Anonymous 1 needed this 'Off the Record'

Still on Life support
Your post at #448.
On Germany and Euroland.
The fact is, it is not in the interests of Germany to resolve the problerm of periferal countries in Euroland for two reasons-
1. Keeps the exchange rate of the Euro down, thus giving them an advantage. Effectively it means that instead of becoming anothetr Switzerland, they have become the China of Europe.
2. They can buy up assets in the periferal countries on the cheap, and become an even bigger economic force, controlling most of Europe.
This is likely to go on until something snaps.
Wait to see how long it takes for Greece to come out of the Euro. Seems to me that that is the most sensible way out for them.
Nevertheless, industrial growth of 10% is admirable and compares well to that of China.
Strip that out of the German GDP equation and what sort of growth (on the services side) do you get?
Again for various reasons it seems that people are more willing to buy German stuff than ours, and this is a concern that should be addressed urgently.
Certainly Germany is another living proof that developed nations cannot rely on services for growth

Prof Eman

Prof

Germany and the EURO

Is it really in the interests of the Germans to see their customers go bust? Do they really want or need millions more poverty stricken neighbours riven with political and possibly armed strife? It will eventually penetrate to all concerned that they are in a symbiotic relationship, not predatory or parasitic.

Re #442

I think you are paraphrasing a lot of what Jeff said in your points 1 and 2.

Your point 3 - the auditors are paid to check the arithmetic in the accounts and the apparent adherence to legal requirements.

They are paid by the company and appointed by the managers. There are often differences of interest between owners and managers.

If auditors were appointed directly by shareholders then, except in the case where management were the largest shareholders, they could be more active checking for fraud, sloppiness etcetera.

Putting a limit on the length of time one auditor as an individual could serve would limit excessive chumminess.

Putting a limit on the total number of years an auditing firm as a whole could serve would remove the incentive to make nice with whomsoever appoints the auditor.

The disadvantages to change are that the whole relationship between managers of big companies, fund managers, cross shareholdings, multiple directorships... is riddled with conflicts of interest. You might end up with relationships going underground like the Mafia. What else are gentleman's clubs for?

There is a value in continuity. An auditor familiar with the way things are is likely to spot change and wonder why.

Well managed relationships between people of integrity can produce better results. Trust is valuable.

It boils down to personal morality. Our education system, our political system and our role models need to place more value on that.

I am not calling for the stifling of freedom of expression and individual non-conformity that existed in 1950s Britain. The reaction to that resulted in the largely fictional excesses of the Swinging Sixties and the all too real era of "Greed is good".

Prof

More on the 50p tax rate from the Undercover Economist:

It is a fuss about nothing.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/...-b199-00144feabdc0.html

An interesting article on what has gone wrong in the USA since 9/11 and how little it had to do with terrorism. Relevant to us because when Uncle Sam sneezes the rest of the world catches cold. Same with China so we can look forward to twice as many colds :-(

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/...bdc0.html#axzz1Xb0whb00

Whatisname

Besides youthful naivety, I suppose that is the result of over-prescriptive rules, regulations, legislation etcetera. Use check-lists by all means. But we need to revert to general principles and have the flexibility to depart from rules where they do not make sense. I believe that in corporate governance matters this is called "comply or explain". There is nothing wrong with footnotes, end notes and appendices!

Jaremy 485

Graeber has got it right
USA debt to China keeps their factories working and so their poulation are happy.
Cheap Chinese goods keeps the Yanks happy.
It suits both sides.

The only way it can finish is if China forgives the American debt!
It feels wrong, but I am not sure it is!