Posted by: graemebird | February 1, 2010

Special Buoyancy.

Real climate science revision. From elsewhere:

See you aren’t going to get it because all you do is get your smartass comebacks from Coby Beck and Realclimate.

Because you are used to averaging everything you don’t get the context. When these guys go for the radiative heat balance they average out all the real information.

Water vapour is actually proof of refrigeration. And its not water vapour alone that does the job. Its the dual act of water vapour and microscopic liquid airborne water. Remember that phrase. If you use the phrase “droplets” you will never click.

Supposing we are talking mid lattitude ocean. Summer. A hot day. A parcel of water vapour saturated air comes off the ocean since the wind is whipping along. This has a massive refrigeration effect. The water vapour is blocking huge amounts of incoming and outgoing at the same time. Its a net cooler in this context. I know its a warmer in other contexts so don’t jump ahead. There is no doubt its a net cooler in the situation described. Both for its refrigerant effect on the ocean. And its buoyancy. Since the surrounding air is dry it takes all that energy straight up to mid-troposphere. Thats a cooler if ever there was one.

Contrast this to the ocean at the equator. Much the same story. Only this time there is not much buoyancy. Now the water vapour may go up some. But we get a situation where much of the water vapour hangs out low down. Continually phase changing. Releasing that refrigerant energy via the phase change back to water. But only microscopic airborne liquid water. Not droplets. There is no buoyancy in your otherworldly model.

Now consider the microscopic airborne liquid water. It is like no gas for warming. It is 100-1000 times the weight of the molecules surrounding it. It can be grabbing energy from above and below. It can be sinking when its warmer than the surrounding molecules. There is really not much in the way of greenhouse effect. Its really all about water phase-change in mid-air.

Thats the secret of the globe heating up. Essentially it is the expansion of the tropical zone pushing the other zones north and south and up the mountains. The tropical zone is the zone where water-vapour saturated parcels of air lack special buoyancy.

If the above is true why doesn’t the water vapour keep heating up and continue to get more and more buoyant as it gets higher? How is it that the water vapour ever manages to cool enough to turn into droplets so as to form clouds. There are quite a few reasons going into this story and so I’ll concentrate on the neglected one. You see what we are told are greenhouse absorption spectrum, when looking at an individual molecule, are really greenhouse scattering spectrum. Yes its true that in the totality of the interactions most of that spectrum of light will eventually be absorbed and turned into thermal energy. The molecules scatter most of this, and absorb some of this. In the final analysis the totality of the atmosphere will absorb these wavelengths its true.

But there is a trick to this. The higher is the air pressure the more effectively the air can absorb rather than simply scatter the wavelength regions. So when the parcel of water vapour saturated air first comes off the ocean it is scattering IR light from above and below. But it can absorb quite a bit of it as well as just scatter it. As it gets higher and higher, though its absorbed awesome amounts of energy, the parcel of air has expanded (((((( expansion leads itself to cooling)))) and because that parcel of air has less air pressure it is now almost only scattering the light and no longer absorbing hardly any of it and turning it into thermal energy. Otherwise it would go on rising to the top of the stratosphere. Its important to understand the role of the air pressure in determining how effective the air is able to absorb and convert this light, rather than merely scatter it.

Now why would that be??? Well I won’t go right into it. But I’ll just give you a working model based on somebody else’s quote. It will do fine for now:

“Photons HAVE wavelengths.

The CO2 (and all the other greenhouse gases) re-emits everything it has absorbed if it hasn’t lost/spread the energy through collisions with surrounding molecules first. And this re-emission happens incredibly fast. See my post above about Downwelling Longwave Radiation. So it doesn’t have time to move much of anywhere before the energy re-balances.”

What Glen is describing is the following model of things. The photon hits the molecule. This causes an electron to jump up to a higher “orbital” But then the electron jumps back down and emits another photon but in a random direction. There is a time delay. Its not straight scattering. But the wavelength is unchanged. But what if we have the following sequence of events.

1. Photon hits molecule. 2. Molecule absorbs photon and this causes electron to jump up to a higher orbital 3. Molecule hits other molecule prior to the electron releasing an identical photon.

Bear in mind I’m not buying this model except as a working model. And it works for this purpose. The point is that the molecules will scatter light in their scattering-absorption region unless interrupted by another molecule in the middle of this process. And what makes it MORE LIKELY that any molecule will be so interrupted? Air pressure of course. It is air pressure that makes the gases more effective at absorbing and converting the light into thermal energy. Understanding the effects of air pressure is a massive part of understanding climate.



  1. “Contrary to my expectations the RBA did not raise interest rates this afternoon.”

    Is this further evidence that these guys have no fucking idea what they are doing?

    Or is it further evidence that international bankers act as a single cartel and have immense, if not total, influence over eachother?

    You decide. But permutations between these two options are really the only choice in the matter. The reserve bank is doing this country untold harm by not acting more quickly.

    They may be doing ME an enourmous amount of medium term good. But they are doing the country incredible. harm.

  2. Moderated from elsewhere:

    Right. Good post. Libertarianism as a sort of middle ground. As a compromise. People can get caught up thinking of libertarian as libertine. Actually a near-libertarian society may well be quite censorious on a social level, since the level of brute force is ruled out, or ruled out except in extremis.

    Its a bit like saying, we disapprove of what you are doing, we don’t need to like you, but we will try and keep the ground-rules happening for everyone, that compulsion is pretty heavy stuff. Not to be used lightly. So for the most part, we don’t want compulsion to be used for OR against any social trends out there.

    Self preservation however, suggests that we ought look for and act against concerted campaigns of social manipulation, that may be projected with real intent, from any overseas regime. We have a sense of the flavour of Soviet subversion in the old days. But we cannot know the particular shape that modern efforts of political warfare are taking right now, unless we look for them.

  3. “I really don’t understand why Terje persists in dying in the ditch over this 20th order monetary issue. It’s not as if we are constantly facing high inflation.”

    For fucksakes SOON. Why the flying fuck are you so intent on LEARNING anything. What do you mean we don’t have high inflation. We have high and appalling monetary inflation and its destroying our society. Its leading to creation of debt to foreigners, on one side of the balance sheet, and on the other side all the money going to non-wealth creating activities.

    Fucking LEARN Soon. You don’t seem to want to learn anything.

    I suppose you think all this housing inflation is normal and the result of EFFICIENT CAPITAL MARKETS. Rather its proof of totally debauched and corrupted capital markets.

    Its ruining this country before your very eyes you blind fucking dumb, economics-denier.

    I’ve been around how long? Early 2006. And you are still incapable of learning this stuff.

    Forget Terje. He’s a monetary crank. Nonetheless fractional gold would not have this sort of misdirection of funds. When the crash came we could do nothing about it but at least it would punish debt and reward savings. At least the bigshots end of town would have more turnover. And at least all our investment resources would not be wasted on shit projects.

  4. What is the point of the link?

  5. So there was no point to the link was there?

    I would be hard put to think of anyone more ignorant of matters monetary than yourself. You are saying WHAT exactly? That having a Jewish sounding corporate name matters to some sort of what?

    Forgiveness in advance?

    What are you saying?

  6. So you don’t HAVE an argument do you? That was more disgusting then I would have expected from Adrien or some dummy of that ilk. Lets go over it again:

    And this time make an actual argument.

    “I really don’t understand why Terje persists in dying in the ditch over this 20th order monetary issue. It’s not as if we are constantly facing high inflation.”

    For fucksakes SOON. Why the flying fuck are you so intent on LEARNING anything. What do you mean we don’t have high inflation. We have high and appalling monetary inflation and its destroying our society. Its leading to creation of debt to foreigners, on one side of the balance sheet, and on the other side all the money going to non-wealth creating activities.

    Fucking LEARN Soon. You don’t seem to want to learn anything.

    I suppose you think all this housing inflation is normal and the result of EFFICIENT CAPITAL MARKETS. Rather its proof of totally debauched and corrupted capital markets.

    Its ruining this country before your very eyes you blind fucking dumb, economics-denier.

    I’ve been around how long? Early 2006. And you are still incapable of learning this stuff.

    Forget Terje. He’s a monetary crank. Nonetheless fractional gold would not have this sort of misdirection of funds. When the crash came we could do nothing about it but at least it would punish debt and reward savings. At least the bigshots end of town would have more turnover. And at least all our investment resources would not be wasted on shit projects.

  7. Don’t hide behind disgusting vicious links SOON. Make the argument in your own words. Why is it after four years that you think misdirection of capital investment is a twentieth order issue?

    You are supposed to be an economist man? We expect this irrationality from Humphreys and this toadying attitude from Cambria? What is in it for you to be maintaining this level of ignorance.

    How can the quality of ones capital markets be a twentieth order issue. Thats just idiocy. The attitude could not be more idiotic. No free enterprise assumptions can be relied on in such a setup.

  8. From elsewhere:

    What a disgraceful article. Goldman Sachs wrongoing is manifold, large, obvious, and serious. And you are saying that if someone points that out they are anti-semitic. That is what you are saying. The message came through loud and clear. Lets not be coy about this. Go hang yourself in the woman’s toilet you jerk. Infiltrating the government, scuttling the treasury, bribing the Congress, stealing from the taxpayer, for yourself and everyone you have counterparty risk with ….. these are not small wrongdoings.

    What percentage of the employees of this firm are you claiming are Jewish? Paulson isn’t a Jew for example. But he is a criminal. Or criminally stupid as the case may be. This article could not be more disgusting. How did it ever get through the editors?

  9. you dope

    the article pointed out that it was Rush who made that argument

  10. Rush who made WHAT argument?

  11. Rush Limbaugh made the same argument you accuse the author of making. it’s in the article. learn to read

  12. Perhaps the article is not quite as sinister as the implication of you posting it and saying nothing, made it seem. They’ve wiped my comment. Which I suppose was too harsh. I have this fellow on video before me now. He’s a bit of a wet weed and so I suppose I was too harsh when dealing with someone so feeble. No harm done. The post lasted about 5 minutes. I was thinking of wiping it myself.

    But his article is just muddying the waters. Goldman Sachs salaries averaged out, down to the lowest employee, 770 000 dollars last year. I never thought to think that the place might have a greater percentage of Jews than say JP Morgan. Morgan himself was an anti-semite. I’m not accusing him of being a nazi. But he had these prejudices.

    Ask yourself this? Does Goldman Sachs have a greater Jewish percentage than the gang that Abbadabba Berman belonged too?

    The Americans have seen organized crime first with the Irish gangs, then Jewish, then Italian. I don’t think that the criminality is anywhere near so racially defined in the more modern finance gangs. If you think about the problem that way it takes the emotion out of it.

    Organised crimes rings: You have to smash them by all means within the law, without worrying about whether you will be seen as anti-Irish, anti-Semitic, or anti-Woppy.

    When I say that Irish organized crime would have needed to be smashed as well, I do so with enormous sympathy for the people of the Irish diaspora. Its not an anti-Irish conclusion at all.

    So the idea is that Goldman Sachs has to be taken down, and all its former employees that have infiltrated into government, have to be booted out. No different from how you’d deal with any other crime syndicate.

    But its not a Jewish thing, its an organised crime thing.

  13. Marcy Kaptur doing great interrogating Geithner:

  14. My new hero Marcy Kaptur. She is a real class act:

  15. You are making it up surely? You are a socialist. A bank socialist. She doesn’t seem to think that stealing money off the taxpayer and giving it to the banks is okay. This would make her less socialist than you.

  16. I’ll check out her wiki profile. See if there is merit to your accusation.

  17. I’m just not seeing anything that would reinforce your claim. She is from a small business background. Her family had a grocery store. Here is what she said about the bailout:

    She also blamed Wall Street executives for their greed and held them responsible for the crisis and said

    “You have perpetrated the greatest financial crimes ever on this American Republic. You think you can get by with it because you are extraordinarily wealthy, and the largest contributors to both presidential and congressional campaigns in both major parties…..”

    I’m not seeing anything smacking of hard leftist. Nothing Barbara Boxer about her.

  18. Oh right I’ve found something in favour of your thesis. She’s into this green energy. But she’s been lied to there. So thats not conclusive.

  19. You going to tell me why you think she is a socialist? I’m just not seeing it.

    Is this where you call socialist undertakings and government-to-government deals “free trade deals” and then turn everything on its head?

    Is this where you are flippant about the loss of local industry going overseas? Is this where you equate all such concerns to tarrifs and then equate tarrifs to socialism?

    You see you don’t think SOON. And then you have to wind up going silent because the argument is not there.

    I noted that Marcy, like anyone not a lunatic, is concerned with the loss of manufacturing jobs. How did you get so confused as to equate this with socialism. Only a lunatic and economics illiterate would NOT be alarmed as this continual relative loss.

  20. from wiki

    “She pleaded a “Wall Street Reckoning” and an alternate plan whereby “America doesn’t need to bail you out. It needs to secure real assets and property. Federal regional reserve banks should have a new job to help renegotiate mortgages. American people should get equity in any companies. Major job creation to rebuild our infrastructure. Regulate, we need a modern Glass-Steagall act. Refinancing must return a major share of profits to a new social security and medicare lock

  21. Right? So you give the banks money for nothing, you get something for the bailout, or you let them fail.

    Thats the 3 options in order of which is the most socialst right there. You are choosing the most socialist. I am choosing the most free enterprise. Kaptur is taking the middle option.

    I cannot anywhere find a justification for your bank socialism. So you give them this money and you get nothing back in your view?

  22. What exactly is your argument. You posting stuff without a supplmentary comment, casting wrongheaded aspersions and forcing the other guy to be a fucking mindreader….

    Well its annoying and gutless. If you forced yourself to actually make the argument, you would find that the argument you were making was illogical.

  23. You haven’t made your case. I’m just going to hap to wipe your earlier lie.

  24. What do you think of this number Philomena. The line I’m taking is that the subtext of this song is how a better world ought to be. Cannot seem to get it loud enough for the effect I’m after:

  25. “Two years on from the biggest financial crisis to strike world capitalism since the 1930s, leading international bankers made clear at last week’s World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland that they will resist any attempts to reign in the speculative practices that have led to governments running up unprecedented levels of debt and the loss of tens of millions of jobs.

    The warning signs of a “double-dip” recession, trade war and the bankruptcy of entire countries formed the backdrop to the annual Davos proceedings, where the world’s leading bankers and CEOs have discussed their business strategies with top politicians and economists for the past 40 years.

    The fears of impending trade war between the US and China were stoked by comments in Davos from Larry Summers, the chief economic adviser to President Obama. In a panel discussion with Zhu Min, deputy minister of China’s central bank, Summers attacked China’s trade and monetary policies and warned that the US was prepared to respond by stepping up its protectionist measures.

    Pointing out the consequences of the huge sums of money pumped into the economy by governments around the world, Harvard University economics professor Kenneth Rogoff bluntly declared that for those in their 30s, “It will be terrible for you.” Addressing the huge indebtedness of the German economy, Rogoff told a young German at the forum that Germany’s debt was exploding and there was no alternative to austerity measures and significant tax increases. “It will be very, very painful,” Rogoff added.

    The reaction of bankers at the conference to the catastrophic results of their own activities was to unite in defense of their profits and multimillion-dollar bonuses. The most important lesson drawn by the lords of international finance from the events of the past two years is that they can rely on the unconditional support of their respective governments to bail them out.

    This was summed up in a debate between Carlyle Group LP co-founder David Rubenstein and New York University Professor Nouriel Roubini. Rubenstein said, “We’ve gone through a bit of a heart attack and heart attacks are not fatal so much anymore, so we’ve learned a lot.”

    The lesson for Rubenstein is that as a result of government backing, speculative opportunities have never been so good. He declared that now is a “pretty attractive” time to invest, and boasted that the deals his investment group had sealed in 2009 “will prove to be the best deals we have made this decade.”

    One of the main points of discussion at the Davos meeting were proposals to regulate certain activities of the banking sector, such as those put forward recently by Obama. Bankers are well aware that such proposals leave untouched whole areas of speculative trading and are mainly for public consumption. As one US commentator noted, any proposals for curbing the activities of the banks “have about as much chance of getting through Congress as politicians have of getting into heaven.”

    The Davos conference began with a speech by French President Nicholas Sarkozy, who raised the issue of international regulation of the banks. Sarkozy criticised the greed of bankers, expressed agreement with the Obama’s administration’s proposal to ban proprietary trading by commercial banks, and called for a new Bretton Woods system—referring to the international agreements that anchored US economic supremacy at the end of the Second World War. Sarkozy was at pains to stress that his priority was to save capitalism, not bury it.

    The French president’s bluster is taken with a large grain of salt by financial figures. When asked for his reaction to Sarkozy’s remarks and Obama’s proposals, Jacko Maree, CEO of the US-based Standard Bank, replied that “a lot of those proposals are politically appealing, but practically unlikely to happen.”

    The bankers’ offensive at Davos was led by Josef Ackermann, the chief executive of Germany’s biggest bank, Deutsche Bank, and by Peter Sands, CEO of Standard Chartered, one of Britain’s biggest banks.

    Ackermann told the audience at a panel discussion that it was time to stop playing “the blame game.” In a barely concealed threat that major banks might further reduce their lending, Ackermann warned, “If you don’t have a strong financial sector to support this recovery … you’re making a huge mistake and you will regret it later on.”

    Ackermann’s comments were echoed by Sands. When asked whether he supported measures to break up banks that are currently deemed by governments to be “too big to fail,” Sands responded, “The unambiguous answer is no.”

    During the conference, Ackermann took part in a meeting of bank CEOs to discuss a common strategy to repulse any limits on their activities. On Saturday, he and other leading bankers met for confidential discussions with the finance ministers of France and Britain, European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet, and IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Also present was US Congressman Barney Frank, who heads the House Financial Services Committee.

    While refusing to reveal any details of the talks, Ackermann praised the spirit of cooperation that prevailed, declaring, “There was better dialogue between business leaders, political and regulatory leaders than ever before.”

    Two days after the Davos forum, the German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority lifted the ban on short selling in Germany. This particular form of speculation was banned by the German regulatory authority in September 2008 following the outbreak of the international financial crisis.

    The level of arrogance displayed by the bankers in Davos is matched only by their contempt for a political caste that is fully subservient to their demands. The private discussions at Davos made clear that any measures drawn up by capitalist governments to regulate banking activities will be little more than window dressing.

    The past two years have revealed the enormous political influence and socially destructive role of the banks and major financial institutions. A deepening social catastrophe can be prevented only by the expropriation of the financial oligarchs and conversion of the banks into public utilities.”

    Stefan Steinberg

    • I made some lengthy comments but found myself locked out from my own blog. Don’t be surprised if it takes me some time to respond to your comments. I’ve got to find out what is going on. There is a case for some of the above if we can establish that international banking near-cartel, amounts to the equivalent of an enemy foreign regime, who will always cause us trouble if we don’t clip its wings.

  26. While no expense is spared in bailing out the banks, one in eight Americans need emergency food assistance.

    • The bailout could not be more disgusting. But will Cambria admit it? How can he justify it? Why don’t you try and ask him. I cannot get an answer from him.

      His two answers so far are:

      1. It could work.

      2. Did you not want firms around the world to be recapitalised.

      But he did not say, and did not know what he meant by recapitalised. Of course I didn’t want to see firms around the world recapitalised. I wanted to see myself recapitalised, and I wanted to see stable business spending. Not bank lending, but business spending. And we do not need loans to maintain spending in a fiat currency economy.

    • By the way. Things will only get worse for the Americans. Policy is such that people are set to get hungrier. While GDP just recently surged, this doesn’t mean a whole lot. One good thing is a bit of a recovery of manufacturing. But that small sign aside there is no real prospect of recovery in the US.


    • This one is no good Philomena. I checked the PDF. First thing I see is two graphs based on dirty data. Apparently it is the case that despite these cold snaps, the Indian ocean, and the North Atlantic still have a great deal of thermal energy in them. This plateau of ocean energy at a very high level has gone on since about 2003. The ocean energy did drop, which took the warmers by surprise. But I suppose they can make the argument that it ought to have dropped a lot more than it did. Because its stayed at a persistently high level, compared to any time that we can be sure of. I’m not saying they even have a case overall. I’m just saying that in this one instance they could say ” Well tell us why the ocean energy has stayed on such a relatively high level then?”

      Anyhow. Here is someone not involved directly in the global warming debate. Arch-Weather Forecaster Evelyn Garriss. Easily the best weather forecaster in the United States. Probably the second best in the world as far as I can make out. She is amazing. I got old copies of her newsletter. And it explains things so clearly. Her forecasts are just a sensation.

      Anyway I thought that the upper ocean energy must have dropped through the floor. And I thought that people who said otherwise must be lying. This one time it doesn’t seem so. Evelyn tells us that the oceans are still warm. I trust her 100%. And she explains the paradox of freezing weather in many parts of the globe, and yet the ocean energy still holding up. She’s the best. And no-one explains their own forecasts more clearly than what she does.

      [audio src="" /]

      Here is a picture of the genius here:

  28. From elsewhere:

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    I’m not sure that all these ideas are equivalent. I wouldn’t spread this deal too far. We don’t want your effectiveness compromised when such an important bipartisan-renegade pummeling presents itself. Lets look at how these ideas differ.
    1. The “Great Moderation” could do with a renaming. We could instead call it “Kicking the can down the road.” Smoothing the business cycle is inherently impossible with positive consumer price inflation as the goal and with fractional reserve banking. Attempts to do so just let problems build. So yeah thats a dead idea…… Except.
    Except if we change things. We can get to stability if we phase to 100% backing, Growth-Deflation. The big problem is that we would have to find a way to bring down debt levels first. Or else an attempt to phase to this condition could lead to a whole generation of pain and paralysis.
    2. Trickle Down. Here you aren’t being fair Professor. Because there was no trickle down theory on the right. The Trickle down was a putdown of a leftist characterisation of what we were about. Personally I think we live in a funnel-up system. A system that funnels loot up to the already rich. Imagine if one was born rich and was 20 years old, with some mentor who had explained all aspects of demography to oneself? Imagine you had 5 million USD and were 20 in 1971. Supposing you were an American. You would have had to of been powerfully inept or appallingly lazy not to have turned that into 100 million dollars by the time you were 50.
    3. Privatisation. This is one of these things that could have worked technically. Did work after a fashion if ones expectations weren’t real high and one had tolerance for cronyism. This may sound marxist. But surely the idea is to get the industry rules so good, fair, and clear, that private industry can grow up to out-shadow the government activity by comparison. A sort of comparative whittling away of the state (percentage of the industry.) How could we have gotten stuck with this apparent choice of cronyism versus socialism in infrastructure? This one is a case of too much muddied water to call it flat out a “dead idea.” But I think we ought to be able to nail one part of it down as a dead idea. Privatisation through auction. Privatisation via auction to government approved or assembled consortia. My goodness the ugliness of it all. I think we ought to not pronounce privatization-through-auction “dead”. Its still alive. We must kill it.
    Where privatisation is concerned, I think that we’ve never beaten the standard set by Dewitt Clinton with that canal. Though it may have been socialist on the surface of things it was the fairest, most even playing field that we have had yet for infrastructure. I judge things by “lack of schmoozing with officials”. What is the point of a nominally private market if you cannot do anything without being on the inside schmoozing meal-ticket? I couldn’t think of anything more corrosive of the better part of our heritage than to allow this state of affairs.
    Yes I know that technically Dewitt Clinton’s canal was a socialist undertaking. But to me it was more in the spirit of free enterprise, liberty and fairness than anything we have seen since. And we could try and best it on all counts.
    4. Efficient Market theory. Yeah thats a dead idea. Almost unbelievably dopey. We have capital markets that funnel all sorts of resources into inherently wealth-destroying activities. We have massively poorly priced shares, that in the case of small cash-poor companies who ought to have good prospects ….. well this is a self-fulfilling prophecy in some sense. How anyone can call this setup efficient is beyond me. Many financial institutions making a lot of their loot from new money creation, asset bubble inflation, and debt addiction. Both the debt and equity markets horribly flawed.
    Already I can sense the ideologues jumping from foot to foot protesting that I do not know what the theory really means. But who cares. Because they will do a bait and switch smuggle if you let them.

  29. someone should get you this for your birthday


  31. The Paulson book will be designed to keep three score and ten criminals out of prison. Its Paulson going over his phone log and secretaries diary, with a team of lawyers getting his, and the others story straight.

    These guys effectively shorted the housing market and then Paulson ripped all the investment funds out of the economy with his splurging packages.

    The thing about shorts is that they have a time window. Its easy to know where a market is going absent bizzare government action. But putting all these shorts down and then draining money from investment to consumption is one way of getting the timing right.

  32. Soon there is immense potential for symbiosis between capital goods to do with biochar and capital goods to do with synthetic diesel. The production processes are pretty similar.

    One could imagine blanket tax exemptions for goods to do with both. And one could put the investment down to strategically improving our energy and food production capacity.

  33. That would be the sum total of how far we could go deferring to the fears and opinions of the global warming crowd.

    Supposing we have the following:

    1. Tax exemptions on revenues gained providing both biochar related goods and services and liquified coal services. And especially focused on those big vats, wherein they have controlled burning. The idea is that you have burning with high heat but under conditions of partial oxygen deprivation. This is the deal in both processes. So you want to make sure that the capital goods can be applied to both. The difference is the heat at which the material is burnt. In the case of the making of Syngas and synthetic diesel, the temperature has to be so high as to gasify the carbon. Whereas with biochar everything BUT the carbon is gasified off.

    2. Tax exemptions on anything to do with the production of Syngas and synthetic diesel.

    3. Clear homesteading rules for improving land and especiallly on either side of these roads out of towns where there is just desert scrub. Third income deductions for applying biochar to such land so that it is easy to enrich and claim the land for agriculture, if the economics to do so is sound.

    The problem is Tony is stuck on spending programs. Thats the last thing you want. Subsidies and spending programs don’t work. Or at the very best they work a tiny bit for a large cost. But in reality they almost always just do a lot of harm.

  34. The subsidy leads to the business throwing all its resources into current supply of goods. The subsidy encourages anti-economic behaviour in the frantic rush to take advantage of the subsidy whose days may be numbered. The subsidy in effect leads to malinvestment and capital consumption at the same time. Because businesses will run their business in objectively uneconomic fashion. And as well they may borrow in order to take advantage of the subsidy to boost current production and to use the interest on that loan as a tax deduction. Such an unsound industry will be totally destroyed when the subsidy is removed. So subsidies are actually a way of retarding progress and ensuring that the industry under subsidy is fatally corrupted.

    The long-term tax exemption by contrast may force businesses into retrenchment, if that the right way for them to go. Small businesses in this country have this idea that part of what makes it worth their while, all the extra effort, to run their own act, is that if they have a good accountant, they can buy a lot of gear as a business right-off, when they may be in sober reality using that gear only 5% in the business, and its mostly a way of having a great lifestyle.

    Now I wouldn’t want to get rid of these deductions. But we need these guys to expand and some within their number to be always challenging the big boys.

    We need the big boys challenged constantly. Challenged constantly and and beaten and taken down often. We need this for a just society and high wages. We also need small business run in such a way that they may readily expand to middling businesses. So that many people get experience with full executive control of middling businesses in their twenties, thus undermining the rigged market that we currently have for CEO’s. Thus undermining their currently outrageous pay scales.

    The current setup hooks the small businessman into this deductions, life-style mentality, and this policy-actuality, and mental-set, tends to make small businessmen stay small and more importantly, only marginally profitable. Small businesses, under current conditions, tend to be run in such a way as to keep them marginally profitable, and this means bigshoteria gets a free ride.


    Because the marginally profitable small business, armtwisted into debt, with interest after all a deduction, simply isn’t geared up to sieze opportunities. Like a drifter with low cash balances, this sort of small business finds that its luck is always running out at just the wrong time. The comprehension of the awesome subtlety of the myriad ways that current policy transpires to give corporate bigshots a free ride, ought to be classified as some sort of gnostic mystery esoterica. Because both sides of politics cannot seem to see it.

    What a long-term tax exemption does, is it makes tax deductions, including deductions on interest costs, meaningless. All of a sudden their business must make a profit. These guys will pay themselves less


  35. Cambria confessing his gutlessness.

    “I was forced to sack a young dude for watching porn over the web who caught by a female doing do. It was pretty bad shit to do, but that’s how it it.

    House rules.

    You’re told not to mess around with inappropriate sites which means you run the risk if you do.

    No tears.”

    A punishment was in order one supposes. But a sacking? Sacking without redundancy this implies?, And only because he was caught by a female?

    This is how the corporate grayness starts infecting us all. Starts homogenizing and destroying any culture that we once had. The government corrupts the corporates, who turn around and corrupt the government further. It cannot last, except if we are to become slaves of the heart, if not slaves in actuality.

    Its like a cultural erasure machine. An attack on culture, manhood and probably womanhood too. Terrible. Just terrible. And look it might be a tiny thing this cultural erasure vampire of the corporate world. But a tiny insipid thing working around the clock over decades can be all it takes for Romano-Celt erasure to be affected. It doesn’t really matter which vein of ones mongrel heritage one is identifying with at the moment. Corporate greyness expansion will drain the life out of anything good. You might call it Boll Weevil erasure. Basque ethnic cleansing. Ulster-Irish taming and quarantine. Exterminating the last trace of Anglo-Saxon cultural Imperialism. Putting the inner-Hollander in his place. Leave the bad Boer behind. The mitigation of the inner Rugaru. Call it what you like. This current grey corporate version of faux-libertarianism is not what we ought to be about.

  36. “…..As you would expect, to make the thing easier for the dumbest generation ever, the Beer version is much shorter……”

    Rafe is right on the money with this reference. What I noticed is that the younger folks seemed for a while to get less tough and cool and rugged. Then it seemed there was a trend reversal in that department. And now the kids are just dumb.

    Down below may appear a video of either Bowie claiming ‘let the children boogie’ or a duet involving Kylie where both parties join to magnify the sentiment that the “kids are alright”. But the kids are NOT alright. Not the kids just graduated leastways. The kids are far from fucking alright. Actually the kids, as defined, are pretty fucked up.

    As usual Rafe is sound as a metronome. Or he would be were he a drummer. A laid back fellow and good at everything. This duet is not notable exactly for its musical value. But its got some great one-liners from the male ego-man of the time. Every so often some bloke gets pitched the role of ego-man. And I for one like to see it.

  37. The British recording industry is, or at least was, an amazing thing. But sometimes one wonders whether it doesn’t crowd out for us, a lot of really great work. Particularly some pretty fantastic vocalists from the Continent.

    I got thinking about this just now because on the topic of “ego-men”, lyrics from Paul Young came to mind. The lyrics came first and I went to google. Since I couldn’t remember Pauls actual name. But he almost qualified as an ego-man for some reason in my mind.

    Then I was reminded of this Italian fellow in a Paul Young video that really stood out in those days. Back when the stupidest generation were babies.

    Because Paul is a fine singer. But it seemed to me that he was overmatched by this Italian fellow who I’d never seen before or since, at least never seen him again until I discovered youtube.

    I did advantage myself of youtube some time back to check out this fellow. Perhaps I lacked the patience. But what seemed to me to be outstanding vocal skills,(a better worlds Joe Cocker), weren’t always in evidence.

    Rather it seemed to me, that here was at the very least, a naturally gifted vocalist, who didn’t so much care for his gifts, and really would rather be be some sort of blues legend, from the Mississippi Delta.

    Anyway I’m probably wrong and ignorant on all counts. Here is the video I remember seeing before the age of the internet. And on a humble television one could still seem to hear just a little bit extra to his voice then the usual run of pop-star quality.

    The recording doesn’t seem to have enough base. Hopefully you are sorted in your computing life and can make all appropriate adjustments. Make sure you put it on full-screen.

    Always we see, just at the moment when we think that the charms of the female of our species, must surely, finally, have bottomed out …. Always we find that we are wrong in this supposition.

    The song is “without a woman.” Well actually I don’t know that for sure. I’m doing my best to translate from the Italian.

    The Italian vocalists name is “ZUCCHERO.”

  38. Moderated from elsewhere:

    ‘The financial bailout and fiscal stimulus appear to have worked well enough to avoid the worst case scenario, another Great Depression. Everyone is so relieved that they think they can continue Business as Usual.”

    No good Jack. There is a science of national profits that few seem to know about. The fiscal stimulus and financial bailout didn’t do any of the things you allege. Additions to the monetary base were absolutely necessary, were all that was needed, and despite the fear and trembling about them were not really radical enough in the short run.

    Also they needed to be followed up with a reserve asset ratio to head off the massive inflation now finally on the way.

    But the fiscal bailout and financial stimulus threw millions out of work, and put billions in the pockets of people who ought to be now unemployed, if not in prison. This program boosted profits and made people unemployed.

    Boosting profits isn’t everything. This program in its Australian variant stopped GDP from dropping but GDP is the wrong metric. No doubt the program in America stopped GDP falling as much as it ought to but as I said its the wrong metric.

    Don’t be making the claim that anything about the fiscal side of this was the least bit acceptable. Its not true.

    This was the greatest act of theft in all of history.

  39. Graeme Bird said…
    Christ you are a moron delong:

    “This paper uses Taylor’s model of overlapping contracts to show that increased wage and price flexibility can easily be destabilizing.”

    Flexibility is destabilizing? Right. Resign you twit. Anyone who doesn’t realize that its fractional reserve that causes instability was not cut out to be an economist.


  40. Oh dear.

    In James Buchanan’s latest essay, it sounds like he is endorsing Birdian monetary economics

    Radical rethinking is required here—a rethinking that has not occurred since
    the Great Depression.
    Individual choices to shift nominally valued assets among differentially leveraged
    accounts cannot be allowed to generate multiplier effects over the whole
    system. Some modern equivalent of one hundred percent, or full, reserve banking
    must finally be installed and enforced. The Glass-Stegall efforts to separate
    deposit and investment banking should presumably be updated and put in play.
    Some extension-application of the antitrust laws to the banking conglomerations
    seems to be in order here. And, economists, in particular, must break free
    from institutionally imposed biases and, instead, imagine settings in which the
    liberties of traders to choose among alternatives are utilized in tandem with the
    tools available through the wonders of modern electronic technology, while, at
    the same time, still achieving some close approximation of ideal money neutrality.

    • Well Buchanan is a smart guy. The banking/government economics monopsony does not allow the heresy of 100% backing. But he understands what is going on. He’s already got his Nobel Prize and so he can buck the system and speak out.

  41. Cambria is making you an offer you can’t refuse

    • I can. I got horribly drunk watching the gridiron at a friends placed and after and I haven’t really recovered psychologically. Cambria is always making crap offers like this that he will slime out of. Besides. Sal is right. I don’t want anything to do with this dishonourable turncoat. Least of all be in his debt.

  42. jtfsoon

    The abusive Joe Cambria and his sidekick BirdLab are permanently banned from this blog and Graeme has no interest in having anything to do with the angry stupid corrupt miserable tosser other than throwing metaphorical bombs in his general putrid direction to the satisfyingly cathartic entertainment of Birdie’s legion of fans.

  43. You’re spam food JC.

    Deal with it. HAHAHA

  44. where is the fat and wise buddha today? i thought he would be excited by my Buchanan link

    • Yeah its a pretty good link. If they weren’t going to phase in the pretty drastically high reserve asset ratio then Buchanan is right about Glass Steagall. But if they were going to phase it up above 40% then it would be unnecessary. Sinclair sucking up to the banks as usual. He refuses to get a grip on the situation. Letting himself be guided by shallow ideology alone.

  45. This Stefan dude is good value Mr Bird. Clear politics, clear thinker and writer, ace reporter.

    Deutsche Bank nets €5 billion profit in 2009
    By Stefan Steinberg

    9 February 2010

    Germany’s biggest bank, Deutsche Bank, released figures last week for the 2009 business year. The bank recorded a massive net profit of €5 billion, exceeding analyst expectations of €4.3 billion. Just one year earlier, in the wake of the international financial crisis, Deutsche Bank had a net loss of €3.9 billion.

    On Thursday, the chief executive of Deutsche Bank, Josef Ackermann, boasted that 2009 had offered major banks unprecedented opportunities to make money. “It will be a while before we see an investment banking market environment as favourable as that of 2009, when conditions fostered high volumes and high profit margins in many areas,” Ackermann told journalists. In fact, 67 percent of the bank’s profits for 2009 came from its investment banking sector.

    Presenting the latest figures, Ackermann announced that Deutsche Bank intended to double its profit margins for the coming year, projecting an annual pre-tax profit of €10 billion in line with his previously declared intention of making an average annual profit of 25 percent. From Ackermann’s perspective, the €5 billion profit for 2009 was somewhat on the low side—a profit rate of just 15 percent.

    In line with the latest profit declaration, Deutsche Bank announced it would be increasing the bonuses for its pool of investment bankers by 18 percent to a total remuneration of €11.6 billion.

    The return to massive profits by Deutsche Bank within the space of a year is entirely due to the financial measures—amounting to trillions of euros in loans and securities—undertaken by the German government and other governments across the globe to rescue those banks responsible for the crisis in the first place.

    Ackermann played a leading role in the politics of the German bailout. In September 2008, he dictated terms to the German government for the rescue of the bankrupt Hypo Real Estate (HRE) to prevent the collapse of the German banking system. The rescue deal was sealed following discussions between Ackermann, other leading bankers and State Secretary Jörg Asmussen (Social Democratic Party), culminating in a late-night phone call by Ackermann with the German chancellor.

    Since the federal election last autumn, Jörg Asmussen is the only leading financial advisor to have maintained his leading post in the new German government—a coalition of conservative parties with the free-market Free Democratic Party.

    It was Asmussen who also helped draft the €500 billion rescue package for German banks plus the additional hundreds of billions promised to the financial community as part of the government’s “bad banks” scheme.

    Governments and their personnel change, but the influence of Germany’s leading banks and its lobbyists over government policy continues to grow.

    Now Deutsche Bank is reaping the profits from the bailout packages it helped create together with various other stimulus measures introduced by the government. The result, according to one finance analyst, is that Deutsche Bank has “definitely had a good crisis…. There’s good profit overall.”

    Major banks such as Deutsche Bank are able to profit from the crisis in a number of ways.

    Firstly, the German government’s bank bailout packages and other forms of stimuli for big business are financed by loans by the government placed on equity markets. One of the main agencies for such bond transactions is Deutsche Bank, which is able to reap enormous fees in the process.

    Secondly, the bank can profit from the record low interests rates established by central banks aimed at revitalising the finance sector. Deutsche Bank is able to lend money from institutions such as the European Central Bank at virtually zero rates of interest and then charge its clients substantial interests rates on their own loans from the bank.

    Finally, Deutsche Bank can exploit the fact that the financial crisis has led to the collapse of some of its major rivals—e.g., the stricken Commerzbank, which has been taken under the wing of the German government. It is not surprising, therefore, that Ackermann has been at the centre of the recent campaign by major financial interests to defend the status and influence of banks allegedly too “big to fail.”

    In fact, Ackermann sees the opportunity to vastly expand the influence and yields of his bank. In a recent commentary, the Financial Times Deutschland notes that the bank is hoping that US proposals to restrict banking practices will enable it to encroach on the leading position of its biggest American rival, Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs, the biggest US investment bank, notched up nearly $5 billion in profits in the last quarter of 2009.

    The FTD writes: “Investment banking remains the most profitable sector for Deutsche Bank.… The fact that fourth quarter profits came in much lower than at competitors like Goldman Sachs is sure to be an annoyance for Ackermann. But he is likely to catch up should the US government fulfill its plans to prevent American banks from operating hedge funds or engaging in proprietary trading.”

    The political clout of Deutsche Bank was highly visible at the recent Davos World Economic Forum. In the course of the summit of top bankers and politicians Ackermann demonstrably warned against playing the “the blame game”—i.e., any attempt to make bankers accountable for their actions—and later met with fellow bankers, CEOs and finance ministers. After their meeting behind closed doors, Ackermann praised the spirit of cooperation that prevailed, declaring, “There was better dialogue between business leaders, political and regulatory leaders than ever before.”

    Two days after the Davos forum, the German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority lifted the ban on short selling in Germany. This particular form of highly speculative transaction had been banned by the German regulatory authority in September 2008 following the outbreak of the international financial crisis.

    Commenting on the power and influence of the banking community, journalist Lucas Zeise notes in the latest edition of the Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik:

    “Two years have passed since the outbreak of the property and financial crisis, yet there has been no progress in the regulation of the banking and financial sectors. Worse still, a serious start has not even been made. This diagnosis doesn’t only go for Germany. It applies equally to the US, the European Union, and at the level of international regulation…. Apart from a few mini-corrections and proposals for raising minimum levels of private capital for investment banks, which will be implemented in who knows how many years, nothing, absolutely nothing has happened in terms of serious regulation.”

  46. More Goldman Sachs fraud,1518,676634,00.html

  47. The scam-artists are doing the same thing here in effect. Worm-tongues encouraging Kevin Rudd to take the cost of the national broadband initiative off the public accounts. Surrounding it in “private” debt. So obviously destroying the logic of the scheme.

    I guess I’ve told you about that before Philomena. But these guys are just poison and we could have been rid of all of them. The Americans could have been selling all their assets and cancelling debts.

    They stole enough money to pay off a huge proportion of peoples troubled mortgages. Now with a bit of luck Geithner may be indicted. But Paulson has already got his book published to teach everyone his story about who said what when.

  48. See SOON. If you have 100% backing. And you find a way to pay down debts to where you can get to the growth-deflation pocket without paralysis….. Then supposing you can stay there.

    There is simply no way that excessive risk-taking by any of these clowns can “multiply through the whole system” in Buchanans words. This is not acceptable. We aren’t doing too badly here but this may mean the end of the American Republic. The bank bailouts, stimulus packages and deficit spending has thrown everyone out of work. Ring America sometime. Outside of the rigged market, unemployment might be as high as 50% in a lot of places. Its a total disaster.

    We know how to stay out of recessions and redirect investment funds to wealth creation. Since we know how to do this what is getting in the way?

    Well you guys are. You don’t accept the scientific method. You don’t see even in retrospect that Rothbard was proved right.

  49. Sorry for the feminine comparison. It’s the one that comes readily to mind, but JC is like a reverse Prince Charm[less] who in his homoerotic way fancies sending a chariot to deliver you hither and thither at his will in exchange, he desperately hopes, for you giving him your heart and soul.

    If all this and he wasn’t so sad, bathetic and pathetic, one could only laugh uproariously. Which of course we do.

    Loving True Romance btw. Now that is female loyalty I can identify with.

  50. Who knows the real unemployment levels in the US.

    In Miami the youth unemployment among relatively well-educated non-Black or Hispanic illegals is probably at least 50%. There is simply no place for these young people to work at wages that are acceptable to them and their families and so they don’t work and turn to drugs and hopelessness.

  51. Yeah isn’t Alabama a sweetheart. So you are watching the movie hey?

  52. I don’t see any end to the mess in the US. Not unless they go on a budget cutting binge, then sell up all those bankers. Then repudiate their debts. Otherwise the delayed death blow is in.

  53. Alabama’s astonishing. Fabulous. Hadn’t seen this movie. Got it – on your recommendation – for $10 at Westfield.

    Miami btw is an incredible dump. Most of the Florida coast certainly Miami should never have been built on and one day it will be inundated and submerged back into the sea. No great loss. This ugly artificial excrescence has completely obliterated its magnificent original natural environment.

    Today the beaches are absolutely crap. Dirty, flat, hot water in summer. Yuck. The botanical gardens probably the most attractive place in town are a joke. Most of the flora species are introduced and foreign to the locale. How telling.

    And the place is a culture-free zone for tourists unless you feel like a voyeuristic tour of the barrios and slum neighbourhoods of some of the poorest most destitute people in the world or think casinos and sterile clubs and brothels are nourishing food for body or soul.

    Most decent Americans who don’t have to live or work (or not work) there and would never visit Miami are deeply embarrassed by it and happily leave it to the jumped up deracinated old fogeys with zero entrée or the foggiest of what real taste and sensibility and sensuality can get gratis.

  54. My Mum was there when that fashion guru was murdered. But there was a bunch more murders when she was there that didn’t get the same press.

  55. I wasn’t blaming the old lady by the way. She is not like Angela Lansbury. People dropping dead everywhere she goes.

  56. LOL. My mother was very scary too as everyone who met her knows, but she didn’t murder anyone that I know of either.

  57. I did experience a superlative wholly Hispanic production of Macbeth on an otherwise dismal recent visit to Miami – a production enjoyed by my small gang and a much larger gaggle of NY Jews – which was infused with pagan witchery. sorcery and alchemy with more than a little tongue in delicate, leftist cheek.

    Deliciously memorable.

  58. I almost feel jealous of non-English speakers who are able to experience Shakespeare in their own language.

  59. No need to be jealous. He just held the “mirror up to nature”.

    Lovers and madmen have such seething brains,
    Such shaping fantasies, that apprehend
    More than cool reason ever comprehends.
    The lunatic, the lover, and the poet
    Are of imagination all compact:
    One sees more devils than vast hell can hold;
    That is the madman: the lover, all as frantic,
    Sees Helen’s beauty in a brow of Egypt:
    The poet’s eye, in a fine frenzy rolling,
    Doth glance from heaven to earth, from earth to heaven;

    And as imagination bodies forth
    The forms of things unknown, the poet’s pen
    Turns them to shapes, and gives to airy nothing
    A local habitation and a name.
    Such tricks hath strong imagination,
    That, if it would but apprehend some joy,
    It comprehends some bringer of that joy;
    Or in the night, imagining some fear,
    How easy is a bush supposed a bear?

    A Midsummer Night’s Dream

  60. Philomena. What do you think of the Miseans coming out against patents and intellectual property?

    I thought you might find it gratifying since you seemed to show some sympathy towards that idea on catallaxy. These guys are really the intellectual leaders in right-wing economics. And they’ve swung very hard against this stuff.

  61. Miseans are against freedom and democracy because they want everybody disassociated from one another. They are statists and totalitarians to their bootstraps. If some of them now debunk patents and intellectual property, well, wow. Who cares. These people are way too late to the real libertarian party which began at least half a century ago. So what else is new.

  62. Most of them seem to be anarcho-capitalists. The see the way forward as being through hyper-secession. Some see secession as the ultimate road to voluntary societies.

  63. It always was, is and forever will be a contradiction for advocates of capitalism to champion the free market as the default baseline economic arrangement, a natural force of nature even, and otoh advocate for quite “unnatural” state intervention. Perhaps the clearest example of this is so-called intellectual property.

    IP exists to impose the commodity form onto a set of “goods” – such as culture – which in their natural state or a genuinely civilised world – could or should never be commodified.

    IP requires state coercion and it pretty much ensures monopolies. It’s anti-libertarian.

    The thing is the constant revolutionising of the means of production under capitalism changes conditions in such a way that this commodity form for culture or intellectual/information goods becomes unsustainable. Thus, computers and networks tend to become instruments which destroy the ability to effectively control copying of information. This is ABC for leftists.

  64. Certainly I took a long time to come around on this. But I’ve only heard people making a powerful case in the last couple of years. Like I’ve never heard a lecture like Jeffrey Tuckers EVER.

    If the case is righteous and the argument is made soundly I’ll certainly listen.

  65. This dude seems to be on top of it. Have a gander.

  66. Very interesting. Thanks. I think we need to be careful in transition. But this shows that these so-called “free trade deals” are no good. As much good as some of them did do at first. Because we have to impose our own law, and do things as fairly as we can. We cannot be going along with a Disney 75 year copyright or anything crazy like this. Once you rig things so you are going to run surpluses you can offer unilateral free trade without any of this toadying to unjust patents and copyrites.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: