Bank Watch ...

[featherstick]

We export almost as much food as we import. For every kg of Camembert we buy from the French, we sell a kg of Cheddar to someone else.

[Little John]

This 40% thing, however it's measured, is an economic construct. If the economy changes the numbers can change. We could, physically, produce far more human food than we do.

Yes we could. However, it would require that we denude the land of what few animals we have deigned to allow to remain on it due to their having, hitherto, served our purposes. We would need to do this in order to go over to a more or less fully vegetarian diet in order to maximise calorific output.

Secondly, our current output depends massively on fossil fuel inputs. If these were to disappear, then I would be very surprised if we could make up anywhere near the shortfall even by going vegetarian and by turning all available land over to food production.

Take away the imports as well, not a chance. We had 35 million in the 2nd world war, and we only just managed to feed ourselves then. We have nearly 70 million now.

[biffvernon]

This 40% thing, however it's measured, is an economic construct. If the economy changes the numbers can change. We could, physically, produce far more human food than we do.

Yes we could. However, it would require that we denude the land of what few animals we have ...

That really isn't true. The uplands and wetter western areas will always be dominated by sheep and cows eating grass. What we can do without, if needs be, is the arable land devoted to barley for animal feed, tulips and pony paddocks.

If just the land devoted to golf courses were converted into allotments there would be an enormous increase in high quality human food produced.

Fossil fuel inputs can largely be substituted by labour, but of course for now oil is much cheaper than labour.

[UndercoverElephant]

If just the land devoted to golf courses were converted into allotments there would be an enormous increase in high quality human food produced.

Ah yes, golf courses. If you take a look at a map of the countryside bordering Brighton, you will find no less than seven golf courses within 3km.

(Bear in mind that to the south of Brighton there is only sea, and to the west the conurbation extends into Hove and Shoreham.)

[Little John]

This 40% thing, however it's measured, is an economic construct. If the economy changes the numbers can change. We could, physically, produce far more human food than we do.

Yes we could. However, it would require that we denude the land of what few animals we have ...

That really isn't true. The uplands and wetter western areas will always be dominated by sheep and cows eating grass. What we can do without, if needs be, is the arable land devoted to barley for animal feed, tulips and pony paddocks.

If just the land devoted to golf courses were converted into allotments there would be an enormous increase in high quality human food produced.

Fossil fuel inputs can largely be substituted by labour, but of course for now oil is much cheaper than labour.

How, exactly, do you suppose that we could provide anywhere near enough food for ourselves in the event of;

a) a lack of economic ability to continue to import food
b) a lack of economic ability to import fertilisers
c) a population of nearly 70 million given that we already have concrete experience of struggling to feed 35 million

[clv101]

How, exactly, do you suppose that we could provide anywhere near enough food for ourselves in the event of;

a) a lack of economic ability to continue to import food
b) a lack of economic ability to import fertilisers
c) a population of nearly 70 million given that we already have concrete experience of struggling to feed 35 million

Check out Simon Farlie's book Meat or the last (or last but one) The Land magazine which had a summary. The numbers are pretty clear that we can feed the UK's population, organically with some meat using mixed agriculture. The challenges are social and political, not physical.

[biffvernon]

But, but, but, we might have to play less golf...

[nexus]

Who was it that said that golf was a good walk...ruined.

[raspberry-blower]

How, exactly, do you suppose that we could provide anywhere near enough food for ourselves in the event of;

a) a lack of economic ability to continue to import food
b) a lack of economic ability to import fertilisers
c) a population of nearly 70 million given that we already have concrete experience of struggling to feed 35 million

Check out Simon Farlie's book Meat or the last (or last but one) The Land magazine which had a summary. The numbers are pretty clear that we can feed the UK's population, organically with some meat using mixed agriculture. The challenges are social and political, not physical.

Simon Farlie's article Can Britain Feed Itself
An updated article taking the premise one step further Can Britain Farm Itself? in the current edition of The Land magazine

[UndercoverElephant]

http://usawatchdog.com/libor-interest-r ... #more-8451

The Libor interest rate rigging scandal is being called the biggest financial fraud in history. Libor is a key interest rate that is used globally to set as much as $800 trillion in transactions. It is used to set interest rates for things such as credit cards, student loans, mortgages, corporate bonds and hundreds of trillions of dollars in derivatives. Libor stands for the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate. It is supposed to be an estimate of what it would cost for some of the biggest banks in the world to borrow money from one another. Sixteen global banks are involved in setting the rate, three of which are in the U.S. (JP Morgan, B of A, and Citi.) It was recently revealed by Barclays Bank (in the UK) that this key interest rate quoted by most of these banks was nothing more than a gigantic rate rigging scheme.

In a financial system reeling from one fraud after another, this is the mother of all rip-offs by the banksters. Karl Denninger of Market-ticker.org calls this, “the largest organized theft ever committed in human history.” This has already brought out lawsuits by the dozens from investors and institutions who say they were cheated by Libor rate rigging. Who’s suing the big banks? A better question might be who’s not suing? Let’s start with investors both big and small. CNN reported last week, “With Libor’s alleged suppression, Charles Schwab says, it was deprived of the higher interest payments it deserved. In another complaint, individual investor Ellen Gelboim claims she purchased corporate bonds that paid variable interest based on Libor, and suffered lower returns as the banks held the rate down.” (Click here for the complete CNN story.) These lawsuits and others have been combined into one in federal court in New York, but avalanches of new cases are coming.

Several state AG’s are also suing, right alongside municipalities and cities around the country, and that is just in the U.S. Remember, this scandal is global. Hedge funds trading in derivatives are going to line up to sue the big banks if they were on the losing end of a trade. Libor affects $550 trillion in derivative contracts. Some investors got hurt when Libor was manipulated up, and some took losses when Libor was manipulated down. There is something for everyone, and that equates to very big exposure to the banks involved in the alleged rate rigging. If the banks are responsible for just 1/10 of one percent of the $800 trillion in Libor transactions, it would represent $800 billion in liability to the banks. I’ll bet the total cost will be much higher, and some banks will go under as a result of litigation and loss of reputation. Ron Hera of Hera Research told me last week, “Truth is, if you take back more than 1% of what the banks have stolen, they’re busted.”

Another unintended consequence of the exposure of the Libor rate rigging scandal may have an effect on the value on the almighty U.S. dollar. Rob Kirby wrote a great piece you can read at Goldseek.com that said, “Libor . . . is one of the lynch pins in setting [rigging] global U.S. Dollar interest rates. This is why a larger discussion needs to be had about the Libor rigging – it is not a London or Barclay’s centric story. It has EVERYTHING to do with making the American Dollar look viable as the world’s reserve currency.” (Click here for the complete post.) How are the U.S. dollar and Treasuries going to fare when the manipulation of Libor stops cold?

Maybe everything is rigged, and there are no free markets anymore. That’s a point the Business-Standard.com brought up last week when it said, “. . . investigations have started to discover other examples of rate-fixing in multiple countries. These enquiries are likely to cover a wide range of indices that have hitherto been believed to be set by “the market”. These indices include ones that set the worldwide prices for natural gas, crude oil, metals, wheat and many, many other commodities, all of which are set by clubs similar to the one that sets Libor.” (Click here for the complete story.)

The banks are surrounded legally on Libor rate rigging. Some are already saying the financial damage is going to be so hard to calculate that the banks involved won’t be on the hook for much money. I say, this is going to drag the banks down like an oversized boat anchor in a thousand feet of deep blue sea. The damage may not be felt immediately, but it’s there, and it will drag on for years or until the next financial collapse. Yesterday, one visitor to the site asked, “Do you think that these bankers will be indicted for the LIBOR scandal?” I replied, “Not only are the big banks “too big to fail,” but the banksters are “too big to jail!” That does not mean there will not be big consequences for this sort of fraudulent criminal activity. Unfortunately, we will all take a big hit.”

The Libor scandal is another in a long line of lies that are undermining the confidence in the financial system. MF Global, PFGBest, foreclosure fraud, Lehman Brothers collapse, EU debt crisis, toxic assets, TARP and JP Morgan’s London Whale trading scandal are just a few of the things that are causing people to lose faith. The economy cannot thrive, let alone recover, in an environment of fraud and corruption. Both debt and criminals need to be flushed from the global economy. The Libor rate rigging scandal is coming at a time when the Federal Reserve is worrying about a sinking economy, fiscal cliffs and a crushing EU debt crisis. Is the Libor lie the black swan that finally sinks the system?

It looks to me like the global financial system is now, as Kunstler put it, pranged. It was in serious trouble already, but this is so big that no amount of sticky tape or lies can come anywhere near stopping the meltdown. We already know there are a whole load more banks involved, some of them heading for bigger fines than Barclays. What's already in the pipeline is enough to completely wipe out every bank involved (via litigation), but that's not even the biggest problem. The real reason it is pranged beyond redemption is that the existing system still depends on LIBOR and that means that next time the system comes under major stress (which is going to happen), the riggers are going to have to choose between rigging LIBOR again, even while the lawsuits and inquiries are going on, or admitting the truth. And if what happens is anything like what happened in 2008 then the truth will be the following:

There is no LIBOR rate, because in reality none of the banks involved can get any sort of overnight loans whatsoever.

And that breaks the system instantly. You might say "they'll just rig it again", but how can they do that when the entire world, including lots of other people who are responsible for looking after vast amounts of other people's money, are watching? Who in the bank is going to take responsibility for the decision to rig? Are they going to do it on the basis of a "misunderstanding"??

[peaceful_life]

How, exactly, do you suppose that we could provide anywhere near enough food for ourselves in the event of;

a) a lack of economic ability to continue to import food
b) a lack of economic ability to import fertilisers
c) a population of nearly 70 million given that we already have concrete experience of struggling to feed 35 million

Check out Simon Farlie's book Meat or the last (or last but one) The Land magazine which had a summary. The numbers are pretty clear that we can feed the UK's population, organically with some meat using mixed agriculture. The challenges are social and political, not physical.

Sorry for straying off topic of OP.

Colin Tudge.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP2Ey8wG0PY
Also author of 'feeding people is easy'.

[UndercoverElephant]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP2Ey8wG0PY

Yes. Unless we address the strategic, structural flaw (that the goal of modern farming is the maximisation of profit when what is actually required if the system is going to be sustainable is something else entirely) then the rest of the debate is a bit pointless. It's actually the same strategic problem we have with the banks.

[peaceful_life]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP2Ey8wG0PY

Yes. Unless we address the strategic, structural flaw (that the goal of modern farming is the maximisation of profit when what is actually required if the system is going to be sustainable is something else entirely) then the rest of the debate is a bit pointless. It's actually the same strategic problem we have with the banks.

His points on the metaphysical, and how the planet is viewed as a commodidty is the essential meme to break.

Money has been ascribed the illusion of dominion, how is that bankable unless it's usage is completely inverted on itself where repair is given worth?

[UndercoverElephant]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP2Ey8wG0PY

Yes. Unless we address the strategic, structural flaw (that the goal of modern farming is the maximisation of profit when what is actually required if the system is going to be sustainable is something else entirely) then the rest of the debate is a bit pointless. It's actually the same strategic problem we have with the banks.

His points on the metaphysical, and how the planet is viewed as a commodidty is the essential meme to break.

Money has been ascribed the illusion of dominion, how is that bankable unless it's usage is completely inverted on itself where repair is given worth?

That is going to be a tough meme to break, but I think it is breakable. I remain hopeful that this time really is different. One of the effects the unprecedented scale of the financial/economic/political shock that is coming will have is to provoke all sorts of people who are normally fast asleep into waking up, in order to try to understand how the unthinkable ended up happening. Then add to that the existence of the internet and how social media and non-mainstream news sources have changed the way cultural change takes place. I hope this will lead to a public debate where all manner of normally-taboo questions, including metaphysical ones, are openly discussed.

[Aurora]

The Guardian - 16/07/12

Barclays boss told me to change Libor, says banker

Jerry del Missier tells MPs he believed he was acting on Bank of England's instruction when he manipulated interest rates in 2008.

Article continues ...

No real surprises there then.