Posts Tagged ‘Interest’

 

Advertisements

If he didn’t repeat himself yesterday, then I might not have known that he said the same thing back in 2015….

Bank of England governor trashes textbook theory and rips apart the workings and effects of the global financial superstructure, read the original speech here from three years ago

…and another blog which probably analyses it better than me here

Their world imagines self-interested, atomistic agents, coolly calculating odds over all future possible states of the world, writing and trading contracts with each other, all frictionlessly enforced, all achieving mutually beneficial – indeed socially optimal – outcomes.

Of course, markets only clear in textbooks. In fact people are irrational, economies are imperfect, and nature itself is unknowable.

When imperfections exist (which is always), adding markets can sometimes make things worse.

Mark Carney timeless quotes can be found throughout this speech

 

Note the historical parallel to contemporary Chinese and Middle Eastern dominance of US assets and currencies and their recycling of dollars back into the US dominated global economy….

An excellent history of the workings of global central banking, seen through the economic history of Japan. The Asian financial crisis, Long Term Capital Management and the recent Euro debt crises are also explored and together brought into contemplation….highly recommended

 

Consider this post in reference to the concept of derivatives.

I feel that if anyone wants to attempt any critique of the derivatives market in its entirety, one has to move past any continued emphasis on ‘casino capitalism’, as this is an oft repeated line which, whatever its merits or otherwise, has become an easy reply for those who favour such practices.

I believe one needs to concentrate on debunking the notion of risk management in order to effectively retort.

Many supporters of derivatives would rightly point to their use is not just to speculate with (as in Investment Banking), but as a valid means to manage risk, especially in Insurance, and it is this aspect which deserves further attention in my humble opinion

The above linked post brilliantly draws together the notion of colonising time as an integral commodity, matching any such physical asset, thereby shinning a much needed light on the important and neglected aspects of this discourse of, post colonialism and global racial financialisation.

For anyone not familiar with the work of Ann Pettifor – one of the few to correctly call the coming of the financial crisis a number of years prior to it arriving, and one of the main proponents of the Jubilee 2000 campaign which cancelled a portion of third world debt – please search for her various articles, lectures and opinions online.

Associated with Keynesian economics and the Labour party, her views may be dismissed by some, however upon closer inspection, I was interested in her view on the creation of money, and what this meant for resolving the debt and economic problems facing the developing world.

She is principally part of the PRIME think tank/research group, which has a number of papers on its site proving an alternative voice on economic issues

The above lecture at the LSE discusses her latest book, ‘The Production of Money: How to Break the Power of Bankers’, and gives an insight into her theories.

What I wish to highlight, are the following;

  • The issue of commodity money, and how scarce resources should not be used as a basis of any monetary system
  • The recognition that a fiat monetary system, can and should be used for the benefit of the population – outside the control of private banks, but in the knowledge that an entirely man-made system should be used to achieve a level of prosperity in all societies
  • There are certainly many socialist aspects to these beliefs, such as exerting capital controls and spending money into existence in terms of health, education and social expenditure thus increasing national debt, however interest ideally should not be necessary when such a system is implemented
  • There are some similarities with what Positive Money are advocating, but it seems there are specific differences, as this discussion points out…

 

 

The findings imply that Islamic banks are not different from conventional banks, except for different branding to cater for a different category of clients

(INCEIF 2016)

A 2016 study in Malaysia, one of the most prominent centres for Islamic Finance, compared the two kinds of institution in order to ascertain if the difference between the two are genuine or merely superficial. It lends weight to the latter judgement.

What does this say about the industry from a body set up to proliferate the understanding of it? Learn more about the ICEIF here

Assuming one can get around the root of the matter (which you can’t since these are facts which have not been questioned, rather they have been accepted by the practitioners themselves throughout history), which is; Money is fictitious, no intrinsic value, it is fiat, it is always loaned into existence – all money is interest bearing, furthermore, money is of (created from) interest itself, consider the following points which I would like to highlight in order to put the concept of these debt products into perspective;

  • These creations are based/modelled on debt products. The conventional guise of this instrument is an interest bearing debt, the sharia equivalent must mimic all of these qualities, and perform for the same uses ie. it is the same product by a different name (= DECEIT)
  • All cash flows, or rather ‘Rent’/’Profit Share’ must be benchmarked against the prevailing risk free rate, or the yield must meet a company’s cost of capital requirements and therefore all cash flows, whatever their innocent sounding names, are embedded with interest. Remember, an interest rate is itself is comprised of the risk free rate, a risk premium and a profit margin. Without this, the whole reason behind ‘Islamic Finance’ goes out the window – it must meet a clients required return in comparison to other assets/products that can match yield available
  • These are still IOUs, adding to the proliferation of debt based financing  – in a system/world which is created of and from Debt. Again, remember that one of the needs which spurred creation of this product was the need to raise/take advantage of, surplus capital in a particular demographic/region considering that which was already available elsewhere, or not easily available rather. The status quo of building ever higher mountains of obligations still stands true.

I hope to be able to build upon this argument in future posts…..