Psychopath Economics: a crowdfunding appeal

chapter synopsis.indd

Psychopath Economics is a book about the logic of economic power. It argues that today’s system is psychopathic, in that it is dominated by an elite – the so-called 1% – that cares little about consequences, other than the continuation of its dominance.

The book argues that, being psychopathic, the elite and the neoliberal economy it has shaped are ultimately self-destructive, because they exploit human and natural capital to their natural limits, thus threatening to destroy the economic and environmental foundations of modern society.

Drawing on the work of experts and commentators from a range of fields – including economics, anthropology, history and social psychology – this book looks at the role of belief systems and the psychopathic logic of power in the rise and fall of civilisations.

One of the book’s core arguments is that, when elites feel remote from everyone else and are left unchallenged, they can drive their societies to destruction. Today’s elite shows every sign of repeating this cycle. The book argues that only by attacking the systems and assets that further the elite’s control – specifically financial assets, debts and intellectual property – will ordinary people have any chance of taking back power and altering today’s societies’ long-term cycle of decline.

In this way, Psychopath Economics is my contribution to the momentum for change.

Copies of the book can be pre-ordered via the crowdfunding platform, StartJoin, at startjoin.com/psychoeconomix. An introductory video about the book is also available here.

A message to Israel: “For once in your life…”

“For once in your life, do something that you can relate proudly to your grandchildren.”

Why doesn’t Israel help Palestinians in Yarmouk?
Given the horrific tragedy of the Syrian refugee camp, it is time for Israel to think differently about the Palestinian people, some of which is part and parcel of this country and its future.

Full article by Oudeh Basharat in Haaretz.

In this Feb. 4, 2014, file photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, residents of the besieged Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp wait to leave the camp. Photo by AP

Can we afford government for corporate freeloaders?

torygraph

Sure, they were writing in a ‘personal’ capacity. Sure, it’s going to be big news that 103 business leaders are backing the Tories in the run-up to a general election in a letter to the Telegraph. But, to me at least, the whole thing reeks of a carefully-orchestrated stunt. And one with a very high risk of backfiring.

Let’s start with the letter itself, which asserts that the “Conservative-led government has been good for business”. Notice that the Liberal Democrats are not getting much of the credit here. And, if they are, they’re not saying.

The business figures justify their support for the Conservatives on the grounds of overall economic management, which has experienced the slowest recovery from recession in 314 years. The press and media have swallowed the Tories’ claims that the economy’s pitiful performance is something to celebrate, while forgetting that the Coalition government inherited an economy in 2010 that was actually growing by 1.9%. In fact, George Osborne oversaw a decline: in 2011, growth fell to 1.6%, and to 0.7% in 2012, before rising to 1.7% in 2013.

In an Independent article in August last year, David Blanchflower said the recovery seen during the last Labour government followed a similar pattern to previous recoveries, but that this disappeared once the Coalition took power.

He said: “What is unprecedented is the flatlining of the economy in the Great Recession under the Coalition, once the recovery was already underway, from around Month 37 (February 2011) through Month 59 (December 2012). In February 2011, GDP was 4.9% below the starting level; it was 4.2% below it in January 2012 and still 4.2% below in December 2012. It had still only reached minus 3.1% by May 2013, in Month 64. The Coalition killed off recovery at birth.”

Blanchflower was not the only economics writer who could see the optimism and celebration was misplaced. To take just one more example, Keith Fray wrote in the FT last August: “That the sum total of everything produced in the economy is only now returning to the levels of six years ago is astonishing. To give some context, the recession and recovery have lasted about nine months longer than the second world war.”

In all previous recessions, Britain had recovered its lost output within four years. This recovery, however, has taken more than six.

Indeed, the ‘recovery’, such as it is, has been characterised by an increased reliance on low-paid, low-skilled, low-security – often, temporary – employment with few prospects for progression, hence its name as the Taxless Recovery. Far from helping the recovery, the Coalition’s obsession with austerity – a strategy often shown to be counterproductive and ineffective – was probably a significant contribution to our economic frailties.

Even worse, one of the Coalition government’s stated aims when assuming power was to rebalance the economy; away from unproductive activities, such as financial services, towards manufacturing; making things, instead of playing with Mickey Mouse money. This has not happened, which has contributed to the modern-day UK’s poor productivity levels – a point depressingly missed by all of the major parties as the election battle hots up. Indeed, Britain’s productivity growth is at its lowest levels since the second world war.

So the business leaders’ assertion that the Conservatives have demonstrated their economic competence can be described as questionable, at best – and, at worst, complete tosh.

Which brings us onto the UK’s corporation tax rate, which is due to fall from 21% to 20% this month. This follows its cut from 28% to 24% in 2013, and the further cut to its current rate last year. The new 20% rate will give Britain one of the lowest corporation tax rates in the western world – even below Luxembourg’s 21% – though Britain still has a long way to go before getting into touching distance of Ireland’s 12.5%

The business leaders explained their support for tax cuts thus: “David Cameron and George Osborne’s flagship policy of progressively lowering corporation tax to 20% has been very important in showing the UK is open for business. It has been a key part of their economic plan.”

‘Open for business’, eh? Isn’t that the phrase Osborne has constantly used since the 2011 budget? (Yes, it is, just so you know.) It couldn’t be that these business leaders just used the Tories’ own scriptwriters to pen their letter, could it? Surely not!

But will the new rate be affordable? Well, according to the Telegraph, yes. It claims that the “endless barrage of propaganda about companies not paying their fair share [of tax] is both unfair and misleading”.

Two points here: whichever party is in power will have to sharply cut government spending. But given Osborne’s desire for a further £60bn of cuts if elected in May – with benefits for working-age people and around one million public sector jobs set for the chop – then protecting government revenues is, surely, vitally important. Important for a government that values public services and the people that rely on them, at least.

Whole departments could disappear in an austerity drive like no other we’ve seen before, yet austerity has delivered precious little as it is. Though Osborne’s projection was amended slightly in last month’s Budget, the damage will have already been done by then.

 

Tax and inequality

But, then, this is no concern of the business leaders who have signed this letter. Because, with the possible exception of Duncan Bannatyne – whose net worth fell from £420m in 2010 to an estimated debt of £122m in 2013 after a costly divorce – they’re all rich enough, thanks very much, not to care about cuts.

Tory supporter Baron Anthony Bamford has a net worth of $4.2bn. Dixons Carphone and Talk Talk owner Sir Charles Dunstone is worth $2.7bn. Baroness Karen Brady’s net worth is estimated at $123m. Former M&S chairman Sir Stuart Rose was reportedly worth £34m ($51m) in 2012. He recently told Radio 4’s Today programme that zero-hours contracts should not be outlawed. MacLaren Technology Group founder Sir Ron Dennis is estimated to be worth approximately £300m ($513m).

Outgoing Prudential boss Tidjane Thiam was awarded a £7.8m salary in 2013, just days after the company was censured by the Financial Services Authority for failing to notify it of its ultimately abortive £23.4m takeover bid for AIA. The Pru was also fined for failing to deal with the FSA in “an open and co-operative manner”. Thiam holds dual nationality – French and Ivorian – and is due to become the chief executive of Credit Suisse in June this year.

Bucharest-born Sir George Iacobscu – chief executive of Canary Wharf Group plc – received £3.8m from the sale of his Songbird shares to the Qatari Investment Authority and Canadian firm Brookfield Properties. In 2013, Iacobescu was awarded more so-far unreleased shares worth a further £2.3m, taking his potential total windfall to £6.1m.

Despite the continuing anger many feel towards the banking sector, Iacobscu wrote in the FT: “A lot of the faults found in the financial system have been eradicated. London’s banking system should give international investors even more confidence.” Yeah, right!

Meanwhile, in 2012, Greene King chief executive Rooney Anand was reported as saying: “We understand, as many people do, the difference between tax evasion and tax efficiency.” Two years later, a “highly artificial tax avoidance scheme” created for the company by Ernst & Young was thrown out by the courts.

But the letter’s publication in the Telegraph could not have been more appropriate. The Telegraph Media Group is owned by David and Frederick Barclay, whose personal fortune amounts to £6bn and who are domiciled in Monaco for tax purposes. And this is the same Telegraph from which Peter Oborne resigned in February because editorial independence had been subordinated to corporate interests.

To put the tax issue in context: though volatile, corporate profits are currently running at a record high. What’s more, tax cuts for the rich have virtually no effect on stimulating the economy and will simply add to the already-strong flow of money from the poor and middle classes to the rich, while simultaneously impoverishing everyone else – including the quickly-disappearing middle classes.

So one has to ask two questions: given that the rich and their corporate interests rely on the same infrastructure – schools, roads, transport, health service – that we do to generate their wealth, is it fair that they don’t pay their share of its costs? And secondly: if these corporate interests are raking in so much money, who is it exactly that’s picking voters’ pockets?

Judging by the Telegraph’s coverage today, we can’t rely on the corporate media to give us any of the answers.

The deficit: It’s a productivity thing

peterbatt:

Britain’s recovery is weak. Some public services could disappear completely over the next five years. Yet, the Conservatives want to deliver tax cuts for the rich. And no one is talking about the real issue: productivity. And the fact that our over-bearing financial services industry almost ensures we don’t invest in productive assets (80% of bank loans go on property and other non-productive investments). The UK’s political elite is talking to us from a parallel universe.

Originally posted on Flip Chart Fairy Tales:

The Resolution Foundation’s chief executive, Gavin Kelly, remarked last week:

All parties are framing the deficit as a fiscal choice. They have said very little about productivity.

LSE’s John Van Reenen said something similar in his review of the budget:

It is surprising and depressing that the Chancellor neither mentioned the productivity problem nor did anything to address it.

As did the FT’s Martin Wolf:

[I]t is misleading to view the main challenge as fiscal. It has also become clearer that the crisis both revealed and caused structural weaknesses that the government has neither recognised nor addressed. The opposition Labour party shows no sign of recognising the weaknesses either. What are they? Simply, the economy is “ex-growth” — underlying growth has stopped. Against that background, the aim enunciated by the chancellor “for Britain to become the most prosperous major economy in the world” is absurd. Here are three indicators…

View original 682 more words

What’s good for the Greeks is good for EU ganders

peterbatt:

It’s barely two weeks since the Greeks elected an anti-austerity government, but the dominant economic and political establishment is looking to quietly dissipate its energy and dynamism so it can return to unsustainable-debt-enforcement-as-usual.
UK chancellor George Osborne, along with David Cameron, has led the criticisms of Greece’s ‘far-left’ led coalition, but this is every bit as much to do with his own austerity agenda than any particular concern he has for the Greeks, who have suffered six years of painful, self-defeating economic retrenchment.
That’s because Osborne, more than most other national leaders, is wedded to an austerity agenda as the pretext for cutting the state to a pre-1930s rump – a state that would, to all intents and purposes, be powerless to resist the power of corporations.
Any credible popular revolt against austerity threatens Osborne’s real motivation: to remove the state, over the long term, as a democratic system and as a mechanism able to implement any form of wealth redistribution.

Originally posted on SHAREverything.com:

slide_399780_4935190_free

Greece’s standoff with Eurozone governments and international creditors poses a greater threat to the global economy than conflict in the Middle East, climate change and rising tensions between Russia and the West, UK Chancellor George Osborne says.

* * *

He warned that tensions between the Greek government and the architects of its IMF-EU imposed bailout pose a “rising threat to the British economy,” and that a path of “competence over chaos” in Europe is paramount.

Why such pessimism and alarm? For one thing, I would argue that at least where the Middle East and Russia are concerned, it’s controlled chaos, where the West is both controller and instigator, and they could stop at any time, whereas Syriza’s victory in Greece and their decisive courage and determination comes as a complete and utter surprise. But there’s more to his concerns. Osbourne has an agenda in Britain that he cannot have derailed.

Osborne said the…

View original 386 more words

Tagged , , , , , , , ,
Financial Post

Just another WordPress.com site

Flip Chart Fairy Tales

Business Bullshit, Corporate Crap and other stuff from the World of Work

Fortune

Fortune 500 Daily & Breaking Business News

Philosophers for Change

Ideas for a new age

Joan Holman Book Marketing Diva

Book Marketing Expert/Consultant Based in Minneapolis, Minnesota

SHAREverything.com

because it makes sense

Futile Democracy

A left-leaning focus on US Politics, UK Politics, World Affairs, and Religion & Secularism

Vox Political

politics for the people

SO IT GOES - John Fleming's blog

John Fleming’s daily blog: human interest, humour, humor, comedy blog featuring eccentricity, performance, movies and occasionally a few tears

Tim Holmes

Writings on life, the world and current events.

Radical University

A space for free-thinkers to shine a subversive light on the issues of our time

Lack of Environment

A blog on the politics and psychology underlying the denial of all our environmental problems

Real Science

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" - Richard Feynman

Real-World Economics Review Blog

Posts are by authors of papers published in the RWER. Anyone may comment.

azizonomics

Economics, Technology, Futurism

Think Left

The purpose of Think Left is to present a view of politics from a left-wing perspective.

Health & Family

A healthy balance of the mind, body and spirit

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 253 other followers

%d bloggers like this: