- This topic has 46 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The events in the last week shows that our democracy is just a veneer. We have a Tory party with a majority of 80 who have just sacked their leader who promised so much in the GE of 2019 and delivered so little and lied so much, to be replaced by an incompetent person elected by a vote of party faithfuls on the basis of tax cuts. Because the ‘markets (read organized legalized crime syndicates of traders and profiteers) did not like these (admittedly stupid) policies, the economy was destabilized and as the Tories had run out of democratic options based on their own party rules, they effectively reversed the policy by imposing a chancellor who is the least likely to be associated with the zombie one, reversing all her policy. The current incumbent PM is effectively dead but there is no way she can be deposed democratically so the ‘rules’ have to be changed. In any developing country aspiring to be a democracy the army would have by now stepped in to assure stability, but here it is left for some shady behind the scenes group of unelected grandees to carry out the coup. This is all happening without much input from parliament in a supposedly parliamentary democracy. It seems ‘the people’ or even their representatives have very little to say about who runs the country.
Meanwhile we have an energy crisis. To my knowledge this is totally manufactured. I have not seen any statistics, but I am sure that the production and usage of gas has not changed by much worldwide. There is probably much redistribution some of it probably through creative accountancy, of whether Russian gas goes to Europe or to other parts of the world not imposing sanctions on Russian gas, thereby freeing facilities elsewhere to supply Europe; it is all very mysterious. But as far as I can see there is really no shortage of gas merely an incredible hike in price with massive profiteering not just by oil producers but by the dark web of derivatives, intermediaries, spot market and other instruments of creative money making out of speculations. There has been talk of rationing in Europe, but despite the supposedly real risk to this country, little concern or preparation that shortages may occur. I strongly believe that that is due to the fact that there are no actual shortages, just a chance to make a killing. So, our government’s response to this is to transfer vast amounts of our money to the tune of 100 to 150 billion, to those robber classes and appear virtuous in doing so. The logical step was to outlaw profiteering or to remove these ill-gotten profits by a windfall tax. Oh, but that would discourage these thieves from making us pay through the nose. So, the charade goes on and like 2008 taxpayers’ money is again syphoned off to create new billionaires at the expense of the taxpayers and the whole rest of humanity.
SA, I think the gas and diesel shortages are real.
Remember that the gas shortage began before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Last winter, eleven EU consortia of manufacturing industries wrote an open letter to the EU government; they buy their energy in advance, and due to the high prices it had become more profitable to sell their pre-bought energy than to manufacture their respective products – Javier Blas, Bloomberg energy correspondent, 22 Dec 2021. I remember as country after country went into rolling blackouts; Lebanon ran out of diesel for generating electricity, Albania declared a state of emergency, China cut back manufacturing to keep domestic lights on.
There was much propaganda about Russia “refusing to sell gas to Europe”, but that was not exactly true. Russia was demanding long term contracts, but the EU was insisting that Russia trade on the volatile “spot market”. But Russia was filling domestic storage before it would sell any surplus. Russia’s supergiant gas field, opened in the soviet era, is now well into depletion and can produce at only a third of its peak rate in the late 20th century. Russia has other supergiant fields eg. Yamal, but they are in Siberia; Russia was demanding long term contracts because, to supply EU demand, it would need to build 1500km of pipeline, massive worker accommodation for sub-zero temperatures, drill more wells etc: Vitaly Yermakov, Senior Research Fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
North Sea gas peaked in 1999. The EU used to produce more gas than it consumed, but depletion has reduced the production rate to a fraction and now it’s dependent on imports. On Jan 4 2022 OPEC agreed to increase oil production by 400,000 barrels per day, but achieved only 90,000. US fracking sites, trumpeted to produce for forty years, have peaked and gone into decline after only a decade.
It’s not the fuel shortage that was manufactured, it was the war in Ukraine; NATO provoked Russia into the invasion in the hope of destabilising the government so it can be replaced with one that will sell Russia’s oil and gas westward rather than eastward.
Having said all that, fuel prices have risen twice as much in the UK as in the EU and this is indeed to do with opportunistic trading and greater exposure caused by brexit, but prices have risen hugely in the EU as well.
Clark
I understand and agree with what you say and that is that there is an actual shortage of production of gas and a lesser extent oil. But I still maintain that this is largely political and the and in fact the Ukraine war was a continuation and worsening of this much politicized and manufactured crisis. You yourself stated that Russia can produce more oil and gas and in fact the nearness to Europe makes Russia a logical supplier, but this means loss of control by the US empire on both leverage on Europe and increased Russian collaboration with Europe. Russia wants a stable price and also stable relationships to invest in these supplies. Also, not currently in the equation by these analysts is the fact that Iran and Venezuela oil and gas productions are not even considered in the equation because of long term sanctions. The crisis is manufactured in order to reintroduce fracking which only becomes profitable when prices are high, to increase LNG and to strengthen the US hegemony on control of energy resources and keep the artificially high value of the dollar.I know that in fact this crisis probably sits well with the aims of XR and others who wish to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, but sadly the US is not interested in Green issues, and I am not sure about the German greens in the way that a green issue has also become entangled in increased militarism, a rather contradictory stance.
I agree with SA.
Few or more years ago I was following some so-called analyst claiming that Oil should be priced $80 or fracking would go bust and debts of the fracking industry can’t go for much longer.
Cutting off the biggest supplier of energy from the biggest market is a very dangerous move. EU is now competing with Global South and China and Japan and India for LNG transported by a limited number of ships.BTW, the same analyst claimed that Russia’s budget is based on $40 Oil price.
Allegedly Russian debt is between 15‒20% of GDPSome links I’ve been pondering:
Javier Blas Retweeted
John Kemp
@JKempEnergy 10hMIDDLE DISTILLATES are the most cyclically sensitive part of the oil market:
* If there is a global economic slowdown in 2023 it will hit distillate consumption hardest
* If distillate shortages ease it must come about through a slowdown in global growthhttps://twitter.com/JKempEnergy/status/1582380313292177408/photo/1
Javier Blas
@JavierBlas 10hThe key question is whether the White House releases *more* barrels on top of those known:
Two ways for that: 1) by fast tracking into FY2023 further Congressionally mandated sales (250m barrels FY24 to FY31), 2) by declaring another emergency and drawing down SPR further
Javier Blas
@JavierBlas 11hCOLUMN: Joe Biden has a big diesel problem
The last time commercial diesel inventories were this low in mid-Oct, Harry S. Truman was US President
New York harbor spot prices are >$200 per barrel
And US diesel refining margins hit a record high today:
https://twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1582363859364347904/photo/1– “If distillate shortages ease it must come about through a slowdown in global growth”
Clark
You need to fix your username. Apart from that all of what you post just confirms what I said.
“The key question is whether the White House releases *more* barrels on top of those known:”
Such a phrase means only one thing. The White House can influence the market by releasing more parcels. So, it is a political decision. And the political decision here is necessary to balance a commercial economic one which enables energy providers and traders to increase their prices at a whim by many different ways of manipulation. Otherwise, how can you convince me that a commodity that is so essential can double in price one day and then fall again, purely at the whim of the markets? It has very little to do, I am afraid, with supply and demand It has happened again and again.
The inherent basis of energy trading has now followed the model of financialized capitalism. This is the new lawless market led open highway robbery by which the so-called free world operates. Commodities now are not sold directly from producers to consumers but through many intermediaries who have to profiteer and make dividends for shareholders and owners. They are only interested in volatility where they can make a killing, they are not interested in the product itself nor the consumers. The ‘free market’ is nothing but a license for these traders to name their own prices.I am sending these links that show that this is an inherent problem that is unlikely to be solved under the current capitalist laws. Maybe one of the reasons for weakening Russia is that it attempted to change this model of market intermediaries and ask for direct stable fixed prices, which goes against the interests of the capitalist classes in Wall Street and the City of London.
The above link is ten years old but is relevant today. It shows how the regulators are unable to deal with market manipulation. The same happened in the sub-prime crisis in 2008 when the regulators, very much weakened by cuts, could not match the resources of the market manipulators who outwitted them.
This link from NASDAQ shows the principles of how things should ideally work.
https://inews.co.uk/news/business/ofgem-fines-firm-manipulating-energy-prices-334885
This link shows an actual example of market manipulation.
And Clark. The current form of capitalism is a very clear legalized conspiracy to defraud the general world population and create a superclass of oligarchs. The West had no problems when this happened in Russia in the Yeltsin years, and they welcomed all of the ill-gotten money into the Western system of financing. It is so hypocritical then of the Tories to be demonizing these same oligarchs whom they have befriended. Liz Truss gave the game away by exposing the underlying principle of the trickle-down mode of wealth creation, but she was so unsubtle that the establishment felt threatened and want to get rid of her. These things should be done quietly and not trumpeted out loud.
Moreover, the need for constant growth is a fundamental if capitalist economy and with finite resources and finite climate resilience is therefore unsustainable. But no one is looking for alternatives to capitalism in the west.
SA, I’m not sure we’re really in disagreement, because I’m not sure that cause and effect can be so clearly delineated. There really is a gas shortage because Russian companies really would have to build massive infrastructure to continue supplying increasing European demand. And European international demand really is rising, because European internal supply really is in depletion. This indeed leads to disproportionally large price swings due to the unregulated market mechanisms that you point out, and those with a neoliberal outlook are perfectly happy with this, and so far have held sufficient influence and power to prevent significant reform.
For it to be a conspiracy there would have to be an overall plan, whereas I think the lack of an overall plan is the cause. I think that traders plan to keep maximising their profits by exploiting the increasing price swings, the Russian government plans to win its war by relying on its massive internal resources, and the Biden administration plans to secure media support and its next election campaign funds by mollifying a large enough subset of commercial and financial entities.
The broader picture is that systems go into instability as they approach their limits.
I see Truss has resigned as PM, and yet the Tories are still going to elect another PM without consulting the wider electorate.
The cynic within wonders if her resignation has been timed to draw attention away from the publication of the report into child sexual abuse at the highest levels of society (and their initial unwillingness/refusal to investigate)?
– “to draw attention away from the publication of the report into child sexual abuse at the highest levels of society”
Fat Jon, !!!Link To It!!! – here, there and everywhere, and link to reports about it, and encourage others to post links. That’s how the web works; the more a matter is linked to, the more available it becomes. Place links in comments which name names and state facts so that search engines have the most informative things to index. Keep the comments solidly factual so that outrageous sensationalism cannot discredit the issue.
Here is reference to it but I haven’t read all of this report.
https://www.policeprofessional.com/news/inquirys-concluding-report-highlights-devastating-scale-of-child-sexual-abuse/The problem is not so much the lack of links to the sexual abuse report, but the complete capitulation of our subservient MSM who have become obsessed to the point of fetishism with what happens in Westminster and Downing Street on a minute by minute basis.
The events are given saturation news coverage 24/7, as if nothing else matters.
Can’t afford to heat your home? Never mind that because Rishi Sunak has just become the bookies’ favourite to make you even poorer.
The reason why we are in this mess is because of the dysfunctional electoral fptp system. It has created a ‘landslide for a party that was voted for by about a third of those eligible to vote. Such a situation creates a feeling of entitlement, and is one of the main reasons why the Tories now feel they have the right to govern despite making such a mess. Moreover the shameless Johnson would like to come back despite his being kicked out for dubious morality, law breaking and for lying. Nowhere in the world would this be vaguely acceptable but it just seems that the Tories will be able to get away with it, barring a miracle.
Amongst Johnson’s achievements are listed , getting us over covid, too late with one of the highest death rates;vaccine rollout; really an achievement of the scientists who made the vaccine. Otherwise billions were squandered on out of date and wrong PPE and money given to cronies for ineffective test and trace. His other achievement is supposed to be getting behind Ukraine and spending taxpayers money on arming Ukraine. In effect he was a key player in preventing a negotiated peace settlement to spare life and avoid destruction. The resulting mess and enthusiastic support for sanctions that backfired is not mentioned.
The economic crisis, cost of living and fuel crises have been made worse by the war in Ukraine it this and a possible peace to avert worldwide economic recession is not being publicly debated. The population have to be asked, are you willing to sacrifice your health services , your social support and your general standard of living, in order to support Ukraine and sanctions ruddy? The question has not been asked and is unlikely to be asked.– “The reason why we are in this mess is because of the dysfunctional electoral fptp system”
I agree with your criticisms of the current “winner takes all” electoral system, but no system of democracy can work when most of its electorate are ill-informed, disempowered, and too busy making ends meet to get involved.
The UK had a referendum on a minor electoral improvement in 2011 and voted two to one against it. When offered a tiny bit more influence, the people turned it down; maybe people don’t want responsibility, maybe they’d rather have someone to blame?
Politics in England has become a spectator sport; the small cast of distant, manicured characters of national politics are encountered only through the nation-scale media, which presents its favoured establishment stalwarts as almost godlike in their power and authority.
But note that this same media occasionally destroys one of these figures with sudden, intense media attention to their private lives. It also deploys such personal attention against those few activists to whom it grants any coverage at all; “is your own home insulated?”, “but weren’t your clothes made using fossil fuel?”, “how did you travel to the protest?”, “what if it was your mother in the ambulance stuck in the traffic you blocked?”.
The media serves as the boundary between people and politics; which side is more comfortable to stand?
I’m not sure the public turned down an alternative voting system simply because they didn’t want any responsibility.
Remember the ‘Project Fear’-style campaign which was launched by the FPTP supporters, which centred on references to “dodgy stitch-ups in smoke filled rooms” as a kind of harking back to the so-called dark days of socialist politicians and union leaders coming to decisions with beer and sandwiches, in secret meetings.
The idea that small and unpredictable extremist parties might hold the balance of power, in a hung parliament or a coalition government, was shouted from the rooftops by the right wing MSM, and probably had the desired effect on the electorate – to stick with the devil they knew, rather than take a leap into the unknown.
The referendum was not about proportional representation but about AV, a different FPTP variant. There was a lot of scaremongering campaign in order to keep the current system in operation, by the two main parties and a low turnout. One of the scaremongering techniques was to say that it will lead to more coalitions and less stable governments. And what is wrong with coalitions if they moderate the extremes of politics and represent a broader view? As we can now see the evils of FPTP system with a government that has no opposition and without parliamentary representation of any leftist views veering to the extreme right.
Fat John and SA, I agree with both your points, but they confirm my second point, that even the simplest of democratic choices – “do you, the electorate, require that each representative has the support of an absolute majority?” – is critically vulnerable to how the nation-scale media present it. Two to one against!
My overall point was more subtle; psychological and personal yet broad and somewhat rhetorical. Is politics something the majority would rather not have to do for themselves, and does the media further put people off?
Now here’s a surreal thought, but see it through for its thought-experiment value. Say the media were obsessed with refuse collection rather than national politics. The top handful of refuse collection bosses were constantly reported on, could pick and choose to whom they granted interviews, and had entire PR departments dedicated to preparing their public statements and manicuring their images. “News” and “current affairs” carried endless coverage debating the virtues of wheelie bins versus plastic bags, which and how many categories of recycling there should be, and the ethical choice between responsibly separating one’s rubbish versus individualistic freedom.
Unthinkable? But where does our idea that politics (and specifically national politics) is supremely important really come from? Purely from the relentless coverage in the national-scale media, I’d say. Politicians come and go, governments come and go, but in the important matters, such as secrecy, inequality, militarism, and that industrialisation is causing a mass extinction, nothing ever changes much. It’s as if nations and their governments didn’t really make much difference, and we may as well be getting all worked up about rivalries in the refuse collection industry.
“If voting changed anything it’d be illegal”.
