to slightly dent any of their overpowering privileges (economically, financially and politically)?

And why the UMC are Not ready for any tiny sacrifices in their life-style to promote the less fortunate classes for slightly better advancement in society?

Note: The UMC description and characteristics are valid in every country: colonial, imperialist, communist, socialist, in emerging nations (India, China,Brazil, Canada, South Africa) and even in poor countries where the oligarchy set roots for decades.

Of Bats, Bees and Capitalism: The Two insurmountable contradictions…

The motto of Neo-liberal capitalists is: “Economical Factors that can be monetarily evaluated should be considered as Capital to be plundered

You read that the economists have lately estimated that Nature can extend worth of 54,000 billion per year on services rendered . What that means?

That concept of valuing the various services that nature are saving the corporations was first contemplated in 1997 by Robert Costanza, and the studies multiplied since then. For example:

Bats save $23 bn per year in the US on pesticides

Bees and pollinating insects save $190 bn per year.

You read that daily transactions amount to over what all nations produced in GNP for an entire year. What that means?

The neoliberal capitalists have been trying hard to eliminate the notion of “value of work” and replace this term with “circulation of capital” as the main wealth generating factor, sort of connecting work with exchange value and disconnecting human work as a significant value.

Neo-capitalists want to equate value with everything that can be transformed into capital, including knowledge, talents, health care, education, potable water, breathable air… Everything that maintain life and the survival of mankind has to be taxed and “capitalized”…

To that end, multinational corporations and financial institutions are giving their best shots for handicapping States sovereign power for enacting laws that safeguard the best interest of their people.  Like How? Allowing multinationals to sue States at an international commerce tribunal for laws that are not to the corporations interests…

It turns out that it has very little to do with meaningful human freedom, and rather a lot to do with corporate freedom – the freedom of corporations to extract and exploit without hindrance.

“Free trade” agreements such as North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), and the latest Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), focus primarily on battering down import barriers, curbing labour unions, reducing restrictions on pollution, legalizing capital flight, cutting corporate taxes, eliminating state subsidies for local industries, privatising public assets, and extending foreign patent protections.

None of these measures have to do with enhancing human freedom. Rather, they are designed in the interests of multinational corporations, who through them gain access to new export markets and investment opportunities, and cheaper labour and raw materials.

The disturbing thing about the rhetorical strategy of “free trade” is that the very things that do promote real human freedoms – such as the right of workers to organise, equal access to decent public services, and safeguards for a healthy environment – are cast as somehow anti-democratic, or even totalitarian.

This term of freedoms in Free trade is an obvious propaganda term, a form of Orwellian doublethink that means exactly the opposite of what it claims.

The constraints are reframed as “red tape”, as “market interventions”, or as “barriers to investment”, even when, as is almost always the case, they have been won by popular grassroots movements exercising democratic franchise

In two new “free trade” deals that are about to come into effect: the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which will govern trade between the US and the European Union, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which will govern trade between the US and a number of Pacific nations.

We hear very little about these deals because they are shrouded in secrecy, and because six of the corporations leading the negotiations happen to control 90 percent of our media.

Yet, we need to pay attention, because these deals are set to form the blueprint for a new global order.

In addition to battering down import tariffs and privatising public services, the latest trade agreements grant corporations the power to strike down the laws of sovereign nations. You read that right.

Neo-capitalism has created two contradictions that is handicapping any progress in sustainability of nature and mankind.

1. The devaluation of the human workforce has generated s surplus in production in the industrial sectors. The consequences were acute rates of unemployment in almost all the industrialized nations, reduction in social protection level (health, unemployment pay, retirement, schooling…), and a  terrible growth of  wealth inequality and life-styles…

2. The infinite accumulation of capital is confronting earth natural limitations: destabilization of eco-systems, diminishing of natural resources that cannot be regenerated, degrading biodiversity, generating multiple polluting calamities (rivers, air, soil…), and climate change…

Neo-liberal capitalism is dealing with two contradicting challenges:

1. Cannot exploit human labor beyond a certain level of no return without ruining the potential for further expansion

2. Cannot transgress nature limitations in massive exploitation without destroying the basis of material accumulation…

These two inseparable and insurmountable contradictions between human labor and nature limitations have forced the multinational corporations, particularly the financial multinationals, to drop their previous illusions of auto-sufficiency and  endogenous source of value

A new “explicit” dimension of value is taking roots: Knowledge in the production process or the Cognitive Capital.

Question: How knowledge and what kinds of knowledge may modify the meaning of value?

Knowledge in all fields of study and applications is a collective endeavor and imposing high fees on license, trademark and corporation registered patents are extreme barriers that handicap the emerging nations to contribute effectively to word wealth sustainability…

Only applied knowledge in production can be exploited as exchange value, but never the spirit of acquiring knowledge…

Obviously “feeling good” attitude and having hope for a better future are not in the capitalism vocabulary to quantify in their economic models, or the multiple interactions among the economic factors that tell the real story for a sustainable environment to mankind.

Note 1: Post inspired by the article of Jean-Marie Harribey in Le Monde Diplomatic #717 under “Of bats and capitalism

Note 2: Read part 1  https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2013/12/25/any-equivalence-between-wealth-and-value-of-bats-and-capitalism-part-1/

Note 3: On Free Trade Agreements https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/free-trade-among-whom-a-death-to-democracy/

Don’t have an objective? Don’t worry if you fail to attain it: Sun Tzu in the Art of War

You want to focus on the brain power for the State economy? And neglect the tools and the skilled working people in the equation?

Do you believe that innovation and opportunities for development can take off if you neglect to produce material things that people can use?

Can’t you imagine losing the know-how if you fail to immerse your hands in the production process?

That’s exactly what happened to current Europe and the US in the last two decades: They figured out that China is the ideal vast potential market, and adopted a post-modern strategy to let China and the emerging States perform the production with lower menial wages, non-obstructive labor laws and ecological constraints

The end result was that many emerging States conceived of, planned and executed long-term industrial objectives, and they stuck it out and never quit at the inevitable initial failures.

Consequently, the emerging nations developed strategic industrial sectors and managed to be self sufficient in most technological breakthrough…

For example, if France had failed to keep steadfast in its strategic industrial sectors such as in space, aeronautic, nuclear, high-speed trains and telecommunication… it is highly possible that France would have ceased to be among the semi-superpower club members…

The environmental restrictions was another factor that favored the transfer of production facilities overseas.

The third factor was the unregulated liberal ideology that says: “Leave it to the private sector and let the government takes its hands off the grand projects...”

The main difficulty is to resolve, after 3 decades of wild liberal economics, is how the States can hire competent “regulators” in every economical sector.

How to retrain States regulators so that they may comprehend the total picture of complex interactions among the industrial sectors, and to be able to retain them after they become highly competent to regulate complex problems…

Mind you that the financial multinationals have the means to hire the best minds whose main job is to “invent and create financial products” that are incomprehensible to normal educated people… financial products that regulators, lawyers and judges feel not qualified to exorcise the danger and consequences of these products, invented by crazy people who refuse to weight the calamitous consequences on their clients...

What are the characteristics of a “Strategic State”?

1. To care for the public interests

2. To maintain the cap on long-term plans and stay on track against all odds

3. To elaborate road maps into the future

4. To stay agile in the face of drastic economical and social changes…

Do you know that former French president Nicolas Sarkozy and his team (Claude Gueant, Henri Proglio, and Herve Marchenaud...) coaxed Tunisia and Libya of Quaddafi to purchase outmoded first generation nuclear plants? Even trying to sell them archaic submarine nuclear plants?

They knew that these underdeveloped States and dictators cannot maintain and sustain any level of safety for these dangerous products. But they didn’t care: “You don’t want to sell them third generation nuclear designed plants that are reserved for the developed nations. The Libyans don’t need these kinds of precautionary luxury as imposed on us in France...”

And yet, the safety of nuclear power plants rests on 3 factors:

1. The design of the installation

2. The organization, operation, and safety authority,

3. A culture for maintaining the safety level for the operators and the people working in the installation…

Nicolas Sarkozy and his team didn’t give a hoot for the health and safety of the Libyan citizens, even less than Quaddafi himself. They were intent on selling sophisticated military hardware that the country didn’t need.

Note 1: Ideas extracted from”The woman who resists” by Anne Lauvergeon. She headed the French nuclear conglomerate Areva for 10 years

Note 2: France is the main exporter of nuclear power plants to third world countries such as Iraq and to Israel as early as 1961…

How do you understand “Secular States” to mean?  

 Note: This is an edited version of an article I published in 2009.  This essay applies to all States, western, orient, animists, pagans, monotheists, secular, semi-secular, democratic, theocratic and other political systems…

Charles Malek, a philosopher and Lebanon’s representative to the United Nations in its earliest 1946 sessions in San Francisco, proclaimed in the sixties that Lebanon cannot survive as a State, unless all Lebanese convert to Christianity! Lately, the Moslem Sunni fundamentalists proclaimed in 2006 that the State of Lebanon should be governed Caliphate-style.  The Moslem Shiaas of Hezbollah want to establish the rule of the “Wilayat al Fakeeh”, an Ayatollah who would lead by holding both the spiritual and political powers.

Fact is, Lebanon political structure is multi-theocratic, though the Constitution, (which has never been applied), never mentioned religion to be the sources for generating laws or running and administrating our civil status.

For example, the Christians during the civil war wanted to establish Christian cantons, exclusively for the right-wing Christian Lebanese, since they over ran the Palestinian Christian camps in their “enclaves” and evacuated the lucky surviving Palestinians from the massacres outside the Christian cantons.

Do Christians in the Levant (Near East States) have ground to be worried?  Islam means by “Jihad” the right to proselytize Islam everywhere and all the time.  As if the western nations have not been carrying their own brand of “Jihad” since Medieval Age to any place they wanted to colonize.

The Christians in the Levant have grounds to be apprehensive: the Christian sects have refrained from converting Moslems because conservative Islam sects demand as “halal” the shedding of blood for the “blasphemous” re-converted Moslems.

The Moslem Sunni salafists in north Lebanon, twice fought the Lebanese army within two years; hundreds of soldiers died and were handicapped for life. The Qaeda of Osama Bin Laden has the same political objective with a twist; the Qaeda wants to establish the restrictive and ultra conservative Wahhabi sect as the essence of selecting Caliphates.  The Wahhabi sect is the one adopted by the obscurantist Saudi Arabia theocratic monarchy.

In 1925, the Sunni Ali Abel Razzak wrote in his book “Islam and origin of governance” that “Islam is innocent of what the conservative Islam understands of the Caliphate.  The Caliphate was never in the religious planning, and neither were the religious judges nor any of the civil administrations in the government.  The Prophet Muhammad didn’t recognize them or order them or denied them.  The political and civil administrative issues were left to the Moslems to decide upon them.  Thus, it is proper that we engage our mind and consider the experience of nations, and the rules of politics that are the best around for our Nation.”

In Iran, Ayatollah Borojardy was detained because he wanted to separate States civil politics from religion, thus, resisting the “Fakeeh” concept of government.  In Lebanon, the Secretary General of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasr Allah, publicly harangued the Shiaa to considering “Wilayat al Fakeeh” as the official political system of his party.

Knowing that Nasr Allah speaks as a clergy in every religious ceremony, blending religion with politics with resistance to the Zionist Apartheid State, could we ever hope that the politics of Hezbollah are just short-term tactics to uniting the Shiaa against Israel?

The State of Israel would like you to believe that a mythical leader they named Moses had a revelation by a superior being named Yahweh to conquer land by the sword and genocides:  Land that was “promised” to the horde of tribes following him.  Thus, Israel would like to establish a Jewish theocratic State in Palestine.

It has been categorically proven that the Old Bible was initiated in the second century before Christ in Alexandria, and chapters were added many centuries later, and it was re-edited several times. Hebrew, as most Arabic verbal slangs bordering Syria, was a verbal slang of the Aramaic written language:  A written version was created in Alexandria as Jews flocked to Egypt around 300 BC.

If you are nowadays following Lebanon’s politics and the preparations for the election in June 7,  you might have the impression that it is the political leaders of the religious sects who are manipulating the sacerdotal castes of our 18 officially recognized religious sects.  

Don’t be fooled; ask any Lebanese and he will tell you that he is forced constitutionally to pay his first allegiance to his sect.  In fact, the sects were given the legal and official right to administer the civil status of its co-religionists from birth to death and the central government is totally helpless in interfering; even if any serious government  wishes to change the political system, it would never want problems to blow in its face…

My question to the western States’ citizens is: Do you believe that the separation of State and religion is implicitly a de facto reality?  Do you believe that religious clerics and institutions have desisted from meddling in State affairs? That during voting periods, the religious sacerdotal castes do not impress on the political climate?

Do you believe that there is no religious backlash on religious minorities? Isn’t religion recognized in your constitutions and in the prayers of your national ceremonies?  Are not the civil administrative posts implicitly submitted to a quota system?

I am sincerely worried about the practices of those hypocritical Secular States who force its minorities to submit to the various litmus tests, on the ground of applying civil laws and regulations. Personally, my position is that religious doctrines and stories are a bunch of hog wash nonsense of myths and abstract concepts that even “zero IQ quotient ” individuals refuse the premises.

The religious sacerdotal castes would like you to substitute “your belief in a Creator” from watching the cosmos and the mysteries of life, into total faith in their particular ideological constructs and set of values.  I feel limited in finding a resolution where check and balance can be erected to cope with the all permeating power of the sacerdotal castes in every States around the world. 

Constitutional laws need to be thought out to restrict the implicit power of the thousand tentacles that religions have instituted to infuse their ideologies in schools and civil administration of people’s daily life. One of the best and most efficient methods is to encourage the establishment of opportunities to exercising choices in every aspect in our lives from birth, decentralized schooling systems, marriages, legal divorce alternatives, and burial at each of the legislative, legal, and executive branches.

Only available opportunities for choices, backed by political determination to honor those choices in the workforce, in the daily living, and in society structure, can permit a fighting chance for all those free minded and reflective citizens and families who respect their potential power for deciding what is best for their spiritual development.

The best that “secular” Western States could do was restrict separation of State with religion to public servants, and refrain from explicitly relating religious political pressures in political campaigns.  Other than that, religions and particularly the religion of the majority, are definitely the most influential power-brokers, alongside the financial multinationals.

Reid published ten rules for successful business ventures, borne from his experiences starting companies and partnering with great entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley.  I slightly edited the rules before commenting on the rules, this insane urge for going bigger and bigger once we start a company, and the lack of defining exactly the product for the reflecting on the relevance of a rule. You may read the link to the original http://greylockvc.com/2011/03/22/ten-entrepreneurship-rules-for-building-massive-companies/

Rule #1: Look for disruptive change.
If you’re about to start on a new venture, ask yourself: “What is becoming possible or necessary that wasn’t possible before? Is a new product (or service) able to take over an existing market or create a new market?” When I co-founded LinkedIn, the tech industry was in a deep depression. I looked at all the opportunities created by the Internet and had the idea that, eventually, everyone would need a professional profile online. The disruption was that people were able to directly reach the best candidates rather than hoping for responses from a listing in the paper or an ad on a Web site.

(I guess that disruptive change was empowering the entrepreneur for direct access to the best qualified professionals in specific fields.)

Rule #2: Aim big.
Regardless of whether a start-up is targeting a big idea or a small one, it will still require the same amount of blood, sweat and tears—so aim big! What is “big?” It is a new product or service that creates or dominates a significant market.

(The term “niche in a market” used to be the common expression in marketing studies, but again, it is better to venture into a stable and developed market.  For example, every specialty business are grouped on a certain street or locality for obvious reasons of clients attraction)

Rule #3: Build a network to magnify your company.
People tend to think that behind every great start-up is a single entrepreneur with a whiz-bang idea. The reality is great companies are built by a number of people with talent who are surrounded by amplifying networks. The most successful entrepreneurs bring in advisors, investors, collaborators and early customer relationships.

(The idea is to steer away from templates that dictate rigid principles for starting up companies.  The trend is to empower many early collaborators in the ideas generation, planning, and decision making.  Open discussion of the early problems are necessary for the designated decision makers in the start-ups.  For example, the enterprise “kharabeesh”, based in Amman, permitted the office kitchen employee to becoming their best animator, and the driver to lend his voice to Qadhafi…)

Rule #4: Plan for good luck and bad luck.
You should always assume you will have both good luck and bad luck with your new company. Good luck is not as simple as “it worked out.” Rather, this is when you discover a great opportunity and can quickly shift to go after it. Bad luck is what happens when your first idea doesn’t work. It doesn’t mean failure; it means you need to pursue plan B.

(No matter what some professionals insist on getting on with the business, and investing time on trial and error tactics, it is essential that meticulous research and comprehension of the business be the first building block.  Otherwise, how would you be able to selecting the best candidates for the job?)

Rule #5: Maintain flexible persistence.
Very often entrepreneurs are given conflicting advice: “Be persistent! Stay committed to your vision!” or “Pivot on key data! Know when to change!” The challenge is to follow them both, but know which advice is most appropriate for which situation. You must know how to maintain flexible persistence.

(I guess flexible persistence presumes a thorough knowledge of the business venture and the need to have confidence in the professionals in the field. How are you supposed to “Pivot on key data” if you are unable to making heads from tails looking at data?)

Rule #6: Launch early enough so that you are embarrassed by your first product release.
With my first start-up, Socialnet.com, it took us nine months to launch the first product. That was a disastrous mistake. We wanted to have all the detailed functionality right away, including social controls to people could decide to connect or not with the people in their networks. We wanted everyone to “Ooh” and “Aaah” about how terrific the product was. We wasted a bunch of time and it put us months behind on more important problems that needed to be solved, such as how to get our product in the hands of millions of people. From that I learned, if you are not embarrassed by your first release, you’ve launched too late!

(If you are not slightly embarrassed by your first release, how would you convince the customers that you consider “redesigning a product” is more important than patching faults and errors?”

Rule #7: Aspire, but don’t drink your own Kool-Aid.
Target excellence, but be very careful about blind trust or belief in your theories. It is important to launch as early as you can in order to learn how your customers use your product or service. It is equally important to identify metrics that tell you if your aspirations and vision are on target. You should also get feedback from your network in order to iterate or pivot on the target, the product and/or the service. In other words, maintain your aspiration but always look for good perspective on how you are doing. It is very easy for creative innovators to get caught up in their own story rather than learning where they should be headed.

(It means, factor in data collection process and timely analysis on clients behavior and feedback as an intrinsic part of the business.  How could you “pivot on the target” if you don’t believe that “data can talk”? How can you gain different perspectives if you refuse to communicate with the data from different venues?  How do you think financial multinationals are making such huge profit if not from mastering the process of gathering data and instant analysis and synthesis of the market responses, needs, and wants?  Fact is, financial multinationals do not speculate: they know for fact what is the outcome of every decision!)

Rule #8: Having a great product is important, but having great product distribution is more important.
I meet a lot of entrepreneurs who think the best product is the most important thing and that the best product should always win. What a lot of people fail to realize is that without great distribution, the product dies. How will you get your product in the hands of millions or hundreds of millions of people?

(That is the principle of vertical integration: Associate with a successful distribution company from the start.)

Rule #9: Pay close attention to culture and hires from the very beginning.
Your first hires set your culture, so make them good ones. These first people hire the next people and so on. The old wisdom was that you needed people with a decade more of experience in your start-up. The things a smart person learned a decade ago won’t help you now – you’re doing things that have never been done before, and the world and the competitive landscape are changing at hyper speeds. What you really need are people who can learn fast.

(Most important rule of all: every generation has a new brand of intelligence that is quicker and more adaptable to the new technologies.  You might be doing a huge mistake if you insist on not hiring from an older generations:  Knowing and adapting to the newer paces in technology is never enough for building a cohesive and sustainable business.  Any exclusion of older generation is a sure sign or amoral ethical conduct of the start-up:  Social movements of solidarity are fine-tuning their selection of companies of choices, not based on just good product, but on sustainable moral and ethical conducts)

Rule #10: Rules of entrepreneurship are guidelines, not laws of nature.
Do not pay too much attention to rules set by other people. Entrepreneurs are inventors. They are successful when they make something work for the very first time. Sometimes in order to make something work, you will drive over the guardrail of one of these rules. Entrepreneurs sometimes just make new rules.

(Do not be dominated by “template” success stories.  Reinventing the wheel is a great mechanism for discovering new ways of doing business:  Pioneers have necessarily missed to investigate many factors, and the new age has a different way to look at wants, needs, and problem solving.)

My first question to these rules is: Are we considering the new “ethical paradigm” of sustainable environment and life-style?  The key words in this generation are “green”, sustainable, rejuvenation, recycling, quality life-style, reforestation, climatic changes, water quality deterioration, toxic waste disposal and sites.  For example, why market a less than “clean” performing product and end-up dumping millions of outdated toxic leftover products?

My second question is: Are we researching how raw materials are being exploited and how the citizens of poor countries are being abused and robbed dry in order for your “great idea of a product” be manufactured and marketed successfully?

Greedy Financial Managers say: “Blame it on greedy human nature”

The verdict of the greedy financial managers and analysts in this international financial crisis is: ” the culprit is a non-entity: It is human risk-taking nature, driven by greed for the enjoyment of the present moment.”

The convenient scapegoat is this mythical concept of human risk-taking attitudes.

Almost all financial managers would like to blame the greedy short-timer shareholders for the successive financial crisis. They say: “The young financial operators have never witnessed but bull market trends and they had no memory of financial crisis.  The young financial operators grabbed the risk-taking attitudes of clients and ran with it.”

1. The financial managers say: “Give a child a piece of candy and promise him another candy if he waits ten minutes until you come back:  Very few children will not eat the candy immediately, instead of two shortly later.”

2. They say: “The weight that people give to the present satisfaction far outweigh logical reasoning of good profits and advantages a year later.

Reason says: “In time of great uncertainty the best recourse is thinking on ways to cope with its consequences.”  The reality of human nature says: “In time of great instability, the past is gone and the future is uncertain; thus, let us enjoy the moment; we have one life to live.

3. The greedy financial managers and analysts say: “People learned to save their liquid money in banks:  Any money in the pocket is spent readily.  Consumerism culture resorted to the devilish credit card mechanism to trap and sap human saving good intentions.”

4. They say: “It is a disorienting characteristic of human temperament that, knowing full-well the ultimate disaster of their actions (investing for short-term benefits), we keep believing that we are immune to bad results and that we are of the lucky-types to having the intuition of jumping ship at the nick of time.”

5. They say: “A father or head of a family feels that he is better off retaining a few debts so that he is forced to staying alert to snatching opportunities.  The father or mother prefers to be indebted and feeling permanently threatened with financial instability in order to be on his toes and keep going day-in day-out.”

6. They say: “Financial managers and operators learned to take the money quickly and run with it and not looking back:  As the crisis arrives and the shit hits the fan they are no longer in the job  and they working somewhere else.

7. They say: “All regulations and restrictions on new shares offered to managers of enterprises were dropped in most companies.  Instead, managers were encouraged to speculate immediately with their shares in order to keep the managers constantly on the lookout for short-term profits to the enterprise.

It is true that there are financial risk-takers and they are a minority category of people.

It is true that many are willing to risk their lives on dangerous adventures not related to money.

It is true there are a few cultures that train their people on risk-taking games not necessarily waging real money.  Fact is, financial managers are no kids or inexperienced on inevitable financial crisis and their symptoms (steady bull market for successive long years).

Financial managers explicitly encouraged the young operators to behaving as if “there is no tomorrow” and take the money and run.  The State will inevitably comes to the rescue in no time.

Financial managers are no dumb:  They know that money transferred around at the speed of light are fictitious money, hundred times overvalued with respect to gold or any goods of values.

Thus, they think that they may as well play this game of risks as if they are playing with beans, candies, or crackers.  It barely comes to their mind that they are playing with the earnings of millions of hard-working people, money earned by blood and sweat.

Greedy financial managers know they rule the world:

1. That they are far more powerful than any government or a combination of unified governments.  2. They know that they are transacting 5 trillion dollars a day, twice more than all the powerful governments managed to save for emergency situations.

3. Greedy financial managers know that they have far more lawyers, consultants, and expert in financial matters than any government can harass them with:  The odds favor the financial institutions in any legal battle.

4. Greedy financial managers know that governments have not many experts or professionals to managing and regulating the financial markets and institutions.  Governments end up hiring financial experts who worked at the financial institutions they mean to regulate.

It is beyond natural individual greed: International capitalism has replaced bourgeois capitalism by mafias-types capitalism at a world scale and nobody dares to investigate into, account for, or prosecute.

The traditional entrepreneur used to say: “This cow is producing my daily milk.”  The mafias multinational boss says: “When I see a cow I feel hungry for steaks

Still, governments have one edge over financial multinationals:  Government hold the “law and order” power.

Jail the financial managers and their bosses before legally prosecuting them and they will come to their reason: they will drop all their flatulent blame games and puny scapegoats.

Calendar and time going decimal; (Apr. 16, 2010)

            Soon, the day is of 10 hours, the hour of 100 minutes, and the minute is of 100 seconds.  Financial multinationals and Western Globalization programs have decided that it is easier for businesses to have decimal calendar: it is easier to compute returns on interest rates and traveling across time zones is reduced greatly.  For example, latitudes are divided in portions of 15% so that the USA has 4 time zones; with the new calendar, the time portions will be of 36% and the USA will have to deal with only two time zones.

            The French Revolution in 1792 had already begun a new calendar of 10 days a week and thus, a day had 1000 minutes and the minute 1000 seconds; this calendar didn’t last long.  Maybe the real objective for the new calendar is to forget that there was an ancient highly developed civilization called Babylonian very advanced in astronomy and whose metric system was based on 12 and multiples of 12 such as 60.

            I am not sure; this article was written on April the first.  Even today, the normal and natural civil people such as in Latin America, Persia, and many parts of the world start their year March 23 or the beginning of spring.  Celebrations last for a week; the date of April 1st is the effective working day for the New Year.  Sacrifices of animal and humans are to exorcise last year evils into giving mankind reprieve from pain and suffering and abundance.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

September 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Blog Stats

  • 1,416,183 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 767 other followers

%d bloggers like this: