And the Blubberman spouts again...

The blubberman has an on-going lovehate relationship with Auckland's Mayor Len Brown.

His latest series of expostulations centres on "dishonesty" surrounding the use of a trust to keep the identity of donors to Browns "war-chest" secret. It is a technique used by virtually every prospective politician in this country.

So to illustrate we have the Blubberman quoting at length from the Dom Post and Herald.

Included in the Herald article was this -

Former Auckland City Mayor John Banks, who came second with 171,542 votes (behind Mr Brown's 237,487), declared $948,937 in donations and $554,958 spending in the last three months of his marathon campaign.

There is no mention of this in the Blubberman rant.

Then again today, with the news that the Casino made donations to the Brown campaign the following from the Herald article has been ommitted -

Mr Brown's financial returns include a contribution of $15,000 from the company among total donations to his cause of $581,900.

SkyCity said yesterday it made an identical campaign contribution to former Auckland City Mayor John Banks - who lost the Super City leadership race despite having $948,937 at his disposal - although it did not show up as a donor in his returns.

Now if the Blubberman were so honestly in pursuit of political dishonesty as he makes out, why does this latter fact not make a far greater raruraru than the former? At least Brown is honest about where his money came from to the extent that the casino donation is acknowledged. Banksie on the other hand...?

Too selective, blubberman, too selective by half.

UPDATE -

It seems, from a comment made by the man himself, that because Banks lost the election there is no point in chasing what the blubberman sees as a dead horse. I very much beg to differ on that.

He also makes the point that if Banks were Mayor, and was "as dishonest as Brown" the he (the blubberman) would be on his case.

That to me is a cop-out.

On taking quotations out of context -

How many times have these words of Adam Smith been quoted in support of the neo-capitilist ideals of disaffected Americans -

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love."

Me old mates at ALD tagged a commentary at New Statesman that picks up this point and correctly places it in the context of his earlier "The Theory of Moral Sentiments".

Read the article for the detail. I recommend it.

What does deserve quotation is another (equally out of context) relating to the "political economy" from Adam Smith -

..."first, to provide a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people, or more properly to enable them to provide such a revenue or subsistence for themselves; and second, to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the public services".

Next thing will be members of the American right quoting the likes of Karl Marx's economic theories in support of their neo-neo-capitalism. The driver behind such a move might well come from this thoughtful article from Der Spiegel -

Greece is only the beginning. The world's leading economies have long lived beyond their means, and the financial crisis caused government debt to swell dramatically. Now the bill is coming due, but not all countries will be able to pay it.
...
A Huge Bubble

The world was saved, temporarily at least, but since then it has accumulated more debt than ever before in peacetime. The national deficits of the 30 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have grown almost sevenfold since 2007, to about $3.4 trillion today. Their total debt burden has also grown dramatically, to a record-setting $43 trillion. In the euro zone, national deficits have even grown 12-fold in the same time period, with the euro-zone countries accumulating $7.7 trillion in debt.

The current government debt bubble is the last of all possible bubbles. Either governments manage to slowly let out the air, or the bubble will burst. If that happens, the world will truly be on the brink of disaster.

When Greece faces a possible bankruptcy, the euro-zone countries and the IMF come to its aid. But what happens if the entire euro group bites off more than it can chew? What if the United States can no longer service its debt because, say, China is no longer willing to buy American treasury bonds? And what if Japan, which is running into more and more problems, falters in its attempts to pay for its now-chronic deficits?

The conditions that prevail in Greece exist in many countries, which is why governments around the world are paying such close attention to how -- and if -- the Europeans gain control over the crisis.

Now that is frighteningly close to some of the ol' probligo's worst fears. Galahs like MK should, but won't, listen.

Time to go play Gorillaz...

The book on my bedside table...

... at the moment is "Affluenza" by one Oliver James.

Having read the Prologue and Part One it seems to me that there is little point in reading much further. I do not suffer from Affluenza. It is not likely that I ever will - given that various members of the family have described my as "stingy" and "old" and "expletive" at different times. Therefore there seems no real future in reading how James proposes his cure for the ailment.

His opinion on the causes and who might be the most susceptible plucks the strings of my confirmation bias. His commentary in what I have read thusfar would curdle TF's coffee and give his Beemer an apoplexic fit.

I guess that just about says it all.

It also fits into the context of my last comment at TF's place regarding government deficits and the difference between "need" and "want".

Out of the commentary in Der Spiegel - regarding the Greek economic crisis comes this following which also rings a strong 12-string chord from the ol' probligo -

In fact, the Portuguese economy has been stagnating for the last 10 years. It grew substantially before that, after the country had joined the EU. In the years since the introduction of the euro, the Portuguese have gotten used to low interest rates and have "lived completely beyond their means," as President Aníbal Cavaco Silva, an economics professor himself who was also prime minister during the boom years, warned last year. "We spend 10 percent of GDP more than we take in, year after year," says Portuguese economist António Perez Metelo.

Private households owe more than 100 percent of their annual income. Because the Portuguese save so little, banks are forced to borrow money abroad. Each of the 10.6 million Portuguese citizens owes foreign banks an average of €18,300 and paid €590 in interest in 2009.

This situation cannot continue -- not in Greece, not in Portugal and not in most other countries. But the euro zone isn't the only place with a debt problem.

The US budget deficit has now reached $1.6 trillion, or 10 percent of GDP. The national debt is now over $12 trillion and is forecast to expand to more than $20 trillion by the end of the decade. At that point, Americans will be paying $900 billion a year in interest alone.

Der Spiegel continues -

Today, only four areas consume almost all government revenues: defense, social programs, health care and interest on debt. Americans must pay for everything else with new debt.

Fred Bergsten, director of the Peterson Institute, one of the leading economic think tanks in the United States, warns: "If we don't correct the situation in the next five years, our worldwide position will be in jeopardy."

The disastrous financial situation is in large part due, not to the economic stimulus packages and programs to fight the global economic crisis, but to behavior during the years under former President George W. Bush. At the time, Americans became accustomed to consuming far more than they produced.

They consume inexpensive goods from Southeast Asia, and the Chinese and the Japanese are only too willing to accept US Treasury bonds in return. In other words, Asia is giving the United States an almost unlimited credit line. This is the only reason the Americans were able to keep interest rates low for so many years -- the cost of borrowing was being kept artificially low. Many people believed that they could afford to buy real estate. And in the belief that the value of their houses was constantly increasing, Americans consumed even more and got into more and more debt. This illusionary system fell apart when the real estate markets collapsed.

But current President Barack Obama has also contributed substantially to the biggest American budget deficit since World War II. His healthcare reforms alone will cost the government about $900 billion in the coming years. And the military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan will swallow up $160 billion in the coming budget year.