Update no.615

Update from the Heartland

No.615

23.9.13 – 29.9.13

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

To all,

We have many important issues before the Congress, yet our esteemed political representatives have apparently decided the fragile economic recovery from the Great Recession was going just a little too well, and we needed to take a step or two backward.  We long past failed to enact a proper budget, which then meant we needed another extension.  I cannot recall how long ago it was that we had a properly enacted budget for the federal government – a dozen or more years I surmise.  After releasing the tension on the trigger over Syrian chemical weapons use, the House of Representatives passed H J Res. 59 – Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014, by a vote of 230-189-0-13(3), with a number of little pearl goodies imbedded for their buddies and money men, but they only extended the long-in-the-tooth budget until 15.December.2013.  The Senate picked up the bill only to be entertained by Senator Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz of Texas, assisted by Senators Marco Antonio Rubio of Florida and Randal Howard “Rand” Paul of Kentucky, as he held the floor for 21 hours 19 minutes in a yet another lame attempt to defund the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) [PL 111-148; 124 Stat. 119; 23.March.2010] [432].  The Senate amended the bill to strip out the PPACA defunding provision and passed H J Res. 59 by a vote of 54-44-0-2(0).  The House then voted on the resolution with an additional provision to delay the implementation of PPACA by one year [231-192-0-8(4)], which in turns sends it back to the Senate.  Oddly, in all this worthless political wrangling PPACA will become effective on 1.October.2013, regardless of congressional budgetary action.

            There is no doubt in my little pea-brain that the PPACA has created enormous confusion, concern, apprehension and a burgeoning politically motivated disinformation campaign intended to scare the hell out of people.  Companies are struggling to understand the financial consequences to their profits as well as the impact on their employees.  I am less than a year from retirement.  I do not consider myself an ignorant man, but this whole fiasco has jacked up my worries with the daunting process of transition from employer-provided, group insurance to Medicare and TriCare for Life (military).  I feel I must be in pretty good shape thanks in no small part to my military service.  However, this seems to be a minefield to me, where one misstep could be fatal, given my current medical state.  I know I should not be whining, as there are others reading these Updates who have no medical insurance coverage.  My concerns have caused me to consider delaying retirement until all this crap gets squared away; than again, with the dysfunction of Congress, it may never be squared away.

            Lastly, Congress is an institution of compromise by design.  As with all compromise, we must choose the fights and the tactics to achieve our objectives.  Frontal assault is necessary and occasionally successful, usually when overwhelming force is available and other alternatives are less workable.  Unfortunately, as has been graphically demonstrated far too many times, the frontal assault turns into a meat grinder.  Using the constitutionally required budgetary process or the national debt as a perceived tool of extortion is a frontal assault.   The Tea Party Republicans are turning the crank on the meat grinder.  I understand the concern of some over the implementation of PPACA, as noted above; however, improvement would seem to be a more productive endeavor than destruction.  I have no idea what it will take to gain a Congress that understands its purpose and proper processes.  I suspect a generation or several.  Somehow, we must return to a state of compromise and abandon the extortion of a scorched earth policy by a small minority of the opposition party.  This intransigence must change.

The United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 2118 by a vote of 15-0-0 to demand Syria destroy its stockpiles of chemical weapons by 30.June.2014.  I would like to offer congratulations to Foreign Minister Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov of Russia and Secretary of State John Forbes Kerry on the accomplishment of their negotiations; however, I remain skeptical whether Syria will comply, and I am disappointed in the time frame.  The Ghouta event [611, 614] was neither the first nor the last use of chemical weapons by the al-Assad regime.  The other events noted so far:

19.3.13 - Khan al-Assal – noted earlier in Update no. 592

13.4.13 - Sheikh Maqsoud

29.4.13 – Saraqeb

World reaction was only words and saber rattling.  Syria saw no consequences.

21.8.13 – Ghouta [611, 614]  – this is the attack that got everyone stirred up.  Since the Ghouta attack, there are been more attacks near Damascus:

22.8.13 - Bahhariya

24.9.13 - Jobar

25.8.13 - Ashrafieh Sahnaya

It is important to note Israeli reports of Syrians moving chemical weapons to Lebanon [581] much like Saddam Hussein moved Iraqi chemical weapons to Syria before Operation IRAQI FREEDOM.  I want the diplomacy to work, but more importantly, we need those chemical weapons destroyed before they fall into the hands of al-Qa’ida or any other of the myriad terrorist groups intend upon doing harm to the citizens of western countries.  The longer they exist, the greater the threat to western nations.

News from the economic front:

-- HSBC Holdings PLC reported its preliminary assessment of the Manufacturing Purchasing Managers Index (PMI) for the People’s Republic of China (PRC) rose to 51.2 in September from a final reading of 50.1 in August.  The rising PMI above 50 indicates the PRC’s economy is strengthening.

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) Debacle [552]:

-- U.S. and U.K. regulators fined interdealer broker ICAP PLC a total of US$87M for the brokerage firm's contribution to the LIBOR debacle.  Separately, the U.S. Department of Justice charged three former ICAP brokers with criminal conduct for their part in the company’s LIBOR activities.

-- So we don’t lose focus . . . the infamous 16, involved, international banks are:

·      Barclays [UK] – US$454M fine [550]; Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Bank of America [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      BTMU [Japan] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Citigroup [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Credit Suisse [Switzerland] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Deutsche Bank [Germany] – US$654M LIBOR profit [578]; set aside €500M (US$641M) for LIBOR liability [589]; Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Lloyds TSB [UK]

·      HSBC [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      HBOS [UK]

·      JPMorgan Chase [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Norinchuckin [Japan]

·      Rabobank [Netherlands]

·      RBC [Canada]

·      RBS [UK] – £390M (US$612.6M) in fines, 21 employees involved [582]; Singapore sanctions [600]

·      UBS [Switzerland] – US$1.5B fine, two charged [575]; Singapore sanctions [600]

·      West LB [Germany]

Added to the list by the Monetary Authority of Singapore [600]:

·      ING [Netherlands] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      BNP Paribas [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Crédit Agricole [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      DBS [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Standard Chartered [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      United Overseas Bank [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Macquarie [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]

·      Commerzbank [Germany] – Singapore sanctions [600]

Others involved:

·      ICAP [UK] – fined US$87M + three executives charged [615]

I trust none of us will lose sight of what these banks have done.  Lest we forget!

Comments and contributions from Update no.614:

Comment to the Blog:

“Your statement, ‘Although the OPCW/WHO team made no attempt to attribute responsibility, I think there is very little doubt where responsibility lays’ is irresponsible and unsupported. We know no more than we did before about the source of the attacks.

“The articles to which you link about the Navy Yard shootings deal with gun control, not mental illness. Funding to treat mental illness has been cut again and again, often by the same characters who attribute mass shootings to that cause rather than deal with the abundance of firearms. They could be right about disturbed minds causing at least some of the killing, but I have a question. If they perceive mental illness as the cause of these tragedies, why do they not increase funding to find and treat at least the most dangerous of the mentally ill?

“The Marine Corps corporal’s presentation on porn and suicide to which you linked is 38 minutes long. I cannot spare that much time.

“The link to the story about gay marriage supposedly conflicting with religious liberty did not work for me. (Windows 7, Chrome 29.0 browser) We have discussed this topic before. My position is simple. If a person opposes gay marriage, that person ought not to marry someone of the same gender. If they are clergy, as I am, they already have the choice of whether or not to perform the marriage ceremony for any couple that requests it, including same-sex couples. I assume those whose religious convictions oppose same-sex marriage will continue to refuse to sanctify such marriages. I will pick up their slack in my local area.

“However, they have no say in anyone else’s marriage, nor should they. I recommend boycotts for dealing with small businesses that insist on a bigoted stance. They need to know that customers control their success or failure. Thus, they are free to remain prejudiced and act on their bias so long as they are willing to pay the price. I doubt many will cling to their stance long enough to go bankrupt, but I could be wrong. Either way would benefit society.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: responsible.  In most investigations – accidents, engineering, criminal – there is rarely the smoking gun.  Investigators must examine the available evidence, connect the dots, and derive the probable cause as best they can.  Given the facts we know, without the proverbial smoking gun, we must ask who had the capacity, capability and motive?  Is it possible the rebels acquired a multiple rocket launcher capable of launching Russian chemical rockets and attacked their supporters?  Yes, of course.  It is also possible the IRI did it to instigate the U.S. to attack?  Yes, of course.  Is it possible the United States made the chemical attack to create an excuse for military action?  I suppose that is possible as well.  However, given the potential perpetrators, who is the most likely?  Thus, my opinion.

            Re: gun control.  The point I apparently failed to make in last week’s Update [614] was it is time to move on from the incessant debate about firearms and focus our energies on the root cause – mental health screening and treatment.  You asked a very pertinent question.  My answer: I have no freakin’ idea.  Perhaps it is because mental health intervention is not politically popular.  Part of the difficulty in health treatment is broadly a state burden, although Medicare and PPACA are federal health related laws.  With the struggle to mature PPACA, it will be virtually impossible to get the attention of Congress.  We can debate as much as we wish.

            Re: Hicks presentation.  Yes, it is long, but he does make a scholarly case for conservative morality, albeit decidedly biased rather than expansive.  It’s there if you ever get the time or curiosity.

            Re: gay marriage.  Your opinion should be the standard for all morality questions – if you don’t approve, don’t do it, and leave others to their pursuit of Happiness.  Religious beliefs do NOT give anyone the right to impose their beliefs on others . . . that was my point.

            Re: boycott.  The action is a personal choice.  The law has long recognized that businesses open to the public cannot discriminate based on any of the social factors.  The conflict in this case stands upon company-paid benefits.  It is a misty line worthy of public debate.

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)