Saturday, September 28, 2013

Economic terrorism





It was a rainy morning of October 2008, Her Majesty waked up. She asked for her dresses, as in the morning she will see Mr. Brown. Honestly she liked much more Tony. 

Never mind, during this hard times may be Gordon can explain her something. She was a bit nervous. The financial markets are shaken and she does not like such news. She remembered all the recessions since the Great Depression. She definitely hates this.

Gordon came and she was listening him. And in her mind again Tony. Why Tony let this man to talk so much and so complicated? She understands not a single word.


Gordon left. She called Edward. Is there any chance to get some explanation to these financial events? Edward looked a bit worried, but promised to help.

She was wondering while finishing her tea. Today it got more bitter taste than usual…





Few months later Edward came to her office;

 Mam, I need you for a presentation. So what is
this all about?

Your Majesty asked me if I could get some explanation for the crisis. Please let me take you there.

Good Edward, just make sure they will speak English.
 
Certainly Mam…

Who will I meat this time?

Professor Luis Garciano.

She listened the man, all the analysis of the previous situation as well as the possible ways to get out from it.




The Queen have asked one simple question:

 ‘How come nobody could foresee it?’

The professor answered: 

“I think the main answer is that people were doing what they were paid to do, and behaved according to their incentives, but in many cases they were being paid to do the wrong things from society’s perspective.”

(Guardian, 26 July, 2009 ) - See more at:



The Queen went home and called Edward.

Edward, where did you hide this bright man till now?


1535 July 6th was a shiny day… Thomas was sitting in his cell and felt a sort of relief. The last hours of his life. He accepted his destiny.

Being and advisor to the King is not always a lucky job. Anna is a clever woman,
very clever. Managed to pull in her whole family…

The King – I tried to save him, but cannot. The God will judge him anyway…

Someone knocking on the door – Sir Thomas, we came for you…



The history changes right?

At 1535 if His Majesty did not like his advisor, they just beheaded him. That is what happened to Thomas More and to many in his seat. Why the King did not liked Thomas? Hmm… because he did stand for his values. And he was ready to die for that. Thomas gave pretty good advices, but he also had some principles.




What about today?

Today the economic science getting closer and closer to Astrology or Fortune telling. However there is a big difference. The astrologist or any fortuneteller are paid to predict our future. We pay and they say what they think about.

Our modern day economists, sorry the majority of them are in many ways sitting on the both ends of the economic processes. 

They are the one supposed to predict and guide their nations and businesses in their future strategies, but on the other end they are by many ways the beneficiaries of multiple private businesses. By the income the majority gets far higher benefits from their “private” functions.

On the “lower levels” it is very clear, that the financial advisors usually guide us for those financial products, which give higher benefit for them, I mean for the advisors and not you as a customer…



Sounds funny right? In fact more complicated a scheme, more chances you have to lose money. They all play on one single factor – your secret desire – the human greed. They all promise you higher than the market returns. But in fact this in general terms impossible. So at the end of the day you will be happy to get out from such schemes and feel lucky if you did not lose money. On the other end your financial advisor will make sure, that he gets his payment the first day you entered into the deal…



Before the crisis majority of those so-called financial advisers failed to present the truth to the customer. That was one of the major problems leading to the catastrophe.

What happens to a doctor, if he gives the wrong medication, or makes you harm due to incompetence or negligence. The doctor will be fined, or prohibited from further practice or in worst case even jailed.

What happened to those advisors, who made you lose your money?

Absolutely nothing. They got paid, they might said sorry and now they are sitting in the same chairs or in some others and giving exactly the same advises. And they make sure, that you do not read those small letters at the bottom of the contract you just about to sign.

Think about this…


Do you think on the “higher levels” the situation is better?

Don’t be so naïve:

Academic financial economists hold many roles in the private financial sector, from serving on boards to ownership of financial services firms. Often academic economists serve as consultants for financial firms. The desire to obtain and hold a consultancy, which serves as an additional source of income, may bias these economists’ views of the appropriate contours of financial regulation. A similar but stronger argument can be made for those economists that serve on boards of important and large private financial companies or who work as ongoing employees of the firm. Still other economists have founded or co-founded their own financial services firms and retain either an ownership role, a role as a chief economist or as a co-founder. It is clear that these economists might have a vested interest in the nature of financial regulation.”
Just let me give you one more sentence from the above study examining how much the “high scholars” are involved in the private sector..

“More specifically, of the nineteen economists that we included in our study, we found that thirteen, or almost 70%, worked in some capacity with private financial institutions. In our sample, two of the financial academic economists are co-founders of private financial services firms where they work in key positions, one as managing partner and the other as chief economist. In the case of the former, the firm is owned by all the managing partners, making the former an owner of the firm. In the case of the latter, we were unable to determine ownership. 

A third economist works for two banks, in one case as president and in the other as director. Eight of the financial academic economists serve on the board of directors of private financial firms and two economists were identified as consultants or affiliated experts for private financial firms. Since it is difficult to identify consultancies unless either the company or the economist mentions it, it is likely that more than two economists served as consultants.”
And this robbers work from inside, so even a bunch of handsome policemen cannot stop their actions...
In the meantime study does not trace those cases, when the scholar’s research is funded by a private entity. In case they would check this aspect as well, it would definitely show even worst situation from the one they describe.

In general there must be a focus on those, who advise any government and their relationship with the private and public sectors. Otherwise we shall walk into the next disaster…

In general it makes no sense to let the wolf to look after our lambs. And I let you think about one question.

How long shall we let this situation?






No comments:

Post a Comment