Barbados Underground

How Is The Barbados Economy Doing?

November 19, 2009 · 177 Comments

Dr. Justin Robinson, Department of Management Studies, Cave Hill, UWI

In its most recent review, published on November 13, 2009, the Credit Rating Agency, Standard and Poor’s (S&P) affirmed Barbados’ investment grade international credit rating, but adjusted its outlook from stable to negative.  The S&P report has generated much public comment and debate on the state and management of the Barbados economy, as the economy wrestles with an economic crisis of biblical proportions, the worst since the great depression of the 1930s. I propose in this brief article to offer a perspective on the performance of the Barbados economy utilizing three widely used metrics of economic performance, the level of employment, the level of foreign exchange reserves and the state of public finances.

At the end of the third quarter of 2009, the un-employment rate in Barbados was reported at 10.1%.  Table 1 presents data on the un-employment rate in Barbados since the year 2000, as reported by the Central Bank of Barbados.

Table 1

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Unemployment Rate
9.4% 9.9% 10.3% 11.0% 9.6% 9.1% 8.7% 7.4% 8.1% 10.1%

The data suggests that the average un-employment rate in Barbados over the last decade has been 9.36%, and the median 9.50%.  Readers may want to note the increase in un-employment in the aftermath of the mild global economic slowdown after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York.  Due to the structure of the Barbados economy with its heavy reliance on tourism and international finance, we are uniquely vulnerable to global economic recessions.  Given the magnitude of the current global recession, an un-employment rate of 10.1%, after well over a year into the current global economic crisis, represents a measure of success to date. I am inclined to credit this to the commendable restraint shown by the private sector in terms of layoffs, and the choice by the government to maintain levels of employment in the public sector as well as implement a moderate fiscal stimulus.

In a press release of November 13, 2009, the Central Bank of Barbados reports that current levels of foreign exchange reserves provide 20.7 weeks of import cover, well above the accepted norm of 12 weeks import cover.  Readers may want to compare this to the recession of 1991, when reserves provided 2 weeks import cover.  Barbados does not appear to be in any imminent danger of an exchange rates crisis, or have any need to enter into an arrangement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).  The fact that Barbados appears likely to emerge from the current global economic crisis with its fixed exchange rate regime and independence from the IMF intact, represents a measure of success in navigating the economic recession.  I am inclined to credit this to the lessons learnt from previous crises, especially the strategy of pre-emptive borrowing of foreign exchange reserves.

In assessing the state of public finances I will utilize the fiscal balance as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).  The fiscal balance is the government revenues minus government expenditure, and the total is then divided by GDP.  Table 2 table provides data on the fiscal balance in Barbados since the year 2000 as reported by the IMF..

Table 2

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Fiscal Balance to GDP (%)
-3.1 -6.2 -12.8 -5.9 1.4 -3.6 -3.8 -6.00 -5.6 -7.1 (proj)

The data suggests that Barbados has had an average annual fiscal deficit of 5% of GDP over the last decade.  Readers may want to note the dramatic worsening of the fiscal deficit in the aftermath of the global economic slowdown after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York.  Given the Barbados economic model of a high commitment to health care and education spending in particular, economic slowdowns wreak havoc with government finances.  Of interest is the worsening in 2007 when there was no global economic slowdown.  I am inclined to attribute the worsening of the fiscal deficit in 2009 to the slowdown in government revenues as a result of the global economic crisis, and the choice by the government to maintain levels of employment in the public sector as well as implement a moderate fiscal stimulus. In this respect Barbados is far from alone.  Economies major and minor, developed and developing have seen their public finances worsen as governments try to mitigate the impact of the worst global recession since the 1930s.  To provide some perspective, table 3 presents the latest figures as reported by the Economist magazine of November 7 2009.

Table 3

United States Japan China Britain Canada
Fiscal Balance to GDP (%)
-11.90 -7.70 -3.40 -14.50 -2.40

In summary, I would suggest that the Barbados economy has performed reasonably well to date in terms of levels of employment and the levels of foreign exchange reserves.  The public finances have, however, suffered as the government has sought to maintain levels of employment in the public sector, and stimulate the private sector by implementing a moderate fiscal stimulus.  The change in the outlook from stable to negative by S&P is largely driven by the increases in the fiscal deficit. The international credit rating is important and the nation should try to hang on to it.  Hopefully we can find a way to maintain desired levels of employment, make the needed fiscal adjustments and hang on to the investment grade rating, in the midst of this deep and stubborn global economic recession.  Given the Barbados economic model, this is far from being anyway near as easy as the S&P analysts seem to be suggesting.  My question is, as raised by my colleague, Dr. Don Marshall, if the adjustments in the fiscal deficit required to please S&P necessitates that the economy be plunged into an especially deep recession, would that be in the best interests of Barbados as an economy and a society?

Categories: Barbados · Barbados Economy · Barbados Government · Barbados News · Blogging · Caribbean · Caribbean News · Politics

177 responses so far ↓

  • love // November 19, 2009 at 5:00 PM

    Dr. Robinson,

    A very lucid discussion on the historical and present realities of the Barbadian economy.

    Particularly important to get Barbadians to understand…is the fact that Barbados’ economy is not immune from the effects of the global economy.

    Equally important is the fact that the BLP gov’t of the past 14 years did nothing – while there was no global meltdown – to restructure the Barbadian economy.

  • David // November 19, 2009 at 5:15 PM

    Agreed the piece seems to dispassionately detail the context of Barbados economic performance to date. The challenge which has been detailed by many is the length of time it will take for the developed economies of the world to gather growth momentum, especially the US, Canada and UK where our tourists and FDO are predominately sourced.

    The question which Justin asked in the last paragraph which the Prime Minister answered yesterday is one which is worthy of debate.

    My question is, as raised by my colleague, Dr. Don Marshall, if the adjustments in the fiscal deficit required to please S&P necessitates that the economy be plunged into an especially deep recession, would that be in the best interests of Barbados as an economy and a society?

    If Barbados is unable to borrow or at worse have to pay a premium for borrowing because of a downgrade to junk status, how does that predicament impact our growth strategy?

  • Christopher Halsall // November 19, 2009 at 5:24 PM

    @Dr. Robinson: “Of interest is the worsening in 2007 when there was no global economic slowdown.

    Care to expand on this? You didn’t in your report….

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM

    @Justin, two things your piece did not touch, but which I think are worth exploring.

    1. Appropriateness of exchange rate peg. The persistent weakness of the US dollar can bring important benefits to countries pegged to it, takes away real freedom of monetary policy, and gives these countries the same policy dilemmas that the US has to face. Some are arguing that the current phase of US$ weakness may be an appropriate time for readjustments of pegs or contemplating moving to a floating regime (see for example, http://www.moneyshow.com/trading/Currency_Corner.asp?aid=currency-18260&scode=010473). As the piece notes, the key considerations include ‘financial market development and capital controls, strength of economic ties to the United States, and prospects for economic slack and inflation’. We know the PM’s position on the peg, but that is not an economic argument in itself.

    2. Completeness of the picture. You touched partly though not fully 3 of the 4 sectors needed: real (unemployment, though oddly not growth); fiscal (you looked at the deficit though you were silent on the debt issues); balance of payments (international reserves). When I read the piece this morning in the Advocate, I saw no mention of the other main policy pillar: monetary developments and inflation seemed to get no airing and I wondered why.

    Thanks.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM

    It is useful to see the OECD’s revised growth prospects for 2010-2011, released today, see http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axLRIVF3w3Ns&pos=1. Bottom line: recovery is weak and vary variable. Concerns that US and EU outlook is weak though positive, and that puts more pressure on China to pull the world forward. Major risk: raised concern about new asset bubbles that policy makers need to be aware of, they have yet to materialize.

  • kiki // November 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM

    Six One Penny
    Must fall in the ghetto
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/category/misty-in-roots/

  • Christopher Halsall // November 19, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @Dennis…

    And, let us please recognize the Elephant in the room…

    The US of A *wants* their dollar to be weak, because they owe so many others so very much based on US dollars.

    Meanwhile, those of us who are tied to the US Dollar are along for the ride; if we’re ready for it, or not.

    So, following from the above, may I please ask this very simple question: Is Barbados actually sovereign?

  • zion1971 // November 19, 2009 at 7:39 PM

    @ C. Hall.

    I think the USA is deliberatley depreciating the green back so that it can stimulate export and makes its huge debt cheaper to service. However, if the japanese and the chinese and all the other soverign wealth fund start to unload the dollar out of panick then barbados can be in for a rough ride. I think the Barbados dollar is very overvalued and we might have to consider a floating rate soon.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 19, 2009 at 9:15 PM

    @Chris Halsall, a weak US dollar helps the US economy in many ways, agreed. But the balance is delicate on how weak the dollar should go and how fast it should move.

    “Sovereignty”? Nice concept. Limited real value when you are a small country.

  • David // November 19, 2009 at 9:28 PM

    One would have thought given the seriousness of the global economic situation and how it is affecting Barbados we would have seen a more senior group of journalists represent tonight. With the exception of Edwards from the Nation and to a lesser extent Joseph from MixFM…

    Some useful info came out but it was a lollipop press conference in our view.

  • Bush Tea // November 19, 2009 at 9:55 PM

    Is Dr. R suggesting that since the rate of decline is not significantly worse than the average for the last decade- we have ‘done well’ considering…??

    Is this not like the man who fell off the roof concluding, on passing the third floor, “…well…, so far so good!!”

    As a simple Bushman, I continue to be amazed at the apparent situation where we seem to expect to run an ongoing current account deficit (except for 2004).

    How can this be sustainable? Is this not the same as spending 5% more that you earn every year?

    Surely this is the reason that Sovereignty continues to be out of our reach….

    ….the answer is also obvious. We have to work harder and smarter to earn more, if we wish to continue our present lifestyle – OR, we must reduce our standard of living to match our productive limitations.
    ….ELSE, our financiers will dictate for us both of the above levels….. on the ground floor….

  • David // November 19, 2009 at 10:00 PM

    @Bushman

    You obviously have not grasped the concept of debt rescheduling and its use as a fiscal strategy…lol

  • Bush Tea // November 19, 2009 at 10:15 PM

    @David
    I am very much acquainted with that concept.
    Borrow from whosoever will lend -and then from Peter to pay Paul and at ever increasing interest rates…

    It usually ends with the miscreant running and hiding from Peter, Paul and the court marshals…

    ….so this is what macro economics is all about? LOL

    The BIG joke is everyone talking about the ‘rebound’ of the economy…..
    …ever heard of crash and BURN….?

  • Veritas // November 20, 2009 at 5:55 AM

    David, what would you have asked the PM that they didn’t? I have seen the senior journalists there before and they were awful!

    in my view, Barbadian journalists are only now getting used to real democracy and access to the Prime Minister.

  • Green Monkey // November 20, 2009 at 7:16 AM

    Not directly related to this topic of the Barbados economy perhaps but still somewhat relevant none the less as many of the economists concentrating on the local or Caribbean economic scene would have been trained in the US and/or been influcenced by economists trained in the US:

    Priceless: How The Federal Reserve Bought The Economics Profession

    The Federal Reserve, through its extensive network of consultants, visiting scholars, alumni and staff economists, so thoroughly dominates the field of economics that real criticism of the central bank has become a career liability for members of the profession, an investigation by the Huffington Post has found.

    This dominance helps explain how, even after the Fed failed to foresee the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression, the central bank has largely escaped criticism from academic economists. In the Fed’s thrall, the economists missed it, too.

    “The Fed has a lock on the economics world,” says Joshua Rosner, a Wall Street analyst who correctly called the meltdown. “There is no room for other views, which I guess is why economists got it so wrong.”

    One critical way the Fed exerts control on academic economists is through its relationships with the field’s gatekeepers. For instance, at the Journal of Monetary Economics, a must-publish venue for rising economists, more than half of the editorial board members are currently on the Fed payroll — and the rest have been in the past.

    Continued at:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/07/priceless-how-the-federal_n_278805.html

  • RJH Adams // November 20, 2009 at 7:57 AM

    @Dr Robinson,

    It’s good to highlight past successes and hope the provisional data included therein maintain the trend. Perhaps it is worth suggesting that there are very significant time lags to consider when looking (for example) at the tourist trade and that the effects of these are not entirely visible in the bald data on show. Also, comparing Barbados’ to a well-diversified G8 economy seems of little point to my mind.

    Still, it is the future that truly counts. The Japanese have an apt saying: “darkness lies one step ahead” and it must be on next steps that administrators openly focus. No matter how helpful the benefits of relentless positivity, without the complementary public airing of challenges (with timely data so frequently absent) the practice encourages a dangerous complacency and ill-informed debate.

    The S&P position is what it is – adopting a defensive stance to it seems of little purpose. Their report is not a political (or other) condemnation and the idea that it “seems to be suggesting” that the task of guiding the economy is “easy” looks difficult to maintain with an equitable reading of their pronouncements (unless the suggestion is that they are not assessing even-handedly over different reporting periods).

    They are not that patronising; and casting their words (or those of the IMF) as a zero sum choice between fiscal balance vs social harmony is more a simplified political argument than fair representation of the economic choices available.

    @Christopher Halsall,

    Re 2007, possibly Dr Robinson was subtly referring to pre-election spending. The effect, if that is what it is, is also visible in the 2002 data. There is an interesting body of academic research on the impact of this democratic tendency in the US system. It would refreshing to see something local stretching back to 1966.

    Re US inflation, it is easy to overstate the control of the US government on the dollar price (whatever their wishes). With a zero interest rate policy (or near enough) there is little, for practical purposes, they can realistically do to depress it more. The fx market is just too large.

    That sound odds given the vast monetization the Fed has engaged in. But for all its expansion of the monetary base (essentially coin, notes and commercial bank reserves held by the Fed) broader money has hardly been affected. M2, the accepted measure of broad money (at least for inflation measuring/forecasting) is the sum of the narrow definition of the aforementioned monetary base plus anything that qualifies as “nearly money” (such as savings accounts). Which is a lot of things.

    Indeed this is the heart of the problem the US faces. It is pushing a string with its expansion of the monetary base. The evaporation of assets, credit and wealth (including those in M2) has been so severe that it is at best managing only to nurse/partially plug the enormous hole in the interbank lending system. Even the recently much touted carry-trade whereby cheap dollars are borrowed to fund lending in higher yielding currencies has not expanded US commercial lending (which would ultimately be an inflationary pressure).

    Indeed, for the financially-minded out there, I’d go further and suggest that what has moved the dollar for a very long time was, firstly, the massive leverage financial markets engaged in from 2002/2003 followed, much more recently, by an equally massive deleveraging from 2008. To imagine otherwise, as many academics with little to no market experience and much of the media appear to, is, well, highly suspect.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 8:01 AM

    is there anyone out there with
    experience of financial confirmations

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/9421535/Collateral-Damage-Part-2-The-Subprime-Crisis-and-the-Terrorist-Attacks-on-September-11-200126122008

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/19813178/Nikki-Alexander-Taking-Down-a-Nation

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/06/26-9

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 8:01 AM

    @Green Monkey, largely rubbish in my view. The Fed (and US Treasury) gets criticised a lot, almost daily. Maybe no one listens but spend a day watching Bloomberg and you’ll hear plenty. The same can be said for most of the world’s official financial agencies. Hardly anyone foresaw the housing bubble, but hardly anyone foresees any financial crisis. Markets have herd mentality and logic often does not factor in until it’s too late.

    Further, the greater amount of economists world wide have no US/Fed training. The article does a disservice to the great UK economics schools at Oxford, Cambridge, London, Warwick, Manchester, etc. and to the varied and excellent economics teaching in most European countries.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM

    Or failed settlements trades, derivatives, asset or mortgage backed securities, foreign exchange transactions, tax reporting etc

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 8:43 AM

    who isn’t stupid bent or on the take

    Robbery In The City
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/robbery-in-the-city/

  • Justin will know who this is.... // November 20, 2009 at 8:45 AM

    Justin,

    interesting article, however I would suggest that it’s base premise is flawed by the choice of the three metrics.

    Your analysis does not address issues of debt levels, the structure of the debt profile, (which previously was mostly held in Barbados dollars but has now shifted substantially towards US dollar debt). It does not address the levels of foreign investment which the previous administration relied on to keep the Forex reserves up, but sources for that have dwindled with the recession. It does not assess issues of growth in the overall economy….I could go on.

    However my point is that the picture presented by your choice of metrics is not accurate. Further to compare the Barbados economy with those of the major OECD countries is comparing apples and oranges.

    The most charitable interpretation of this article is that it is an academic examination of two discrete economic statistics. A less charitable interpretation would be that it is political discourse.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 8:49 AM

    @RJR Adams,
    From my time on staff, I was (and still am) used to the IMF being ‘blamed’, but I continue to emphasise that it does a basis job first and foremost. That is to assess national economic conditions in a standard way; that’s in keeping with its prime mandate of surveillance. It’s mandate extends to then giving policy advice, and if it is to lend money, following that advice or meeting conditions consistent with such advice.

    Many people fail to recognise that the Fund is largely like a doctor, who diagnoses and then prescribes treatment. What is clear is that the ’sicknesses’ often identified have a long history and have gone a long time without proper treatment. So, taking Barbados specifically, the economic problems evident today have their origins several years ago, and without digging too hard one can see that with the accumulation of debt (not a problem in itself but grave if it is not giving the necessary returns or is largely feeding consumption) and the lack of diversification of the economy (the ‘all eggs in one basket’ problem). So, on two fronts the economy was being made more vulnerable. A third element is about taking action to address clearly identified problems. In that vein, I point to CLICO/CL Financial. Although the current crisis did not have its origin in Barbados, the elements of the company’s problems were evident across its operations. The weakness identified by the authorities in Trinidad before the crisis were not addressed, but were in fact facilitated by inadequate legislation. The interconnectedness of the enterprise meant that national ‘fire walls’ needed to be put up fast to avoid a collapse. My reading suggests that was not done and the acceptance of poor financial managment (in the form of poor government and surpervisory oversight, exemplified for instance by the tardy disclosure of accounts) as the norm in Barbados is now reaping its whirlwind. There is blame to be shared and one hopes that people will have the integrity to acknolwedge it and move on to fix the problem.

    On the US monetary and fiscal problems, the whole world has to suffer in their wake. But, countries that are pegged, such as Barbados is, will have a hard time trying to insulate themselves from the negatives of a sustained US dollar decline (ie a cut in wealth), in the same way that they had gained from a US dollar increase.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 8:50 AM

    @Justin (and Don), I appreciate the local economics profession stepping up to the plate to help discuss the major national economic issues, something that I feel has been really lacking over the past couple of years.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 8:54 AM

    @RJR Adams. CORRECTION

    “Its mandate extends to then giving policy advice, and if it is to lend money, following that advice or meeting conditions consistent with such advice IS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION TO PLACE ON THE BORROWING COUNTRIES.”

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 9:01 AM

    lovers sleepers dreamers
    all you schemers
    this is your wake up call
    checking you all

    http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=20786984

  • David // November 20, 2009 at 9:02 AM

    @Veritas

    First let us agree and we have made the feedback before, the format of the press conference does not lend for journalists to press/follow-up on any issues. It is essentially formatted to provide the PM with the opportunity to wax lyrically on issues he wants to highlight.

    Also there is Reudon Eversley now Director of News at CBC a trained journalist but a DLP card carrying member no doubt who played a role in the last DLP political campaign. No disrespect to the gentleman but BU will always expose the possible conflicts/agendas as we see them.

    1. If BU was present at the press conference last night we would obviously have pressed harder on the immigration matter, to allow the PM to restate old positions when the Commisong/government backroom deal has moved the goal post was negligent.
    2. Given the concern of the credit rating agencies and other global finance houses regarding the catastrophic impact of the CLICO transaction an the looming liability can negatively impact our economy it was critical to press the PM on this matter.
    3. There is the issue of our oil exploration program. Based on reports little interest has been shown by bidders with one received to date. BU is all about developing an RE program BUT the current government’s commitment to our oil exploration program should be declared, in fact it should form part of our national strategic plan.

    Other questions we would have asked but like we said given the format it would have been a waste of time. In fact the journalists present last night are probably embarrassed the morning after. This might explain why the senior journalists stayed away.

  • Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:06 AM

    Thanks for the comments to date. I picked three metrics for a variety of reasons.

    1. The space limitations of a newspaper article.

    2. The recent change in the S&P outlook seemed to be driven by an unexpected surge in the fiscal deficit so I wanted to focus on that variable and the trend in that variable over time.
    The basic thesis there is that while the government’s revenue base is cyclical, the expenditure structure is much less so. The data suggests that the mismatch spans political regimes. I hoped to spark a debate on that mismatch.

    3. I chose un-employment because we seem to be using 6.7% as a benchmark for a well performing economy in Barbados. the unemployment rate fell to around 6.7% in the third quarter of 2007 and that seems to have become some sort of benchmark. In my opinion the un-employment rate fell to those lows for one quarter on the back of a several major projects with finite lives being undertaken at the same time. The underlying suggestion here is that if we want to maintian un-employment around 6% we need to generate more sustainable sources of employment.

    4. I chose foreign exchange reserves because I believe it is the single most important measure of the stability of the Barbados economy.

  • Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:23 AM

    In my opinion the level of unemployment and the fiscal deficit are related as countries battle the recession.

    Countries that have tried to moderate the impact of the slowdown of their employment levels by maintaining expenditure levels or enacting a fiscal stimulus have seen their fiscal deficits surge. Hence the example of the US, UK, Japan, China, and Canada in terms of their fiscal deficits. The economies are clearly different but the economic strategies bear similarities in the face of the recession.The US, UK and Canada are also our major trading partners.

    Dennis, I am comfortable with the exchange rate peg as it is as the best strategy for Bim in the near to medium term. There are issues with the weak dollar, but given the structure of the Barbados economy, it is not clear to me that there are attractive alternatives.

  • Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:26 AM

    Chris,
    One can associate the other surges in the fiscal deficits to external shocks to the economy except for 2007. That particular surge seems to have been linked to domestic choices.

    maybe that spending spurt during a growth period has something to do with the drop in unemployment in that year.

  • David // November 20, 2009 at 9:29 AM

    @Justin

    To support your point about the peg to the US dollar, Dr. Persaud and yourself seems to be on allfours on this point for the same reason you gave above.

  • Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:34 AM

    RJR Adams, nice to have you on the blog, I really enjoy your posts.

    I am really not interested in highlighting past successes. Barbados has achieved a lot and we all enjoy the high quality of life here. That is a given.

    My own sense from data ( and I am very open to different interpretations) is that the challenges we face today are somewhat structural, and have really been exposed by the latest external shock.

    I want to suggest that we have not really built an economy that seems capable of sustaining 6% type unemployment. The public finances remain extremely vulnerable to any slowdown in revenues

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 9:35 AM

    = ⚆ = BURNING SPEAR = ⚆ =
    + / + Social Living +\+

    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/social-living/

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 9:50 AM

    @ Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:23 AM

    I too am comfortable with the peg (and I see from the Fund’s last Article IV report, they do not see the exchange rate as misaligned). I really wanted to flag the constant factor that maintaining the peg requires flexibility elsewhere and if that is not present then something has to give.

    I have noted that there has been concern expressed by economic agents that the peg has hurt them (I think especially of the remarks made by Gordon Seale during the summer about its effects on tourism in the context of Winston Cox’s remarks about the peg being ’sacrosanct’).

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 9:56 AM

    @ Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:34 AM
    You wrote:
    “My own sense from data ( and I am very open to different interpretations) is that the challenges we face today are somewhat structural, and have really been exposed by the latest external shock.” [In my commentary on the 2009 Budget (see http://livinginbarbados.blogspot.com/2009/05/comments-on-budget.html, and also published in Barbados Business Authoritiy, May 25), I wrote 'More vocational and industrial training, more public housing, and helping the 'creative economy', may be good for some, but introducing measures to tackle 'structural' weakness, such as the acknowledged lack of competitiveness in the economy and impediments to doing business would be better for almost all.' The PM's remarks on BWA are a classic indication of how a structural problem not addressed just festers and comes back to haunt you.]

  • Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:58 AM

    Good point Dennis. My view, is the fiscal mismatch may in the long term threaten the ability to keep the peg. So I guess we are on the same page there.

    Fiscal prudence is part and parcel of maintaining the peg. I think the data on the fiscal deficit suggests that we may not have had that much prudence when the external environment was far more favourable.

    It is not clear to me that the middle of a huge recession is the best time to fix the chronic fiscal hole.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 10:07 AM

    musical war
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/musical-war/

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 10:26 AM

    @ Justin Robinson // November 20, 2009 at 9:58 AM
    “My view, is the fiscal mismatch may in the long term threaten the ability to keep the peg. So I guess we are on the same page there.” [On exactly the same page.]

    “Fiscal prudence is part and parcel of maintaining the peg.” [Precisely. Without getting into too much more technicality, that's one reasons why currency board arrangements work well with pegs, by taking away the freedom to play loose with the fiscal balance.]

  • RJH Adams // November 20, 2009 at 10:28 AM

    @Dennis,

    1) I read a piece of analysis recently by a Japan specialist:

    http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/about/pifs/symposia/japan/09-japan-briefing-book/japan-serves-up-valuable-minimalist-lessons.pdf

    Amusingly and elegantly argued and I think Tasker puts in perspective the strident calls for regulation currently heard around the globe: these may indeed be valuable initiatives but they will not prevent future excess.

    2) It’s undeniable that the progress of an economy is like a thread and runs through political administrations. Yet a frequent premise found on Bds blogs is that a new administration restarts from zero, or near there. That is (by moment) convenient for all parties but does tend to obstruct best analysis of where things currently stand at any given point and so creation of best policy. A fine point of principle would be to remove the “not ours / not from here” attitude when it comes to considering potential solutions. It also addresses (somewhat) David’s call for political solidarity during crises.

    3) You regularly catch the ritual IMF abuse. I sympathise with much of what you say – the IMF has (on my admittedly incomplete knowledge) changed its game since the days of “enhanced structural adjustment facilities” and particularly since the Asian Crisis. An ESAF is now (I think) called a”poverty reduction and growth facility” (or perhaps the name has changed again) and does appear to take far better account of the fate of the most vulnerable. But the long shadows cast by the ESAF remain. Sovereignty, in both its ideal of pragmatic forms, is bound to be fiercely protected.

    At least, that is, until the wheels fall completely off the wagon. Seeking IMF assistance is still – unfortunately in light of the evolution of policy (or at least my perception of it) – the fastest method of political suicide in Asia, most of South America and closer to home.

    4) I wonder if the peg makes a difference in the face of a sustained dollar decline. It’s there largely to offset currency risk since most of Bds transactions are US dollar denominated at source. That appears to remain a valid assumption going forward. US consumption is something less than 20% of global GDP. If it continues to drop – and discretionary spending on things like tourism with it – it is unclear to me what other currency regime might represent a superior means of mitigation.

    -Rawdon

  • RJH Adams // November 20, 2009 at 10:29 AM

    @Dr Robinson,

    I should really have prefaced my remarks in similar vein to yours. It is relatively difficult to find robust analysis on Bds economic matters and when it happens, as with your productions, it is always enjoyable. Even when I disagree (perhaps most when I disagree).

    That said, there is not much to disagree with in your supplementary comments (but much to discuss in the bar).

    -Rawdon

  • donald duck esq // November 20, 2009 at 10:42 AM

    What about the $160 million in expenditure cuts announced by the Minister of Finance?

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 11:16 AM

    Not wishing to leave anyone behind in the discussion. The currency board idea is well explained on Wikipedia. The essence is that there is a commitment for the money supply to have a fixed backing in foreign exchange. It requires certain tough conditions to work best, including no borrowing by government from the central bank, and full convertibility on current and capital accounts of the balance of payments. In the region, the main example is the Eastern Caribbean Currency Board. The idea had been suggested some years ago for Jamaica but was rejected.

    It puts tight constraints on fiscal policy and for that reason politicians tend to dislike it. It also removes many domestic considerations from monetary policy. But it has worked well for a number of small open economies (eg Hong Kong, the Baltic states, Cayman Islands) and even for some large economies (eg Argentina, in an unorthodox form).

  • Alex Fergusson // November 20, 2009 at 11:26 AM

    Barbados has a debt to DGP ratio of some 8% and climbing out of control but which is neither being used for stimulus or stabilization.

    This is therefore a new era in rescklessness and irresponsibility by the DLP, even by its standards.

    The second point is that whereas such a high deficit should be used only in extra-ordinary circumstances, under the DLP it has become the norm.

    The third point is that the DLP is yet to announce new policies designed to encourage private sector investment or the increase our level of exports.

    Barbados needs policies to raise the level of exports to GDP as well as private foreign capital to GDP, while there is also urgent need to regulate the number of new entitlement programmes, especially in the absence of matching enterprise creation.

    Therefore, the crisis in Barbados is not the global financial crisis, but the absence of necessary “LEADERSHIP” from Thompson and the DLP.

    The question that BU family has to answer, is whether in addition to the global financial crisis – there are other forces that have been at work, are at work and continue to be at work, which are compunding the adverse effect of the recession.

    For example! What are the policies announced by the DLP, which will bring Barbados through or are we waiting on Gordon Browne and or Obama and the IMF – to run Barbados from the UK and Washington?

    I hold that the crisis in Barbados is Thompson and the DLP

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 11:35 AM

    @ RJH Adams // November 20, 2009 at 10:28 AM

    1. I will look at the article later, thanks.
    2. Agreed. I tend to say that historical perspectives often displayed are too short and see too much direct cause and effect with hardly any time lapse. But most commentators seem unable to work without a framework that is partisan (even in cases where assigning partisanship hardly makes sense), which tends to draw false boundaries.
    3. I’m used to the barbs. The Fund changed over 15 years ago, but the world is still stuck with old images. That’s partly a PR problem for the Fund, but also limited real exposure for most people. The mandate on conditionality was loosened a long time ago (where now there must be proof that they are ‘macroeconomically relevant’, so are far fewer), and the Board routinely chops out ‘unnecessary’ conditions from programs. The poverty reduction and growth facility (PRGF) is not really so similar to the ESAF, as it involves a ‘poverty reduction strategy’ complement that must be ‘home grown’ and some countries struggle because they do not have the resources to actually produce the necessary strategy document. The PRGF/PRS process is also one that is a joint IMF-World Bank approach (with the Bank steering and financing the social policy program side, and Fund deals with the macroeconomic side).

    As for ‘political suicide’, economic collapse kills politicians faster. Countries have found ways to get IMF endorsement for what they are doing with real or promised financial support, but the important ’seal of approval’ that helps open other financing spigots (even Jamaica for a good few recent years).
    4. On the peg and the currency risk. I’d differ, if only because a large part of tourism is not US driven (but UK, Canada and rest of Europe). A casual eye view shows a lot of goods that are sourced from the UK (but I have not had a chance to look at the IMF’s Direction of Trade Statistics). I just say that the exchange rate cannot always be ‘off the table’ for discussion.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM

    preferably working in an asset transfer agency or off shore money deposits and client services

    Cut and pasted.. blah blah blah
    What is economics? Modelling business and finance? Or modelling the world? The world’s full of people each expressing their independant take on Maslow’s heirarchy of needs and aspirations, and trading off the ego with their (or their spouses) social conscience. Simply modelling GNP puts all the focus on short-term profits, and moves none on the progression of the population up the heirarchy – this was an aspect of the crash, that such questions were disregarded. Indeed, there’s a Nobel Prize for the person who finds another level above altruism: but we’re really rather more oriented towards less highfalutin’ goals, towards lifting the third world onto the first step without pulling the second world backwards. Can it be done? Perhaps, but not according to the classic industrial model of production causing waste: we need to review our industrial processses, and indeed our aspirations, to ensure the polluter really pays. This is a start in linking G20 and the imminent Chinese announcement on the environment: the question now will be to gag the Republicans so the US Government can really start to govern.

    anyway here’s another revival tune
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/sunshine-of-your-love/

  • David // November 20, 2009 at 11:58 AM

    @Alex Fergusson

    The BU family debunked your Barbados/Guyana comparison and now you coming with the above?

    Are you not shame when one takes into consideration the BLP has continued to support the underpinnings of our economy with the tourism and foreign direct investment legs?

    What do you expect given the fickle nature of such?

    Barbados has done well but we need to review the business model which supports our economy for the future. To be frank we are tired listening to the politicians talking shit.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 12:01 PM

    @RJR Adams,

    My take on Tasker’s piece is that there is always a game of Chase on for policy makers, because markets, and actual enterprises are always leading. So, it’s only by accident that a horse can be caught before it’s bolted. What he says, “Changing the system will not abolish bubbles” is patently true.

    On that note, I will smile having read that Pres. Chavez did not like the latest Venezuelan GDP data, so has now abolished that measure and come up with a ’socialist-friendly way of measuring economic growth’, see http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/11/19/venezuelas-chavez-slams-gdp-methodology-after-third-quarter-contraction/.

    I like Bhutan’s ‘gross national happiness’. Some school children and I were discussing this last night on the edge of NIFCA rehearsals and agreed that measuring the width of smiles may be the way to go.

    Have a good weekend.

  • Alex Fergusson // November 20, 2009 at 1:07 PM

    David,

    This is the one good point you made:

    “Barbados has done well but we need to review the business model which supports our economy for the future.”

    Now you understand the vision outlined recently by Opposition Leader, Miss Mia Amor Mottley, Q.C., M.P.,

    It is why you should also read the National Strategic Plan 2006-2025 and the BLP’s 2008 Manifesto.

    Imagine, thompson tried to give the impression in the House last Tuesday – that he somehow has to defend establishing a Mission in Brasil, Cuba and China.

    That may sound good to people who do not read. But again, it is a snatch of good BLP policy, hijacked from page 67 of the BLP’s 2008 Manifesto:

    “Continuing to reposition Barbados globally, through the expansion of our diplomatic coverage. To this end, we will give priority to the early opening of resident Embassies in Brasilia, Beijing, Havana and Georgetown to service our growing bilateral commercial and consular interests.”

    Now David Sir, why do you suppose Georgetown? Incidentally, this is the same Guyana economy which is now growing at 2.5% this year – having grown by 3.8% in 2008?

  • Alex Fergusson // November 20, 2009 at 1:28 PM

    @ David,

    You said:

    “Are you not shame when one takes into consideration the BLP has continued to support the underpinnings of our economy with the tourism and foreign direct investment legs.”

    Wrong again! What about the work then to transform the sugar industry to the sugar cane industry?

    How about efforts to ensure that Barbados has an offshore oil exploration programme – having defeated T&T so that it can no longer claim that just off Oistins belong to Trinidad?

    What about the BLP’s efforts to ensure that Barbados gets a Green Economy?

    How about an EPA with Europe and the efforts to drive the CSME.

    What about education and one university graduate per household?

    So you do not get confuse and talk about tourism and FDI, here is the most significant reforms which led to the same economy success and $2.4 billion in foreign exchange which has proven to be the saviour of Barbados:

    The Barbados Labour Party consistently promoted economic success and social re-engineering based on a cluster of tax, regulatory and infrastructure policies that reward work; encourage investment and stimulate enterprise.

    Those policies have been directed towards the creation of an entrepreneurial society, and economy based around services and exports, one that is globally integrated and at the cutting edge of information and communication technology.

    The Barbados Labour Party is the party of empowerment, enfranchisement and entrepreneurship.

    Do not make the mistake again and confuse the DLP and its operative with BLP and competent social and economic planners. It will require you knowing when to lowere and raise the bar on the level of debate.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 1:51 PM

    don’t stop til we major

  • Anonymous // November 20, 2009 at 1:55 PM

    I have been loking up Avinash Persaud on the web. I am confused by what I read. Does Avinash Persaud have a masters or phd in economics? Is he a typical professor or an honorary professor?

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 1:57 PM

    “FRISCO NIGGS AINT NO PUNKS”

  • Anonymous // November 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM

    I do not mean to sound malicious. But there is such a long list of his accomplishments that his academic qualifications are conspicuous by their absence.

    He seems a little young for being a Professor Emiritus.

  • Alex Fergusson // November 20, 2009 at 2:42 PM

    What about that national breakfast meetings that would to have help Thompson run this country – given that he does not know what he is doing or what to do?

  • David // November 20, 2009 at 2:55 PM

    @Veritas

    Here is another question we would have posed to the PM.

    Please confirm BU sources the government is well on the way to settling with 3S (the company fired by government contracted by the former government to build the flyovers). What is the amount and it is provided for in the 2010 budget?

  • Alex Fergusson // November 20, 2009 at 3:05 PM

    donald duck esq // November 20, 2009 at 10:42 AM

    What about the $160 million in expenditure cuts announced by the Minister of Finance?

    ++++++++++++++++++++

    Incidentally, in it last Article 1v Consultation, the IMF recommended to the DLP that it should reduce its Goods and Services Vote by 2 – 2 ¼ % of GDP ($7191 Million for 2009) (i.e.) between $143.8 to $161.8.

    The same $160m that Thompson has.

    This is one of the clearest examples that DLP policies already carry a: “Made in Washington Lebel,” and that Barbados’ economy is being run from Washington and not Bay Street.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 3:17 PM

    Baff Boom
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/baff-boom/

  • love // November 20, 2009 at 3:38 PM

    This is one of the clearest examples that DLP policies already carry a: “Made in Washington Lebel,” and that Barbados’ economy is being run from Washington and not Bay Street.
    **************************************

    To Alex Fergusson,

    If what you claim above is true….then that is better than the BLP years when our economy was fashioned on GREENLAND….a DUMP !

    Millions down the DRAIN…and yet a bag of garbage cannot go there.

    Tell us which is better ?

  • Christopher Halsall // November 20, 2009 at 3:38 PM

    @Justin Robinson, RJH Adams and Dennis Jones…

    I would be very interested in your thoughts about the current, and future, BDS peg to the USD.

    Four main questions:

    1. As a net importer, does the “peg” to the USD really make sense? From whom (or is it who?) do we mostly import? To whom do we mostly export?

    2. Does the current peg of $1.98 BDS to $1.00 USD make sense? If nothing else, shouldn’t it have been (for example) $2.02 (or $2.05 et al) BDS to $1.00 USD? (Think about all the vendors who accept $1 USD as being $2 BDS.)

    3. It has been suggested that in the near future (read: within 10 years) there will be a shift from the USD being the international currency to another. Possibly another country’s currency; possibly a new “global currency”.

    4. What would be involved in decoupling the BDS from the USD? Either taking it independent, or tying it to another currency?

    I would be very interested in all your learned points of view.

    Best regards to all.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    Poor Man Struggle
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/poor-man-struggle/

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 4:49 PM

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 5:33 PM

    @ Alex Fergusson // November 20, 2009 at 3:05 PM
    “Incidentally, in it last Article 1v Consultation, the IMF recommended to the DLP that it should reduce its Goods and Services Vote by 2 – 2 ¼ % of GDP ($7191 Million for 2009) (i.e.) between $143.8 to $161.8.

    The same $160m that Thompson has.

    This is one of the clearest examples that DLP policies already carry a: “Made in Washington Lebel,” and that Barbados’ economy is being run from Washington and not Bay Street.” [Just because the cut in spending equates to a deficit change indicated in the Article IV does not mean that this is “made in Washington’. Fund policy proposals are a package, not disparate parts, so you need to see what other policy changes will accompany the spending change. Many outcomes other than the one envisaged by the IMF are consistent with that one figure. Look again at the Article IV and the key policy variables, if the governments monetary/inflation, balance of payments, and output scenario that go with the $160 million cut are the same as proposed by the Fund then you are not looking at the same policy package.

    Even if the government’s policy package were the same merely means that the Fund and Barbados are agreed on the necessary policy changes, not on whose ‘factory’ put it together.

    But the key take away (see paras. 10-11 of the Article IV) is that while the Fund proposed expenditure cuts (1% of GDP) to keep the 2009/10 at the same level as last year, the government ‘did not favour further tightening of the fiscal stance at this stage’. So the question to ask and answer if is the government has now changed its view.

  • Christopher Halsall // November 20, 2009 at 5:54 PM

    Trust kiki to interject noise into a serious discussion…

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 6:06 PM

    @ Christopher Halsall // November 20, 2009 at 3:38 PM
    1. Most of Barbados’ imports come from the USA (about 40+%), Caricom (20+%) and the UK (10%) (see the IMF’s Direction of Trade Statistics 2004, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2004/cr04153.pdf; these older data are free, while more up to date through 2008 are available but by paid subscription–I do not believe that the structure of trade has changed much since 2004). But remember that a lot of goods are priced in US$, so the exchange rate variation may be less that implied by the geographical direction of trade.

    Exports went mainly to Caricom (35%), US (15%), and UK (12%), and other (23%).

    One really ought to factor in services too, mainly tourism and you can look at the CTO’s data to see where most tourists come from (UK, US, Canada), and where most Bajans travel.

    2. The official rate is B$2:US$1 but in most actual transactions involving banks there is always a spread, from which they get part of their fees.

    3. Moving from the USD as the world’s main reserve currency will take a long time, whether it’s in 10 years or more is hard to say. Lots of things need to happen before the USD can be displaced as the primary reserve currency, and the major currency for financing international trade.

    4. B$ decoupling from US$ is hard to discuss in a vacuum. It depends on what the new situation would be; there’s quite a wide range of standard alternatives. Moreover, decoupling may not be the desired option, with a change of peg value also possible. If the exchange rate regime were to change from fixed to floating (if that is what you mean by ‘independent’) then that would also entail other changes in how international transactions can be conducted so that the various movements could properly have their impact on determining the value of the currency.

    Hope that helps.

  • Straight talk // November 20, 2009 at 6:15 PM

    CH:

    Whilst we are all blinded by our supposed regional superiority, in being able to maintain our peg to the suspect dollar, let us not forget we are devaluing our currency at the same rate as the US are allowing theirs to depreciate.

    Devaluation by stealth, with not a word said to explain our rocketing inflation, except soon expected relief supplies from Dominica and an ever increasing airlift from the terminally ill airlines.

    Blowhard “economists” have proved, through their most recent and now discredited predictions, that they are as much scientists as were the emperor’s tailor’s were gents outfitters.

    We see previous, seemingly weighty, comments on this blog smugly defining where we went wrong but where were their learned voices when we were taking those faux pas.

    Perhaps the suggestion of a possible way forward may be more acceptable from these timid academics, anything rather than a belittling ” well if I was going there I wouldn’t start from here”
    kind of commentary.

    Give us a vision, if you can have one without mashing corns, not history.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 6:28 PM

    Watch this Sound
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/watch-this-sound/

  • Christopher Halsall // November 20, 2009 at 6:31 PM

    @Straight talk: “…the emperor’s tailor’s were gents outfitters.

    Agreed. The emperor has no clothes…

    Sad, isn’t it?

    Some still wear clothes.

    Interestingly, they’re not generally listened to….

  • David // November 20, 2009 at 6:48 PM

    @Chris

    After the intellectual discourse on the matter of peg or no peg, answer this – do you think a Barbados government (party) ever have the will (power) to implement such when the economists say the time is now?

  • Christopher Halsall // November 20, 2009 at 6:57 PM

    @Dennis Jones: “The official rate is B$2:US$1

    I think you’re wrong.

    Or perhaps I am.

    My understand is the official exchange rate is $1.98 Barbados to $1 US.

    Could someone please tell us all which one of us is correct? Or if we’re both wrong, what is the correct ratio?

  • Christopher Halsall // November 20, 2009 at 7:03 PM

    @David… There is an old saying: Get an even number of economists in a room, and you’ll never know the correct answer. Get an odd number, and you *might* know…

    To answer you direct question indirectly…

    I am beginning to believe that perhaps it is time for a *serious* third Political Party here in Barbados. Perhaps in time for the next general election.

    As they say: serious people seek counsel from many; but then they make their own decisions….

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 20, 2009 at 7:07 PM

    @CH
    The Article IV document (p32) has a section on ‘Exchange-rate arrangements’ and reads:
    ‘Barbados accepted the obligations of Article VIII, Sections 2, 3, and 4 on November 3, 1993, and there are no restrictions on the making of payments and transfers for current international transactions. The Barbados dollar has been pegged to the U.S. dollar since mid-1975 at BDS$2.00 = US$1.00.’

    There should be documentation/legislation to back this statement by the IMF (and you may take a look at the Central Bank of Barbados, and as far as I’m concerned 2:1 is the official reference rate.

    In practice, any exchange rate will have a buy-sell spread, so you may see rates quoted as 1.98/2.02.

  • kiki // November 20, 2009 at 7:12 PM

    1 US Dollar = 2.01000 Barbados Dollar
    1 Barbados Dollar (BBD) = 0.49751 US Dollar (USD)

    Median price = 1.99000 / 2.01000 (bid/ask)
    Minimum price = 1.99000 / 2.01000
    Maximum price = 1.99000 / 2.01000

  • **Adviser to the President** // November 20, 2009 at 8:37 PM

    My advice is simple

    get rid of x
    scratch y
    _________ X patience
    insert p

    =
    buoyancy in the economy—
    This is a simple equation not hard to figure out at all

  • Zoe // November 20, 2009 at 8:52 PM

    @RJR Adams, Rawdon, your Father and Grandfather would be so proud of you; a real ‘chip’ of the old block! Brilliant!

    While I’m ignorant (lacking knowledge) re this subject matter, I truly delight in reading what you have to say, just wish I could make sense of it!

    My forte is eschatology, ‘End-Times’ as it relates to the IMF, World Bank, WTO, the ‘Federal Reserve’ the greatest *hoax* fostered on the American people, ever, which has deliberately created this current economic crisis, as it did in the great depression of the 1930s, only, this this time around, it serves to help usher in the ‘New World Order’ One World Government, which is just around the corner, and a new world currency, the US dollar is on the way out, all carefully planned, and in its final stage of execution!

    Sorry fellows, did not mean to interrup your well-meaning, and courteous exchanges on economics!

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 5:26 AM

    Public Enemy – He got game

  • Terence M. Blackett // November 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM

    WEIGHING IN!!!

    Monetary experts now warn, “We’re in the terminal stages of the world’s most gigantic pyramid scheme” in fiscal history…

    If you believe the academic and monetary claptrap – then both the Poseidon and the titanic are sailing along just fine….

    “All signs point toward the U.S. dollar – already down one-third against other world currencies since 2002 – heading at breakneck speed for a precipitous and historic crash…”

    “Anyone holding dollars or dollar-denominated assets is sitting on a ticking time bomb, and the fuse is burning short. There isn’t a moment to lose before we see a worldwide rush to the exits…”

    “The unmistakable warning signs revealed – point to a monetary crisis on the verge of spinning wildly out of control, leading to massive INFLATION* and quite possibly, a sudden and catastrophic dollar collapse that will change the world forever…”

    “Major foreign investors such as China are quickly catching on to the hard reality of impending U.S. insolvency. They are coming to the inescapable conclusion that the only way Washington can keep its Ponzi finances going is by running the monetary printing presses non-stop…”

    ” Even mega-investor (and high-profile Obama cheerleader) Warren Buffett recently admitted publicly that the frantic spending and money creation underway right now will trigger a currency-destroying inflation that will be much more severe than in the 1970s…”

    “That’s why big-time investment gurus such as Jim Rogers seized on the temporary dollar rally earlier this year to hustle their assets out of harm’s way – before, as he puts it, the dollar “goes the way of pound sterling” and “declines by 90% in the coming years…”

    Here’s just a glimpse of the likely fallout:

    * A price explosion as Americans scramble over one another to buy tangible assets or simply hoard basic necessities, before the dollar’s purchasing power evaporates fully.

    * Widespread shortages, sparse grocery store shelves and the return of long gas lines.

    * Failed businesses and economic dislocations far eclipsing anything we’ve seen to date.

    * A breakdown in commerce, as longer-term transactions become impossible to make.

    * Rising crime and rampant unemployment.

    * Government handouts drying up, with an angry dependent class taking to the streets.

    FINAL THOUGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Apocalypse or Random Economic Theory?

    YOU JUDGE – YOU DECIDE!!!

    In the 2009 Unrestricted Warfare Symposium at the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, intelligence analyst James Richards unveiled a blueprint detailing exactly how U.S. enemies could drop the value of the dollar by a shocking 75%, crippling our economy overnight…

    This report’s conclusions are nothing short of chilling.

    So vulnerable is the U.S. to this scenario, Richards urges U.S. ‘intel’ agencies to pay close attention to global gold supplies and the financial maneuvering of rival powers…

    Richards’ prescient paper came out days before Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of China’s Central Bank, challenged the U.S. to step aside to allow a new global currency to replace the dollar.

    The writing is on the wall – the wheels are almost off the wagon….

    No amount of lucid economic theory can save this or bolster it in any way…

    Change has come!!!

  • dreamstarworld // November 21, 2009 at 2:22 PM

    DEBT THE ACHILLES’ HEEL OF ALL GOVERNMENTS!!!

    This week AMERICAN* debt came in at a staggering $12,031,299,186,290.07….

    America is running ever-larger budget deficits, including $1.42 trillion in fiscal 2009 alone.

    The interest cost alone on that debt last year was $202 billion….

    China owned $799 billion of our Treasury debt as of September. That’s up from $618 billion a year earlier and $468 billion the year before that. About 61% of the Treasuries traded in the marketplace, as of mid-2008, were in foreign hands. And now, China has surpassed Japan as the largest foreign owner. That means they control the purse strings…

    The chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission, Liu Mingkang, just warned that …

    “The continuous depreciation in the dollar, and the U.S. government’s indication, that in order to resume growth and maintain public confidence, it basically won’t raise interest rates for the coming 12 to 18 months, has led to massive dollar arbitrage speculation.”

    He added that …

    “The U.S.’ monetary policy has seriously affected global asset prices, fueled speculation in stock and property markets, and created new, real and insurmountable risks to the recovery of the global economy.”

    There’s a “GORILLA” in the room but folks can’t see it…

    Don’t be blind people!!!!

  • dreamstarworld // November 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM

    The next coming economic crisis will be much more severe than the current one…

    Financial asset bubbles are one thing, and they are a risk. But most of the risk, at this stage, is to investor and consumer confidence.

    A bust that would bring financial assets back in line with the fundamentals of the economy would be another major blow to sentiment.

    And that could be the trappings for another recession — even a depression.
    But the guaranteed danger right now is the real economy, real asset deflation, and evaporated demand.

    The threat of a sharper deterioration in the real economy leads to a complete stand-still in economic activity … i.e. a date with depression.

    That’s the battle central banks are most worried about.

    If you’ve concluded that this looks like a lose-lose scenario for the U.S. and the highly interconnected global economy — I’m afraid you’re right.

    A likely best-case scenario is a very slow and painful rebuilding period, where weak demand and lower standards of living rule.

    The worst-case scenario:

    A bout with global depression.

  • sad very sad // November 21, 2009 at 2:54 PM

    SAD VERY SAD !!!

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 3:55 PM

    It’s all about realigning priorities
    becoming less materialistic
    stop spending to boost the economy
    learn not to waste money
    save what you get to survive
    individuals are more important than
    markets and institutions
    food and good health is like money in the bank

  • Bad Man Saying Nuttin // November 21, 2009 at 4:54 PM

    you people are saying that barbados is along for a ride if the dollar crashes but so would most of the world’s biggest economies. China and Japan especially are “riding the tiger”. They can’t get off or they will be eaten.
    By this I mean both countries hold temendous amunts of US denoted securities. A 75% drop in the dollar would cripple the US but it would also devastate China and Japan’s asset holdings. The problem is that most countries in their position cannot divest themselves of US denoted securities without taking a significant hit in their asset holding values.

  • Bad Man Saying Nuttin // November 21, 2009 at 5:08 PM

    Don’t state the obvious, come up with a solution.

    Alex Fergusson states
    “The second point is that whereas such a high deficit should be used only in extra-ordinary circumstances, under the DLP it has become the norm.”

    Are these not extraordinary times? My God man, Have a conscience. The world is in the worst recession/financial crisis anybody under 50 has ever seen.

    @ Bushman you are correct. Economists seem not to understand that you cannot run deficit financing continuously. politicians also seem to fall into that boat sometimes. the well must run dry. We should aim for sustainable levels in fiscal management which equates to prolonged periods of small surpluses or balanced payments cycled with fiscal deficits when problems arise. The problem is that even in the years of plenty we spent more than we generated. the deficit accumulated gradually . We now have to add to that in these bad times to try to keep things stable. Sooner or later though we have to run a balanced budget or a surplus. That will mean swallowing a lot of bitter pills.

  • Chris Halsall // November 21, 2009 at 5:13 PM

    Have you all considered…

    I personally am a fan of asian cultures. They are intelegent. They are learned. They are patient.

    Did you know, for example, that Sony has a 300 year business plan?

    So, from the above, might I please suggest that perhap.those asian countries who own so much USA dollars and debt know *exacly* what they’re doing?

    And from that, may I please suggest that we little Barbados (little more than a rounding error when you get right down to it) might see the writing on the wall?

    (Posted via my Blackberry, as LIME have had a widespread xDSL outage the entire day today….)

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 5:14 PM

    Make hay while the sun shines.
    You Never Know What You’ve Got
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/you-never-know-what-youve-got/

  • David // November 21, 2009 at 5:51 PM

    @Bad Man Saying Nuttin

    To say we have to balance the budget makes good sense but the bitter pill which has to be swallowed; what is the plan? BU has discussed this matter already, the reason why Barbados is a magnet in Caricom at the moment is the high standard of living and the attendant amenities which are on offer.

    We asked the earlier, which government will have the balls to create measures to encourage/force the desired behaviours?

  • Christopher Halsall // November 21, 2009 at 5:54 PM

    @All…

    Is it just me, or does anyone else grow tired of kiki’s perpetual parasitic injection of noise into serious dialogue?

  • Technician // November 21, 2009 at 6:06 PM

    Just you Chris….to hear the noise you have to click on it…….why would you, if it bothers you…

  • Anonymous // November 21, 2009 at 6:27 PM

    Yes chris I too am bothered by kiki’s distraction with all these clips often on very serious topic.

    It is not a matter of not clicking on it,I think it is selfish.

  • Bush Tea // November 21, 2009 at 6:34 PM

    @ David
    “…..which government will have the balls to create measures to encourage/force the desired behaviours?”
    **************************************
    Sometimes you amaze the Bushman yuh know!!

    The point that I have been trying to make from the inception of BU is that there are some absolute spiritual laws that are unstoppable.

    The kind of government that would take those needed steps is a wise, intelligent, prudent one. In other words, IT AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN>

    ….However, the INEVITABLE consequences of continuing with the folly foisted on us by the jokers that we admire as ‘experts’ is frighteningly close to the scenario described by Terence M. Blackett // November 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM …. and actually has already started – even as we type….
    It is going to be a really rough ride…. but it will be so much worse for those who define their very life by what they have accumulated..

    You are clearly a wise man David. Surely you can see the writing on the wall….
    Surely you can see the folly in the logic of the ‘experts’…
    …only unkind words could describe those who cannot see the consequences of continually spending more than they earn….and presuming this to be their rightful due at that…

    But even more fundamentally – David, surely you have been able to deduce by now, that the real true measure of life has little to do with the accumulation of such junk as we consider wealth….

    I strongly recommend to you that you stop reading the junk material normally referenced by the likes of GP, MME and Terence. That kind of draft is useless, misguided and fundamentally flawed….. besides only Harrison college types does really understand that stuff anyway….rotfl.

    I recommend my hero, the international literary genius, Lowdown Hoad – and in particular his latest article which touches on the subject….

  • David // November 21, 2009 at 6:44 PM

    @Bush Tea

    Agree with you about the disregard most Barbadians have to the idea of balancing the personal budget. It is very fashionable to fund the deficit with credit cards and loans as they drive SUVs as status symbols, travel the world and the like. Tell us why a family of 3-4 would have to build some of the edifices which have going price of 1 million?

    The BU household felt flattered that Dick would reference a BU blog to inspire his last article, our only criticism is he did not have the balls tofully cite his source…lol.

  • Christopher Halsall // November 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM

    @David…

    It is one thing for one or more families to run a deficit…

    It is quite another thing for an entire country to….

  • Bush Tea // November 21, 2009 at 7:06 PM

    @David
    The reason why a family of 4 would build a mansion and use their credit card like there is no tomorrow is that they model their behaviour on the Government’s, and on what the ‘experts’ advise.

    In the old days, before we had a graduate in every home and international gurus living in Barbados, the simple, common wisdom was to live within your means, AND to save a little for the rainy day.

    …along came the educated economic gurus with their ‘fiscal deficits’, ‘easy credit cards’ and ‘consume now, pay later’ Ponzi schemes.

    …but as my mother used to say, ‘what sweeten goat mouth does burn he tail….’ and a lot of tails will catch afire soon in our world.

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 7:06 PM

    Chris I ain’t gonna argue with you again
    that would mean we had an emotional involvement which we haven’t got btw

    Now carry on pontificating old sport..

  • Christopher Halsall // November 21, 2009 at 7:16 PM

    @kiki… You’re not my type.

    I desire sophistication in my woman….

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 7:40 PM

    2 options for massive debt are:
    (a) borrow more to stay solvent
    i.e. rob peter to paul
    (b) bite the bullet, stop using credit and
    clear the debt over x amount of years

  • Bush Tea // November 21, 2009 at 8:21 PM

    @ Kiki
    …take 40%. there are many more options.

    c. Your creditor sends the debt collector and take over your house and throw your family into the road….

    d. You declare bankruptcy and move in with the inlaws…

    e. You are pointed to the fine print in the agreements you took and find out that your creditor is your new Lord and Master….and he likes your wife and daughter…

    …here’s an option some of us may like…
    f. your creditor likes you, and is willing to cancel your debt…all you need to do is bend over a bit…

    …Long and Short of it,IMHO, there are no good outcomes from a long term policy of fiscal deficit.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 21, 2009 at 8:30 PM

    @ Terence M. Blackett // November 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM
    You put a lot into quotation marks, so could you cite from where you’re drawing your gems?

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 8:32 PM

    Bush Tea
    Yeah I know the bankruptcy options.

    Big Legal process with big legal costs
    take your home and assets to pay the lawyers
    not the creditors, who are underwritten
    against losses

    Hit the creditors where it hurts in their
    pockets, stop using their services and kill the industry dead.

  • Bush Tea // November 21, 2009 at 9:04 PM

    Kiki
    …play some more tunes….

  • Zoe // November 21, 2009 at 9:20 PM

    @Terence, Thanks for the update from the monetary experts.

    Even at the level of secular honesty, these monetary *prophets* clearly see the ‘writing’ on the wall; I see this as Almighty God allowing the ‘natural’ man, ‘psuechekos de anthopos’ to confirm what His Spiritual Prophets are seeing, and waring people about, unprecedented economic crisis, world wide, the likes of which mankind has never experienced!

    But, we must not take our eyes off Isreal and the Middle East; especially in light of what Obama is pushing for to appease the Palestinians, here is an update re this most serious matter:

    ‘Obama’s “Dangerous” Comments on Isreali Settlements Emboldened Palestinians give ‘green light’ for terror.’

    “Israel’s plan to add some 900 housing units to the southern Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo complicates efforts to relaunch peace talks and embitters the Palestinians, US President Barack Obama said Wednesday.”

    “At the conclusion of a wide-ranging interview in China, Obama told Fox News, that additional ’settlement building’ will not make Israel safer. He said such moves made it harder to achieve peace in the region and embittered the Palestinians in a way that he said would be ‘very dangerous.”

    “Within hours, both Palestinian leader Mahamaud Abbas, and imprisioned terror chief Maruan Barghouti called for a new *uprising* against Israel. Clearly emboldened by Obama’s comments and numerous condemnations from major world leaders, they set about *inciting* a new wave of terrorist violence against Israeli civilians.”

    “Eight years ago, the same embattled Jerusalem suburb of Gilo bore the brunt of Palestinian mortar, sniper and bomb attacks against the capital. To day it continues to be home of tens of thousands of lower and middle income civilians.”

    What Obama and other world leaders don’t understrand, is that Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, IS the very *apex* of consummation of all End-Time cataclysmic crisis, that will hold the attention of all nations.

    Hear from Almighty God’s Word on the matter of Jerusalem:

    2 Chronicles 6 (ca 425-400 BC)

    “From the day that I brought My people out of the land of Egypt, I chose NO other city among the tribes of Israel, for a house to be built in My Name: neither chose I any other man, to be the ruler of My people Israel. But, I chose JERUSALEM, that MY name might be there: I chose David to set him over My people Israel.” (2 Chron. 5,6) emphasis added.

    2 Chronicles 33.

    “…the LORD had said, ‘My name shall be in Jerusalem FOREVER.”

    Question: ARE the nations being stired up about Jerusalem…???

    What does the Lord have to say in Joel 3?

    “The Lord says, “Stir up the nations into action! Let them march into the valley where I will JUDGE them. I will take My seat in court. I will judge ALL of the surronding nations.”

    ……….

    He the Lord Blesses His people.

    “The Lord says, ‘You will KNOW that I am the Lord your God. I live in Zion. It IS My holy mountain. Jerusalem will be My holy city.”

    …..”My people will live in Judah and Jerusalem FOREVER. The land will be their home for ALL time to come.”
    (2 Chron 33; 12, 17, 20) emphasis added.

    What do we not understand about the word *FOREVER*?? It cannot mean one thing for Israel, and another for us! Their FOREVER, is our forever!

    Yes, the global economic crisis, which is just unfolding before all of us, plus the Israeli/Palestinian crisis, are the twin points of End-Time prophetic convergence!

    Let him who has eyes to SEE, see; and those who have ears to HEAR, hear!

  • kiki // November 21, 2009 at 9:21 PM

    Okay Bushman,

    Dedicated to the ‘Complainer’

    Man Next Door
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/man-next-door-2/

    King Tubby – A Noisy Place

  • Christopher Halsall // November 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    Sigh…

  • kiki // November 22, 2009 at 5:17 AM

    Cu Oonuh
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/cu-oonuh/

    Reggie Stepper – Drum Pan Sound

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 22, 2009 at 6:46 AM

    @Chris Halsall,

    On direction of trade, you can also look at the central bank’s economic and financial statistics, which has data through October, http://www.centralbank.org.bb/WEBCBB.nsf/vwPublications/7BFAE5A59A21D1C304257671006B209A/$FILE/EFS_OCT_2009.pdf

  • kiki // November 22, 2009 at 12:31 PM

    Warning / Wolf in Sheep Clothing
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/wolf-in-sheep-clothing/

  • Bajeabroad // November 22, 2009 at 7:05 PM

    PROBLEMS WITH THE ECONOMY ARE STRUCTURAL NOT TEMPORARY!!!!

    (1) Need to cap expenditure for education and UWI. The quality of the return does not justify increased investment. Graduates are leaving with “service” oriented degrees that are not what is needed to propel the economy. Need more technical and entrepreneurship type degrees. The quality of the government’s spending is poor….take BWA losing 60% of the water pumped

    (2) Tourism and International Business have been CHANGED PERMANENTLY. Look at the greater recent shift cruising as opposed to land based tourism from the N America markets. Also land based tourist are taking fewer days

    (3) We NEED to attract export focused Foreign Direct Investment FDI (BIDC and Invest Barbados HAVE to produce results) in the short to medium term because we dont YET have the capacity to grow exports organically, because of point (1) and also lazy business persons who do little else except buy and sell

    (4) Government should raise revenue by imposing a credit card tax, either on outstanding balance amount AND also per transaction. 90% of overseas related transactions are nothing but a drain on Foreign Exchange

    (5) Offer incentives for the establishment of buying clubs, to allow more competition to flourish in the (import-buy-sell) sector for the benefit of lower prices through direct purchases and forcing existing establishments to drop prices. This offsets additional taxes that maybe imposed by the government

    Many more points…too little time

  • Zoe // November 22, 2009 at 10:44 PM

    I posted some of the following quotes from former U.S. Presidents et al on earlier threads; I’ll post some of them again, as their acute observations, then, gives pertinent info on the current *mess* of the United States economy.

    “U.S. Presidents on private vs government control of America’s money.”

    “If the American people ever allow banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” – Thomas Jefferson

    “History records that the money changers have used every form of *abuse* *intrigue* *deceit* and violent means possible to maintain control over government by controlling money and its issuance.” – James Madison

    “The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.” – Abraham Lincoln

    “Despite these warings, in 1913 President Wilson approved the *Federal Reserve Act* concentrating control of America’s money in the *few* men who dominate these *privately* owned banks. A few years later he (Wilson) reflected.”

    “I am a most unhappy man. I have *unwittingly* RUINED my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a *few* men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world- no longer a government by the free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, buy a government by the opinion and duress of a *small* group of *dominant* men.” -Woodrow Wilson

    “THE FEDERAL RESERVE: FRAUD OF THE CENTURY”

    “It all started back in 1913 in what some who have studied the development carefully describe as a *coup d’etat* that took place in America with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act.”

    “The act was an attempt to take advantage of popular opinion in the United States for banking *reforms*. You know how Americans love *reforms.* In effect, however, it was NOT ‘reform.’ at all. It was a power grab-a coup in which a small group of bankers got a blank check to set monetary policy, and, thus, all policy, for the ENTIRE nation. NO WATCHDOGS. NO GUARDRAILS. NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Nada. ZIP. ZILCH.”

    ‘Perhaps Rep. Charles A. Lindburg Sr, said it best at the time: ‘It is common practice of congressmen to make the title of *acts* promise a right, but in the body or text of the *acts* to ROB the people of what is promied in the title.”

    “The very name *Federal Reserve Bank” was designed to ‘deceive.’ It is NOT federal. It is NOT a government agency, It is PRIVATELY owned. In short, it is nothing more than a *group* of private banks charging *interest* on money that NEVER actually existed.”

    I know this sounds like another ‘conspiracy’ theory, this, you’ll say, is just too much for me to absorb!

    NO, this is no conspiracy stuff, it is all there, carefully researched, and extemely well documented, step by step, for any open-minded person to investigate.

    Long before the Federal Reserve Act, which was cleaverly pushed through Congress, in 1913, a good number of bright and perceptive officials saw what was coming down the tube, little did they know what ruination was up ahead for America; all masterfully crafted by a small group of 7 extremely powerful men, who represented an estimated *one-fourth* of total wealth of the entire world, at that time.

    Yes, now it is all coming together, culminating in the ‘New World Order’ One World Government’ soon to be brought about, BUT, first they must of necessity, *CREATE* a monetary CRISIS, out of which will come the Anti-Christ world government, that is prophetically spoken about in God’s Word.

    Voices from the past.

    “I sincerely believe…that banking establishments are MORE DANGEROUS than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding IS but swindling futurity on a large scale.” Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. emphasis added.

    “We are in danger of being overwhelmed with irredeemable paper, mere paper, representing not gold nor silver; NO SIR, representing NOTHING but broken promises, bad faith, brankrupt corporations, cheated creditors, and a RUINED people.” -Daniel Webster, speech in the U.S. Senate in 1833. emphasis added.

    “Whoever controls the volume of money in any country IS absolute master of all industry and commerce.” -James A. Garfield.

    “When plunder becomes a way of life for a *group* of men living together in society, they CREATE for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies ot.” -Federic Bastiat, ‘The La.”

    “Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalistic system was to *debauch* the currency…Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The proces engages all the *HIDDEN* forces of economic law on the side of *destruction*, and does it in a manner which not one man is a million can diagnose.” -John Maynard Keynes, ‘The Economic Consequences of the Peace.” emphasis added.

    “Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have, to RUIN commerce, OPPRESS the honest, and open the door to every species of FRAUD, and INJUSTICE.” – George Washington, in letter to J. Bowen, Rhode Island, Jan 9, 1787. emphasis added.

    “You are a den of VIPERS and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out.” – Andrew Jackson, to a delegation of bankers discussing the Bank Renewal Bill, 1832, emphasis added.

    The facts and evidence are all there, how this all came about; and today vast numbers of people, even elected officials are still hood-winked, concerning the reality of the biggest FRAUD ever brought on the United States of America, and its citizens by a *few* devious, wicked, selfish men, the banking cartel!

  • Inkwell // November 23, 2009 at 10:03 AM

    The New York Times weighed in yesterday on the subject of US government debt, but doesn’t seem too bothered.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/23rates.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&emc=th&adxnnlx=1258981241-eV9Dkz9cSurujKW+PRsgiQ

    But don’t worry, just as the US government deemed that some of its institutions were too big to be allowed to fail, so the major world governments, read China and Japan will not allow the US to fail.

  • Alex Fergusson // November 23, 2009 at 11:08 AM

    David Thompson and the DLP constitute a Reversed Global Financial Crisis.
    ++++++++++++++++++++

    The Democratic Labour Party is using a lot of energy trying desperately to convince Barbadians that the global financial crisis and not its (the DLP’s) incompetence – is responsible for the unnecessary hardship Barbadians are being forced to endure.

    But what are the facts? Few would disagree that the global financial crisis is essentially a commodity crisis. That means that prices on the world market went down.

    Because of a collapse of the banking sector, the mortgage market and other similar institutions in the US – a number of businesses closed; less than 11% of America’s 304 million people lost their jobs and commodity prices fell because of lack of confidence and also – due to reduced demand, as people lacked the capacity to spend or purchase.

    There was a time before that where due to demand, there was a fine line where food policy was mixed with energy policy, and where agriculture products like corn and soya bean – were being used an alternative of energy besides being food sources. That pushed prices up.

    The global financial crisis changed all that since the price of oil fell from US$145 per barrel to some US$40.00 per barrel.

    Reduced demand for natural gas also meant that the cost of fertilizers went down. Other inputs to agriculture like seeds also became cheaper. The price of steel fell, which means a key input to construction, became cheaper.

    The simple point I am trying to make is that the global financial crisis did the DLP and Barbados a favour.

    With the price of oil and food and other commodities on the world market down, this would mean a foreign exchange savings for Barbados. Why?

    Given the DLP dangerous mismanagement of the Barbados economy, that $2.4 billion in foreign reserves left by the BLP would hardly be enough, for a DLP Government that does not know what it is doing.

    That prices remain high in Barbados – speak to the flawed polices of the DLP – Thompson’s energy policy and high taxation.

    Life in Barbados is ONLY hard because of the incompetence of the DLP; it poor judgment, bad decisions and flawed polices and not as a result of any global financial crisis.

    The global financial crisis has resulted in reduced demand and cheaper prices on the world Market – yet the cost of living keeps going up in Barbados, why?

    The answer is simple: the DLP and Thompson’s 2008 high-tax; inflationary budget – the effects of which are now being felt.

    The global financial crisis made things cheaper, but Thompson and the DLP makes them more expensive.

    Essentially therefore, the DLP and David Thompson is a Reversed Global Financial Crisis.

    There are the absence of sensible; competent Government and are therefore very bad for Barbados.

  • Zoe // November 23, 2009 at 11:08 AM

    ‘The Fed Caused The Great Depression. New Chairman admits Federal Reserve is responsible for America’s worst economic disaster’

    “While I was growing up, I often listened to financial pundits on TV shows like “Wall street Week” where *experts* would predict the future of the economy and the markets. Not only did I NOT understand what they were talking about, I always came away wondering if ‘they’ knew what they were talking about.”

    “Was mu comprehension just a result of my lack of knowledge and financial sophistication, or was my hunch right – were these people all blind men describing one part of the elephant or another, but raely if ever seeing the big picture and and truly enlightening their aduiences? I think they just didn’t really know – nothing more than artful, confident guessers.”

    “Years later, I watched the TV series, ‘Free to Choose,’ created by Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman. What a contrast. Here was a man who was at the same time brilliant, full of commonsense, and clear as a bell when he talked about the financial world and the *forces* that shape it. He made sense.”

    “because of this early admiration I had for Friedman, one of the 20th century’s most respected economists, I was interested to leaern that he claimed – contrary to many established economists – that ir was NONE other than the Federal Reserve that *caused* the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake.”

    “Since most people reading these words did not live through the Depression, let’s check out how the Encyclopedia Britannica describes it:”

    “Worldwide economic downturn that began in 1929 and lasted until about 1939. It was the longest and most severe depression ever experienced by the industrialized Western world. Although the Depression originated in the United States, it resulted in drastic declines in output, severe unemployment, and acute deflation in alomst every country of the globe. But its social and cultural effects were no less staggering, especially in the United states, where the Great Depression ranks second only to the Civil War as the gravest crisis in American history.”

    “And what, exactly, caused this economic tsunami that devastated the U.S. and much of the world?”

    “In ‘A Monetary History of the United States,’ which he coauthored with Anna J. Schwartz, Friedman lays the mega-catastrophe of the Great Depression squarely at the feet of the Federal Reserve.”

    Friedman said in part, “And what happened is that [the Federal Reserve] followed policies which led to a decline in the quantity of money by a third. For every $100 in paper money in deposits, in cash, in currency, in existence in 1929, by the time you got to 1933 there was only about $65, $66 left. And that extraordinary collapse in the banking system, with about a third of the banks failing from beginning to end, with millions of people having their savings essentially washed out, that decline was utterly unnecessary.”

    “At all times, the Federal Reserve had the POWER and the knowledge to have STOPPED that. And there were people at the time who were ALL the time urging them to do that. So it was, in my opinion, clearly a mistake of policy that led to the Great Depression.”

    Friedman, as a brilliant economist, and from the perspective of commomsense principles, simply gave his opinion, as ‘…clearly a mistake of policy that led to the Great Depression.”

    Was Friedman constrained to truly express his opinion more openly, that IS that knowing now, that the Federal Reserve IS really controlled by *Private* bankers, and therefore, subtly, craftly, ‘Created’ the Great Depression, not just ’caused’ it as Friedman opined, for their own devious, wicked ends, as they are presently doing as well!

    “Now, maybe you think this is just one man’s opinion, and that maybe the Fed didn’t really cause (create!) the Depression – or that expert opinions differ – or that we’ll probably never really know what caused it. If so, it may interest you to know that none other than the new chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben S. Bernanke, ‘agrees’ with Friedman’s assessment that the Fed caused the Great Depression.”

    “In short, according to Friedman and Schwartz, because of institutional changes and misguided doctrines, the banking panics of the Great Contractions were much more severe and widespread than would have normally occurred during a downturn…”

    “At a November 8, 2002, conference to honor Friedman’s 90th birthday, Bernanke, then a Federal Reserve governor, gave a speech at Friedman’s old home base., the University of Chicago. Here’s a bit of what Bernanke, the man who now runs the Fed – and thus, one of the most powerful people in the world – had to say that day.”

    “I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton Friedman’s ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer…”

    Bernanke, concludes his speech, thus:

    “Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You’re RIGHT, we DID IT. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’ do IT again.”

    “Best wishes for your next ninty years.”

    Really, Bernanke! You won’t do it again!

    “Today, the entire Western financial world holds its breath every time the Fed chairman speaks, so influential are the central bank’s decisions on markets, interest rates, and the economy in general. Yet, the Fed, supposedly created to smooth out business cycles and prevent disruptive economic downswings like the Great Depression, has actually done the OPPOSITE.”

    “Indeed, the Fed’s sins go way beyond the Depression. ‘Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and woreking-class Americans have been VICTIMIZED by a boom-and-bust monetary policy,’ charges U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, the congressman best known for his steadfast commitment to the U.S. Constitution.”

    “From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the burst of the dotcom bubble” in 2001, said Paul, ‘every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy.”

    “In addition,” said the Texas Republican, ‘most Americans have suffered a stradily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies. This represents a real, if HIDDEN, tax imposed on the American people.”

    “Although today, the governors of the Federal Reserve are literaly *gods* of the natiions’s money supply and the financial policy, in previous eras of America’s history, leaders WARNED specifically against an unaccountable, unelected central bank.”

    -David Kupelian is managing editor of WorldNetDaily.com and Wistleblower magazine, and is author of the best-Selling book, ‘The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Oseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom.”

    The cartel adopts a name

    “everyone knew that the solution to all these problems was a cartel *mechanism* that had been devised and aklready put into similar operation inEurope. As with ALL cartels, it had to be created by legislation and sustained by the power of government under the *deception* of protecting the consumer. The most important task before them, therefore, can be stated as objective number five.

    “5.How to convince Congress that the scheme was a measure to protect the public.”

    This was cleaverly done through the passage of Congress in 1913, when the Federal Reserve Act was passed into law. This is what President Woodrow Wilson agonized over, when he said:

    “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly RUINED my country.”

    And, today, we are witnessing the gradual collapse of the global economy, all orchestrated from within America, with the strings pushed and pulled by none other than this *monster* the Federal Reserve, working in cohort with the other players of the New World Order agenda, who DON’T give a hoot about anyone, but their evil plots and plans.

    But, their day of judgment is coming. If only people would wake-up, including academics, and see and understand what has being going on, and IS now playing out in this current economic crisis!

  • Alex Fergusson // November 23, 2009 at 11:11 AM

    Here is the real point:

    ++++++++++++

    The global financial crisis made things cheaper, but Thompson and the DLP makes them more expensive.

    Essentially therefore, the DLP and David Thompson is a Reversed Global Financial Crisis.

    There are the absence of sensible; competent Government and are therefore very bad for Barbados.
    ++++++++++++++++++

    David Thompson and the DLP constitute a Reversed Global Financial Crisis – they are pushing prices up.

  • Alex Fergusson // November 23, 2009 at 11:18 AM

    @ Zoe

    Your thesis assumes that the brightest people in the world live in America and in G20 countries. Isn’t Professor Persual not a bajan?

    Here is the state of the US economy:

    +++++++++++++++++

    With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher.

    In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The potential for rapidly escalating interest payouts is just one of the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/23rates.html?hp

    +++++++++++++++
    Click link, read the full story and lets talk.

  • Carson C. Cadogan // November 23, 2009 at 3:00 PM

    OFF TOPIC

    why can’t I pick the technology I use in the office?

    At the office, you’ve got a sluggish computer running aging software, and the email system routinely badgers you to delete messages after you blow through the storage limits set by your IT department. Searching your company’s internal Web site feels like being teleported back to the pre-Google era of irrelevant search results.

    At home, though, you zip into the 21st century. You’ve got a slick, late-model computer and an email account with seemingly inexhaustible storage space. And while Web search engines don’t always figure out exactly what you’re looking for, they’re practically clairvoyant compared with your company intranet.

    This is the double life many people lead: yesterday’s technology for work, today’s technology for everything else. The past decade has brought awesome innovations to the marketplace—Internet search, the iPhone, Twitter and so on—but consumers, not companies, embrace them first and with the most gusto.

    View Interactive
    Shane Harrison

    How Well Do You Know…Green IT? Technology has transformed the office, but can it now help improve the environment? Try our quiz to see how well you know green IT.

    Even more galling, especially to tech-savvy workers, is the nanny-state attitude of employers who block access to Web sites, lock down PCs so users can’t install software and force employees to use clunky programs. Sure, IT departments had legitimate concerns in the past. Employees would blindly open emails from persons unknown or visit shady Web sites, bringing in malicious software that could crash the network. Then there were cost issues: It was a lot cheaper to get one-size-fits-all packages of middling hardware and software than to let people choose what they wanted.

  • Simple Enough // November 23, 2009 at 9:08 PM

    @Alex Furgusson, No, my understanding of the economic crisis vis-a-vis the historic facts, some of which I quoted from American Presidents et al, is not to assume “…that the brightest people in the world live in America and in G20 countries.”

    The fact of the matter is, that whether we like it or not, America is/was the very hub of the world economy, with the G20 countries, whether we like it or not, holding collectively vast power and either direct or indirect influence on every other nation.

    What little I have tried to share re the sinister, wicked, Federal Reserve, which many perceive to be ‘owned’ and controlled by the U.S. Government, IS not in fact the truth; and many well-meaning, bright economists, in the States and else where, are NOT aware of what has been going on behind the scenes for a very long time.

    Alex, if you really want to get an eye-opener, on this historic, evil reality, I suggest you get a copy of ‘The Money Masters’ How Banks Create the World’s Money’ a two-part DVD, presentation, amazingly well researched, carefully documenting the facts and evidence, which started long before America gained its independence. You can order this DVD set online at, ‘themoneymasters. com.

  • Zoe // November 23, 2009 at 9:10 PM

    Sorry Alex, Simple Enough is yours truly, Zoe!

  • Zoe // November 23, 2009 at 9:42 PM

    @Alex F, I’ll quote Terence Blackett’s most apt remarks Nov 21, 2009, @ 2:01 pm, with which I whole-heartedly concur:

    “If you believe the academic and monetary claptrap – then both the Poseidon and the Titanic are sailing just fine…The writing is on the wall – the wheels are almost off the wagon…No amount of lucid economic theory can save this or bolster it in any way…Change has come!!!”

    Terence, DEAD RIGHT!!! Right On!!!

  • dreamstarworld // November 23, 2009 at 10:34 PM

    When our so-called academic intelligentsia purport their slant on economic and fiscal theory – they neglect the most crucial criteria –

    How does the ancient and historical dynastic connections influence contemporary global economic policy?

    No wonder social historians, social anthropologists, political sociologists and other social scientists can more accurately predict the dramatic “cycles” which has brought us to this place in time…

    Point of Issue:

    There are now only 5 nations in the world left without a Rothschild
    controlled central bank:-

    Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Cuba, and Libya…

    Is there something ominous here?

    Oh Crumbs,these were the same ones who were on Bush’s “Axis Of Evil” List!!!

    Most people are clueless as to WHO
    controls the world….

    The Rothschilds Dynasty have been in control of the world for a very long time based on ancient covenants made with forces from the “bottomless pit”…

    From 1743 until today, this Dynasty has ruled the financial world through lies, deceit, subterfuge, sophistry and malevolence.

    The timeline of the Rothschilds has a clear historical demarcation and is there for all to see…

    The evidence is clear and I am willing to share it if BU* is interested…

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 24, 2009 at 9:05 AM

    @ dreamstarworld // November 23, 2009 at 10:34 PM “The evidence is clear and I am willing to share it if BU* is interested…” [Please do.]

  • Simple Enough // November 24, 2009 at 11:01 AM

    @dreamstarworld, Your above comments re The Rothschilds Dynasty, is accurate and right on!

    The Rothschild Dynasty still control the Bank of England.

    Paul M. Warburg, a representative of the Rothschild Banking Dynasty in EnglandWAS one of the seven powerful bankers who got together by stealth back in 1910, on Jekyll Island lodge, just off the southern coast of Georgia; to deliberate on the startegy of creating the *Federal Reserve Act* which was passed into law by Congress in 1913.

    “In 1930, Paul Warburg wrote a massive book – 1750 pages in all -titled “The Federal Reserve System, Its Origin and Growth,” In this tome, he described the meeting and its purpose but did not mention either its location or the names of those who attented. But did say: ‘The results of the conference were entirely confidential. Even the fact there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public.’ Then, in a footnote he added: ‘Though eighteen years have since gone by, I do feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy.”

    The seven powerful men who comprised ‘America’s All-Powerful Banking Cartel’ back in 1910, that secretly when off to the Jekyll Island lodge, re the Federal Reserve Act, were:

    1. Nelson W. Aldrich, Republican “whip” in the Senate, chairman of the National Monetary Commission, business associate of J.P. Morgan, father-in-law to John D. Rockefeller, Jn.

    2. Abraham Piatt Andrew, assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury.

    3. Frank A. Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York, the most powerful of banks at that time, representing William Rockefeller and the international investment banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company.

    4. Henry P. Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan Company.

    5. Charles D. Norton, president of J.P. Morgan’s First National Bank of New York.

    6. Benjamin Strong, head of J.P. Morgan’s Bankers Trust Company; and

    7. Paul M. Warburg, a partner in Kuhn, Leob & Company, a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty in England and France, and brother to Max Warburg who was head of the Warburg banking consortium in Germany and the Netherlands.

    (America’s All -Powerful Banking Cartel; The astonishing but true story of the Federal Reserve System, by G. Edward Griffin, Whistleblower, July 2006).

  • Anonymous // November 24, 2009 at 6:09 PM

    Economists who have never taken a serious course in economics are making all sorts of comments about ratings. In spite of the shortcomings of the rating agencies,we have a realty that we must face.- we cannot run deficits forever.

    The deficit is very important because of the fact that it negatively impacts the balance of payments.

    The fiscal deficit = exports minus imports.

    For years we been importing more than we have exported. The day of reckoning is quickly catching up on us.

    Over a long period, fiscal deficits can lead to devaluation and /or job cuts.

    For a long time were were able to borrow or attract foreign investors to pay for the imports of goods and services.

    It has become increasingly more difficult to get foreign exchange.

    We simply must adjust or within ten years we are going to have a failed economy and society.

  • Bajeabroad // November 24, 2009 at 10:12 PM

    @ Dreamstar
    You talking the truth you know, but the levels you on really above the average person here…..keep enlightening though, people need to really understand the murky workings of the “free” world….power and greed are always present in humanity….you think if we as humans can come up with slavery and the holocaust, some modern day dark soul or souls can come up with something just as sinister!…they did..what you think this recession is!!…just follow the money trail and see who really profits from this man-made recession!!

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 12:39 AM

    Jeremy Rifkin, president of the Foundation on Economic Trends and the author of seventeen bestselling books on the impact of scientific and technological changes on the economy, the workforce, society, and the environment spoke at the Central Bank yesterday evening and Minister Estwick and Sen Boyce were present.

    He focussed on distributed energy model as opposed to centralised supply (you know the old client server, peer to peer replacing of centralised computing comparison) where each house hold produced its own energy and sent the excess back to the grid, about storing surplus in hydrogen form and so on…

    Chris where the f#ck were you? ROK wah happen man..? Peter Williams was there too and nah body (I had a sore t’roat) asked about discouraging the BL&P dinosaur by refusing them a rate increase…!

    De man was so impressive and confident that he look de Minister in de eye and say dat all that is needed to have Barbados be de flag ship in de Caribbean in implementing this distributive approach practically free of charge is…. wait for it… an email..!

    Dat was a serious mistake! Yah don’ mek dah kind ah comment in front a Minister in public in de West Indies and expect dat yah gun see results…! Well well…!

    BTW will somebody close to Sen Darcy ask, sorry beg he tah tek a course in public speakin’.. ? My God

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 12:46 AM

    Zoe

    Anybody who refers to Israelis creating “SETTLEMENTS” is inferring that the original inhabitants are “savages”. You and Obama and others need to understand this..! Let another organisation deal with the plight in that part of the world. As long as the US remains as the apparent arbitrator, there can be no fair play.

    (I actually respond to Zoe.. Bushman ah need somet’ing tah drink man…!)

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 12:52 AM

    Living in Barbados

    I propose that all senior civil servants and consultants, all those unproductive fat cats that are now receiving over BDS 100,000.00 a year take a cut in salary to bring to 100,000.00 a year salary. In fact I propose that ALL consultants be put on notice and that ALL foreign travel by public servants (expect for the most vital of needs) be put on hold.

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 12:57 AM

    Living in Barbados

    I could think ah six Ministers who only markin’ time. I would axe them, in fact de whole Ministry ah Culture need tah be retrenched…! And why should we be opening overseas offices and staffing them with old men and women..? Let the entrepreneurial argument extend to the likes of Earkine Sandiford and ex Governess of the CB.

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 12:58 AM

    Kiki you and Hasall ain’ de same person using ah different handle..?

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 1:01 AM

    Justin Robinson

    I got a road map for the Development of vulnerable small open economies like Barbados that does not include academics… you want to hear piece..?

  • BAFBFP Phd // November 25, 2009 at 2:15 AM

    Alex Fergusson

    The unemployment rate drop to below 12% from around 18% weeks after the Prime Minister rehashed Tom Adams definition of a category termed “Voluntary Unemployed”. Wha you t’ink..? How is this number determined today..?

  • dreamstarworld // November 25, 2009 at 4:10 AM

    The BEGINNINGS* of the Rothschilds? Dynasty in the 1700’s and their mark upon everything that included MONEY* – including SLAVERY*!!!

    1743: Mayer Amschel Bauer, born Frankfurt, Germany, the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, a JEWISH* money lender (scary) and the proprietor of a counting house. Over the entrance door he places a red sign.

    This sign was a six pointed star (which geometrically and numerically
    translates into the number 666) which under Rothschild instruction would
    end up on the Israeli flag some two centuries later.

    For a fascinating read – check out my friend and colleague Prof. Niall Fergusson’s book:

    http://ebookstore.sony.com/ebook/niall-ferguson/the-house-of-rothschild/_/R-400000000000000182885

    To continue:

    1753: Gutele Schnaper (future wife of Mayer Amschel Bauer) was born.

    1760: During this decade Mayer Amschel Bauer works for a bank owned by the Oppenheimers’ in Hanover, Germany – where he is highly successful and becomes a
    junior partner. Whilst working at the bank he becomes acquainted with
    General von Estorff.

    Following his father’s death, Bauer returns to Frankfurt to take over his
    father’s business. Bauer recognizes the significance of the red sign and
    changes his name from Bauer to Rothschild, after the red sign signifying
    666 hanging over the entrance door (“Rot,” is German for, “Red,” “Schild,” is German for, “Sign”).

    Now Mayer Amschel Rothschild, he discovers that General von Estorff is now attached to the court of Prince William of Hanau. He therefore makes the General’s re-acquaintance on the pretext of selling him valuable coins and trinkets at discounted prices.

    As he plans, Rothschild is subsequently introduced to Prince William himself who is more than pleased with discounted prices he charges for his rare coins and trinkets, and Rothschild offers him a bonus for any other business the Prince can direct his way.

    Rothschild subsequently becomes close
    associates with Prince William, and ends up doing business with him and
    members of the court.

    1769: Mayer Amschel Rothschild is given permission by Prince William to hang a sign on the front of his business premises declaring that he is, “M. A.
    Rothschild, by appointment court factor to his Serene Highness, Prince
    William of Hanau .”

    1770: Mayer Amschel Rothschild marries Gutele Schnaper.

    Mayer Amschel Rothschild draws up plans for the creation of the ILLUMINATI* and entrusts Adam Weishaupt with its organization and development.

    1773: Amschel Mayer Rothschild born.

    1774: Salomon Mayer Rothschild born.

    1777: Nathan Mayer Rothschild born.

    1788: Kalmann (Carl) Mayer Rothschild born.

    1791: The Rothschild’s through Alexander Hamilton (their agent in George Washington’s cabinet) set up a central bank in the USA called the Bank of the United States. This is established with a 20 year charter.

    1792: Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild born.

    1796: Amschel Mayer Rothschild marries Eva Hanau.

    1798: Nathan Mayer Rothschild leaves Frankfurt for Manchester, England,
    where will the help of his father and brothers he exports English textiles
    to Europe.

    And so there you have the first 55 years of the creation of the ROTHSCHILD FAMILY DYNASTY…

  • art // November 25, 2009 at 8:17 AM

    Fairly opinionated *stuff*

    You’ll orobably to make a case for the *demise* of the Barbados economy and the Jews next.

    The downgrading and debt burden of Barbados is due to morons like you, who sit around and bring no value to the Barbados economy, while the rest of us make foreign exchasnge and deposit it in the local banking and credit union system. Who by the way are not *Jews*- they are honest hardworking citizens trying to get ahead in life, like me.

    You’ll find me at work, moron

  • Alex Fergusson // November 25, 2009 at 12:31 PM

    Guyana’ economic and political success shames Thompson and the DLP

    ++++++++++++++

    Even as Barbados slides deeper into recession and as our country faces the ugly scenario of being in worst than crisis – Trinidad is in recession but its unemployment stands at a mere 5.1 per cent while its rate of inflation – as of last month, at 2.7 per cent.

    Yet, as David Thompson and the DLP continue to bellyache and blame the global financial crisis for their share incompetence – they are shamed by the fact that the Guyana economy grew by 3.8% last year and will grow by 2.5% this year.

    What was Mr. Thompson’s recent Media Conference all about?

    The people who could not pay their bills before he spoke are no closure to doing so now!

    We heard that crime is down but a dragnet a few days after nabbed 16 persons for illegal activity.

    Unemployment continue to rise.

    The government said it does not have a cash-flow problem but cannot pay Income Tax returns or the Reversed Tax Credit – yet wrote off $19 million for brandname people and gave over $20 million to a company that was said to have been sound and well managed.

    We now hear the AG promise to amend the Anti-Corruption laws of Barbados.

    Then how soon can Barbadians expect by-elections in St. Philip North, Christ Church East, St. Michael East and St. Michael North West?

    AND THE DLP’ GIMMICKS CONTINUE WHILE THE PEOPLE SUFFER!!!!

  • art // November 25, 2009 at 5:54 PM

    To Alex

    2 years into the new government your BLP have not justified retaining the skeleton thieves, and it is doubtful that people will subscribe to your party until you convince the general public that you have purged yourself of the personnel that treasury raped, innocent attitude you undertook over the last years of your now disenfranchised regime.

    To all (a)political reading

    The new regime wants to do the same, and is moving in the same direction, and that is why we are so messed up. When they should have moved within 100 days to ensure it would/could never happen again, they have procrastinated (at best) and are now claiming they’ll do it early next year.

    What a mess. When we were earning big and we could have paid down the foreign loans we did the opposite and spent like water. Now we have the consumption of an elephant and the metabolism of a dog.

    What a waste of our Bajan potential. To both parties the answer to how we are doing (for all two of you) is, ‘way below what we should be doing’.

    None of you think about anything except yourselves.

  • BAFBFP MSc // November 25, 2009 at 6:45 PM

    The Governor of the CB just say that Barbados lends the US money. I mean de WHOLE WORLD and then some, know that US Treasury notes ain’ worth the paper dat dey print pun, an’ yet we helping tah fuel de problem. Dese academics need reeling in man…!

  • Glockenspiel // November 25, 2009 at 9:44 PM

    Anonymous said that ,in spite of the shortcomings of the rating agencies,we have a realty that we must face.- we cannot run deficits forever.

    Too true, neither can anywhere else and the only place with a surplus now is China. So, what does it bode?

    Next two years all heck is going to break loose.

  • dreamstarworld // November 25, 2009 at 11:32 PM

    THE ROTHSCHILDS IN THE 1800’s -

    1800: Salomon Mayer Rothschild marries Caroline Stern.

    1806: Napoleon states that it is his, “object to remove the house of
    Hess-Cassel from ruler ship and to strike it out of the list of powers.”
    On hearing this, Prince William of Hanau, flees Germany, goes to Denmark and entrusts his fortune valued at $3,000,000 at that time to Mayer Amschel Rothschild for safekeeping. Nathan Mayer Rothschild marries Hannah Barent Cohen the daughter of a wealthy London merchant and begins to move his business to London.

    1808: Nathan Mayer Rothschild has his first son born Lionel Nathan de
    Rothschild.

    1809: As the Channel blockade was making the export business difficult, Nathan Mayer Rothschild went to New Street, London and set himself up as a banker.

    1810: Sir Francis Baring and Abraham Goldsmid die. This leaves Nathan
    Mayer Rothschild as the remaining major banker in England. Salomon Mayer Rothschild goes to Vienna, Austria and sets up the bank, M.von Rothschild und Söhne.

    1811: The charter for the Rothschilds Bank of the United States runs out and Congress votes against its renewal. At the time Andrew Jackson (who would become the 7th President of the United States from 1829 to 1837) says, “If Congress has a right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use by themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations.”

    Nathan Mayer Rothschild is not amused and he stated, “Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war.”

    Andrew Jackson’s response to this is to say, “You are a den of thieves and vipers, and I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout
    you out.” Nathan Mayer Rothschild’s reply to that being, “Teach those impudent Americans a lesson. Bring them back to colonial status.”

    1812: Backed by Rothschild money, the British declare war on the United States. The Rothschilds plan was to cause the United States to build up such a debt in fighting this war that they would have to surrender to the Rothschilds and allow the charter for the Rothschild owned Bank of the United States to be renewed.

    Mayer Amschel Rothschild dies. In his will he lays out specific laws that the House of Rothschild were to follow: all key positions in the family business were only to be held by family members; only male members of the family were allowed to participate in the family business – (It is important to note that Mayer Amschel Rothschild also has five daughters, so today the spread of the Rothschild Zionist dynasty without the Rothschild name is far and wide); the family was to intermarry with it’s first and second cousins to preserve the family fortune; no public inventory of his estate was to be published; no legal action was to be taken with regard to the value of the inheritance; the eldest son of the eldest son was to become the head of the family (this condition could only be overturned when the majority of the family agreed otherwise). This was straightaway the case and Nathan Mayer Rothschild was elected head of the family following his father, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s death. Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild goes to Paris, France to set up the bank, de Rothschild Frères.

    Nathaniel de Rothschild, the son in law of Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild, born 1814: With regard to the $3,000,000 Prince William of Hanau had entrusted to Mayer Amschel Rothschild for safekeeping, for an account of what happened next we turn to the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1905 edition, Volume 10, page 494, which states,

    “According to legend this money was hidden away in wine casks, and, escaping the search of Napoleon’s soldiers when they entered Frankfurt, was restored intact in the same casks in 1814, when the elector (Prince William of Hanau) returned to the electorate (Germany). The facts are somewhat less romantic, and more businesslike.”

    This last line indicates the money was never returned by Rothschild to
    Prince William of Hanau. The encyclopedia goes on to state; Nathan Mayer Rothschild invested this $3,000,000 in, “gold from the East India Company knowing that it would be needed for Wellington’s peninsula campaign.” On the stolen money Nathan made, “no less than four profits: i) On the sale of Wellington’s paper which he bought at 50 cents on the dollar and collected at par; ii) on the sale of gold to Wellington; iii) on its repurchase; and iv) on forwarding it to Portugal.”

    1815: The five Rothschild brothers work to supply gold to both
    Wellington’s army (through Nathan in England) and Napoleon’s army
    (through Jacob in France), and begin their policy of funding both sides
    in wars. Due to the fact that these brothers had banks spread out across Europe this gave them the facility to set up an unrivaled network of secret routes and fast couriers. These Rothschild couriers were the only merchants allowed to pass through the English and French blockades. It was these couriers who also kept Nathan Mayer Rothschild up to date with how the war was going so he could use that intelligence to buy and sell from his position on the stock exchange in accordance with that intelligence. At that time British bonds were called consuls and they were traded on the floor of the stock exchange. Nathan Mayer Rothschild instructed all his workers on the floor to start selling consuls. They made all the other
    traders believe that the British had lost the war so they started selling frantically. Therefore the consuls plummeted in value which was when Nathan Mayer Rothschild discreetly instructed his workers to purchase all the consuls they could lay their hands on. When news came through that the British had actually won the war, the consuls went up to a level even higher than before the war ended leaving Nathan Mayer Rothschild with a return of approximately 20 to 1 on his investment.

    This gave the Rothschild family complete control of the British economy, now the financial centre of the world following Napoleon’s defeat, and forced England to set up a new Bank of England, which Nathan Mayer Rothschild controlled. Nathan Mayer Rothschild would later state, “I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.” The Rothschilds also use their control of the Bank of England to replace the method of shipping gold from country to country and instead used their five banks spread across Europe to set up a system of paper debits and credits, the banking system of today.

    1816: The charter for the Bank of the United States is renewed for another twenty years with the Rothschild’s in Control of the American money supply again. The British war against the America therefore ends with the deaths of thousands of British and American soldiers, but the Rothschild’s get their bank.

    1818: Following the French securing massive loans in 1817 in order to help rebuild after their disastrous defeat at Waterloo, Rothschild agents bought vast amounts of French government bonds causing their value to increase. On November 5th they dumped the lot on the open market causing their value to plummet and France to go into a financial panic. The Rothschild’s then stepped in to take control of the French money supply. This was the same year the Rothschild’s were able to loan £5,000,000 to the Prussian government.

    1822: The emperor of Austria made the five Rothschild brothers Barons. Nathan Mayer Rothschild chose not to take up the title.

    1827: Sir Walter Scott publishes his nine volume set, “The life of Napoleon” and in volume two he states that the French Revolution was planned by the Illuminati (Adam Weishaupt) and was financed by the money changers of Europe (The Rothschilds).

    1835: President Andrew Jackson (the 7th President of the United States from 1829 to 1837) starts depositing federal funds into banks directed by democratic bankers rather than in the Rothschild controlled Bank of the United States. An assassination attempt is made on President Jackson and he would later claim that he knew the Rothschild’s were responsible for that attempted assassination. The Rothschild’s acquire the rights in the Almadén quicksilver mines in
    Spain. This was at the time the biggest concession in the world and as
    quicksilver was a vital component in the refining of gold or silver this
    gave the Rothschild’s a virtual world monopoly.

    1837: Following his years of fighting against the Rothschilds and their
    central bank in America, President Andrew Jackson finally succeeds in
    throwing the Rothschilds central bank out of America. It would not be until
    1913 that the Rothschilds would be able to set up their third central bank in America, the Federal Reserve.

    1836: Nathan Mayer Rothschild dies.

    1838: Amschel Mayer Rothschild states, “Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.”

    1840: The Rothschilds become the Bank of England’s bullion brokers. They set up agencies in California and Australia.

    1841: President John Tyler (the 10th President of the United States From 1841 to 1845) vetoed the act to renew the charter for the Bank of the United States. He goes on to receive hundreds of letters threatening him with assassination.

    1844: Salomon Mayer Rothschild purchases the United Coal Mines of
    Vítkovice and Austro-Hungarian Blast Furnace Company that would go on to be one of the top ten global industrial concerns. Benjamin Disraeli (who would go on to become British Prime Minister twice) publishes Coningsby, in which he characterizes Nathan Mayer Rothschild as, “the Lord and Master of the money markets of the world and of course virtually Lord and Master of everything else. He literally held the revenues of Southern Italy in pawn, and Monarchs and Ministers of all countries courted his advice and were guided by his suggestions.”

    1845: Andrew Jackson (The 7th President of the United States) dies. This Great Patriot leaves instructions in his will to have, “I Killed The
    Bank,” inscribed on his headstone, a reference to the fact he banished
    the Rothschilds second Central bank in the United States from the US in 1837. Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild, now known as Baron James de Rothschild wins the contract to build the first major railway line across the country. This was called the Chemin De Fer Du Nord and ran initially from Paris to Valenciennes and then joined with the Austrian rail network built by his brother Salomon Mayer Rothschild.

    1847: Lionel De Rothschild now married to the daughter of his uncle, Kalmann (Carl) Mayer Rothschild, is elected to the parliamentary seat for the City of London. A requirement for entering parliament was to take an oath in the true faith of a Christian. Lionel De Rothschild refused to do this as he was Jewish and his seat in parliament remained empty for 11 years until new oaths were allowed.

    1848: Eva Hanau, Amschel Mayer Rothschild’s wife dies.

    1849: Gutele Schnaper, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s wife dies. Before her death she would state, “If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.”

    1850: Construction begins this decade on the manor houses of Mentmore in England and Ferrières in France, more Rothschilds Manors will follow throughout the world, all of them filled with works of art.

    1852: N.M. Rothschild & Sons began refining gold and silver for the Royal Mint and the Bank of England and other international customers.

    1853: Nathaniel de Rothschild, the son in law of Jacob (James) Mayer
    Rothschild, purchased Château Brane Mouton, the Bordeaux vineyard of Mouton, and renamed it Château Mouton Rothschild.

    1854: Caroline Stern, Salomon Mayer Rothschild’s wife, dies.

    1855: Amschel Mayer Rothschild dies. Salomon Mayer Rothschild dies.
    Kalmann (Carl) Mayer Rothschild dies.

    Here you’ll see that this was during the time when President Lincoln came into office and he found himself having to go to the Rothschilds for help in financing the civil war. Rothschild used this as an opportunity to get a charter for another Central Bank in the US. This is also around the time paper money was made in order to pay off debts.

    It is around this time that the Rockefellers came into play. John
    D. Rockefeller to be exact, who was an agent for the Rothschilds in the US. Can you understand why this family also possesses such a large indeterminate fortune as well in America.

    1858: Lionel De Rothschild finally takes his seat in parliament when the
    requirement to take an oath in the true faith of a Christian is broadened to include other oaths. He becomes the first Jewish member of the British parliament.

    1861: President Abraham Lincoln (16th President of the United States from 1860 till his assassination in 1865) approaches the Rothschilds to try to obtain loans to support the ongoing American civil war.

    The Rothschilds agree provided Lincoln allows them a Charter for another United States central bank and are prepared to pay 24% to 36% interest on all monies loaned. Lincoln was very angry about this high level of interest and so he printed his own debt free money and informed the public that this was now legal tender for both public and private debts.

    1862: By April $449,338,902 worth of Lincoln’s debt free money had been printed and distributed. He went on to state: “We gave the people of this republic the greatest blessing they ever had, their own paper money to pay their own debts.” That same year The Times of London publishes a story containing the following statement: “If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North
    American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the
    globe.”

    1863: The Rothschild banking house in Naples, Italy, C. M. de Rothschild efigli, closes following the unification of Italy. The Rothschilds use one of their agents in America, John D. Rockefeller to form an oil business called Standard Oil which eventually takes over all of its competition.

    1864: President Abraham Lincoln discovers the Tsar of Russia, Alexander II (1855 – 1881), was having problems with the Rothschilds as well as he was refusing their continual attempts to set up a central bank in Russia. President Lincoln asks the Tsar for help in the Civil War and the Tsarsent part of his fleet to anchor off New York and the other part off California. The Tsar made it clear to the British, French and Spanish that if they attacked either side, Russia would take the side of President Lincoln. Lincoln subsequently won the Civil War.

    1865: In a statement to Congress, President Abraham Lincoln states, “I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me, and the financial institution in the rear. Of the two, the one in my rear is my greatest foe.” Later that year President Lincoln is assassinated. Nathaniel de Rothschild becomes the member of parliament for Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire.

    1868: Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild dies, shortly after purchasing
    Château Lafite, one of the four great premier grand cru estates of France. He is the last of Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s sons to die.

    1870: Nathaniel de Rothschild dies.
    We can follow the Rothchilds as the bank they own in France buys huge amounts of OIL fields in Russia. They also form the Caspian and Black Sea Petroleum Company which by the way became the world’s second largest oil producer. They also started financing diamond mines in South Africa and copper mines in Spain. During this
    section you’ll read how they bought Reuters news agency because they
    didn’t like the bad things people were saying about them, so this was a
    way they could have some control of the media.

    1873: The loss making Rio Tinto copper mines in Spain, are purchased by a group of foreign financiers including the Rothschilds. These mines represented Europe’s largest source of copper.

    1875: N M Rothschild & Sons undertake a share issue to raise capital for the first channel tunnel project to link France to England, with half of its capital coming from the Rothschild owned Compagnie du Chemin de Fer du Nord. This year the Rothschilds also Provided Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli the finance for the British government to acquire a major stake in the Suez Canal. This deal was done in great secrecy by Lionel De Rothschild.

    1876: Otto von Bismarck states, “The division of the United States into two federations of equal force was decided long before the civil war by the high financial power of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economical and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds predominated. They foresaw the tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore they started their emissaries in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic.”

    1881: President James A. Garfield (The 20th President of the United States who lasted only 100 Days) states two weeks before he was assassinated, “Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” Edmond James de Rothschild has a son Maurice de Rothschild.

    1883: After 6,000 feet of tunnel in the channel tunnel project being
    excavated, the British government halted the project citing the fact that it would be a threat to Britain’s security.

    1885: Nathaniel Rothschild, son of Lionel De Rothschild, becomes the first Jewish peer and takes the title of Lord Rothschild.

    1886: The French Rothschild bank, de Rothschild Frères obtains substantial amounts of Russia’s oil fields and forms the Caspian and Black Sea Petroleum Company, which quickly becomes the world’s second largest oil producer.

    1887: The Rothschilds finance the amalgamation of the Kimberley diamond mines in South Africa. They subsequently become the biggest shareholders of this company, De Beers, and mine precious stones in Africa and India.

    1888: Noémie Halphen, future wife of Maurice de Rothschild born.

    1891: The British Labour Leader makes the following statement on the subject of the Rothschilds, “This blood-sucking crew has been the cause of untold mischief and misery in Europe during the present century, and has piled up its prodigious wealth chiefly through fomenting wars between States which ought never to have
    quarreled. Whenever there is trouble in Europe, wherever rumors of war circulate and men’s minds are distraught with fear of change and calamity you may be sure that a hook-nosed Rothschild is at his games somewhere near the region of the disturbance.” Comments like this worry the Rothschilds and towards the end of the 1800’s they purchased Reuters news agency so they can have some control of the media.

    1895:Edmond James de Rothschild the youngest son of Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild visits Palestine and subsequently supplies the funds to found the first Jewish colonies there, this is to further their long term objective of creating a Rothschild formed country.

    1897: The Rothschilds found the Zionist Congress and arrange its first
    meeting in Munich. However due to local Jewish opposition this is
    re-arranged for Basle, Switzerland and takes place on 29 August. The meeting is chaired by Theodor Herzl. Herzl is subsequently elected President of the Zionist Organisation which adopts the, “Rothschild Red Sign,” as the Zionist flag which 51 years later will end up as the flag of Israel.

    1898: Ferdinand de Rothschild dies.

    So ends another 100 years of Rothschild Dynastic rule. It is around this time that things start to get really deep. Just remember to keep an
    open mind.

    In the next section of the 1900’s you’re going to find out quite a few things that you may or may not have known. Don’t be surprised. Remember, THIS is the most powerful family in the world. Why? Because they have more money than any of us can ever even imagine (conservative estimates of the families global wealth stands at around £300 Trillion). Don’t forget that he who controls the money has ALL the power.

  • kiki BSc (Tech)(Hons) // November 26, 2009 at 3:29 AM

    @BAFBFP PhD
    No man Big Chris is my adversary and I don’t know why.. I must have pissed him off in a previous life or something

    Them Never Know Natty Dread Have
    Him Credential
    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/them-never-know-natty-dread-have-him-credential/

  • art // November 26, 2009 at 8:46 AM

    Hitler wrote, and then stated his “evidence”. I see where you are going.

  • Alex Fergusson // November 26, 2009 at 1:20 PM

    A few days ago the Attorney General of Barbados spoke about amending the Prevention of Corruption Act, to prevet bribery and corruption.

    By DLP standards, this is a sick joke. The AD is an honourable man, but I am saying here now that it will not happen.

    I double, tripple dear the AG to bring Anti-corruption and bribery legislation within the next 100 days.

    IT WILL NOT HAPPEN.

    The DLP cannot implement anti-corruption legislation in this country.

    That would immediately force four by-election and cause a downsizing of staff from the Prime Minister’s office.

    IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Just more DLP talk and promised as a distraction tactic.

  • Alex Fergusson // November 26, 2009 at 1:21 PM

    I mean: “Prevent” in line two paragraph one, not: “prevet”

  • dreamstarworld // November 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

    1901: The Rothschild banking house in Frankfurt, Germany, M. A. von
    Rothschild und Söhne, closes as there is no male Rothschild heir to take it on.

    1902: Philippe de Rothschild born.

    1906: Due to growing instability in the region and increasing competition from Standard Oil, the Rothschilds sell the Caspian and Black Sea Petroleum Company to Royal Dutch and Shell.

    1907: Rothschild, Jacob Schiff, the head of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., in a
    speech to the New York Chamber of Commerce, warns that, “Unless we have a Central Bank with adequate control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history.” Suddenly America finds itself in the middle of another typical run of the mill Rothschild engineered financial crisis, which ruins as usual ruins the lives of innocent people throughout America and makes billions for the Rothschilds.

    1909: Maurice de Rothschild marries Noémie Halphen.

    1911: John F. Hylan, then mayor of New York, states, “The real menace of our republic is the invisible government which, like a giant octopus, sprawls its slimy length over our city, state and nation.

    At the head is a small group of banking houses, generally referred to as international bankers.” Werner Sombart, in his book The Jews and Modern Capitalism, stated that from 1820 on, it was the, “Age of the Rothschild,” and concluded that there was, “Only one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild.”

    1912: In the December issue of, “Truth,” magazine, George R. Conroy states of banker Jacob Schiff, “Mr Schiff is head of the great private banking house of Kuhn, Loeb, and Co; which represents the Rothschilds interests on this side of the Atlantic. He has been described as financial strategist and has been for years the
    financial minister of the great impersonal power known as Standard Oil. He was hand in glove with the Harrimans, the Goulds, and the Rockefellers in all their railroad enterprises and has become the dominant power in the railroad and financial power of America.”

    1913: The Rothschilds set up the Anti Defamation League (ADL) in the
    United States designed to brand as, “anti-Semitic,” anyone who questions or challenges the Global Elite. Strangely enough, the same year that they do this they also set up their last and current central bank in America, the Federal Reserve. Congressman Charles Lindbergh stated following the passing of the Federal Reserve Act on December 23, “The Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this Bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized…The greatest crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.”

    It is important to note that the Federal Reserve is a private company, it is neither Federal nor does it have any Reserve. It is conservatively estimated that profits exceed $150 billion per year and the Federal Reserve has never once in its history published accounts.

    1914: The Rothschilds have control of the three European news agencies, Wolff (est. 1849) in Germany, Reuters (est. 1851) in England, and Havas (est. 1835) in France.

    The Rothschilds use Wolff to manipulate the German people into a fervor for war. From now on the Rothschilds are rarely reported in the media, because they own the media.

    1918: The Rothschilds order the execution by the Bolsheviks they control, of Tsar Nicholas II and his entire family in Russia. This is the Rothschilds revenge for Tsar Alexander II siding with President Abraham Lincoln in 1864. It is extremely important for them to slaughter the entire family including women and children in order to show the world, this is what happens if you ever attempt to cross the Rothschilds.

    1919: Following the end of the First World War, the Versailles peace
    conference is held to decide reparations that the Germans need to pay to the victors. Also decided at this conference is the confirmation of Israel as a Jewish homeland, with the control of Palestine being given to Britain whilst this handover takes place. At that time less than one percent of the population of Palestine was Jewish. The host of this conference is its boss, Baron Edmund de Rothschild.

    On March 29th The Times of London reports on the Bolsheviks in Russia,
    “One of the curious features of the Bolshevist movement is the high
    percentage of non Russian elements among its leaders. Of the twenty or thirty commissaries, or leaders, who provide the central machinery of the Bolshevist movement, not less than 75% were Jews.”

    It is reported that the Rothschilds were angry with the Russians because they were not prepared to allow them to form a central bank within their nation. They therefore gathered groups of Jewish spies and sent them into Russia to drum up a revolution.

    They were given Russian names, for example Trotsky was a member of the first group and his original name was Bronstein. These groups were sent to areas throughout Russia to incite riots and rebellion.

    The Jewish Post International Edition, week ending January 24th 1991, confirms Vladimir Lenin was Jewish. N. M. Rothschild & Sons’ are given a permanent role to fix the world’s daily gold price. This takes place in the City of London offices, daily at 1100 hours, in the same room until 2004.

    1920: Winston Churchill writes in an article in the Illustrated Sunday
    Herald, dated February 8th, “From the days of Illuminati leader Weishaupt, to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, this worldwide conspiracy has been steadily growing.

    And now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America , have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

    1926: N. M. Rothschild & Sons refinance the Underground Electric Railways Company of London Ltd which has a controlling interest in the entire London Underground transport system. Maurice de Rothschild has a son, Edmond de Rothschild.

    1934: Swiss banking secrecy laws are reformed and it becomes an offence resulting in imprisonment for any bank employee to violate bank secrecy. This is all in preparation for the Rothschild engineered Second World War in which as usual they will fund both sides. Edmond de Rothschild dies.

    1938: The Rothschilds Austrian banking house in Vienna, S. M. von Rothschild und Söhne, closes following the Nazi occupation of Austria.

    1939: I.G. Farben the leading producer of chemicals in the world and largest German producer of steel dramatically increases its production.

    This increased production is almost exclusively used to arm Germany for the Second World War. This company was controlled by the Rothschilds and would go on to use Jews and other disaffected peoples as slave labor in the concentration camps.

    1940: Hansjurgen Koehler in his book, “Inside The Gestapo,” states the
    following, of Maria Anna Schicklgruber, Adolf Hitler’s grandmother, “A little servant girl…came to Vienna and became a domestic servant…at the Rothschild mansion…and Hitler’s unknown grandfather must be probably looked for in this magnificent house.” This is backed up by Walter Langer in his book, “The Mind Of Hitler,” in which he states, “Adolf’s father, Alois Hitler, was the illegitimate son of Maria Anna
    Schicklgruber…Maria Anna Schicklgruber was living in Vienna at the time she conceived. At that time she was employed as a servant in the home of Baron Rothschild. As soon as the family discovered her pregnancy she was sent back home…where Alois was born.”

    1943: February 18th, Zionist, Izaak Greenbaum, head of the Jewish Agency Rescue Committee, in a speech to the Zionist Executive Council states, “If I am asked, could you give from the UJA (United Jewish Appeal) monies to rescue Jews, I say, no and I say again no!” He would go onto state… “One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland!”

    1948: In the Spring of this year, the Rothschilds bribe President Harry S. Truman (33rd President of the United States 1945 – 1953) to recognize Israel (Rothschild owned Zionist not Jewish territory) as a sovereign state with $2,000,000 which they give to him on his campaign train. They then declare Israel to be a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine and within half an hour President Truman declared the United States to be the first foreign nation to recognize it. The Flag of Israel is unveiled. Despite tremendous opposition the emblem on the flag is the Rothschild, “Red Sign/Star Of David,” which angers many Jews who believe the, “Menorah,” the oldest Jewish symbol should be used.

    It is pointed out that the, “Red Sign/Star of David,” used on the Jewish flag is not even a Jewish symbol, but of course as the Rothschild Zionists use it that is what ends up on the Rothschild, I mean Zionist, I mean Israeli flag.
    1953: N. M. Rothschild & Sons found the British Newfoundland Corporation Limited to develop 60,000 square miles of land in Newfoundland, Canada, which comprised a power station to harness the power of the Hamilton (later renamed Churchill) Falls. At the time this was the largest construction project ever to be undertaken by a private company.

    1955: Edmond de Rothschild founds Compagnie Financiere, Paris.

    1957: James de Rothschild dies and it is reported (by the Rothschild owned media) that he bequeaths a large sum of money to the state of Israel to pay for the construction of their parliament building, the Knesset. He states that the Knesset should be, “a symbol, in the eyes of all men, of the permanence of the State of Israel.” Maurice de Rothschild dies in Paris.

    1962: de Rothschild Frères establishes Imétal as an umbrella company for all their mineral mining interests. Frederic Morton publishes his book, The Rothschilds, in which he states, “Though they control scores of industrial, commercial, mining and tourist corporations, not one bears the name Rothschild. Being private partnerships, the family houses never need to, and never do, publish a single public balance sheet, or any other report of their financial condition.” This attitude reveals the true aim of the Rothschilds, to eliminate all
    competition and create their own worldwide monopoly.

    1963: On June 4th President John F. Kennedy (the 35th President of the United States 1961 – 1963) signs Executive Order 11110 which returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Rothschild owned Federal Reserve. Less than 6 months later on November 22nd, president Kennedy is assassinated by the Rothschilds for the same reason as they assassinated President Abraham Lincoln in 1865, he wanted to print American money for the American people, as oppose to for the benefit of a money grabbing war
    mongering foreign elite. This Executive Order 11110, is rescinded by
    President Lyndon Baines Johnson (the 36th President of the United States 1963 to 1969) on Air Force One from Dallas to Washington, the same day as President Kennedy was assassinated. Edmond de Rothschild establishes La Compagnie Financière Edmond de
    Rothschild (LCF), in Switzerland as a venture capital house. This later
    develops into an investment bank and asset management company with many affiliates. He also marries his wife Nadine and they have a son, Benjamin de Rothschild. 1967: de Rothschild Frères is renamed Banque Rothschild.

    1968: Noémie Halphen, wife of Maurice de Rothschild dies.

    1970: British Prime Minister Edward Heath makes Lord Victor Rothschild the head of his policy unit. Whilst he is in that role Britain enters the European Community.

    1973: In his book, “None Dare Call It Conspiracy”, Gary Allen states, “One major reason for the historical blackout on the role of the
    international bankers in political history is the Rothschilds were Jewish…The Jewish members of the conspiracy have used an organization called The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as an instrument to try and convince everyone that any mention of the Rothschilds and their allies is an attack on all Jews. In this way they have stifled almost all honest scholarship on international bankers and made the subject taboo within universities. Any individual or
    book exploring this subject is immediately attacked by hundreds of ADL communities all over the country. The ADL has never let the truth or logic interfere with its highly professional smear jobs.

    Actually, nobody has a right to be angrier at the Rothschild clique than their fellow Jews. The Rothschild empire helped finance Adolf Hitler.” N. M. Rothschild & Sons British Newfoundland Corporation, Churchill Falls project in Newfoundland, Canada, is completed. N. M. Rothschild & Sons also create a new asset management part of the company which traded worldwide. This eventually became, Rothschild Private Management Limited. Edmond de Rothschild, a great-grandson of Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild, bought the cru bourgeois estate of Château Clarke in Bordeaux.

    1980: The global phenomenon of privatization starts. The Rothschilds are behind this from the very beginning in order to seize control of all publicly owned assets worldwide.

    1981: Banque Rothschild is nationalized by the French government. The new bank is called, Compagnie Européenne de Banque. The Rothschilds subsequently set up a successor to this French bank, Rothschild & Cie Banque (RCB), which goes on to become a leading French investment house.

    1985: N. M. Rothschild & Sons advise the British government on the
    privatization of British Gas. They subsequently advise the British
    government on virtually all of their other privatizations of state owned
    assets including – British Steel; British Coal; all the British regional
    electricity boards; and all the British regional water boards.

    1987: Edmond de Rothschild creates the World Conservation Bank which is designed to transfer debts from third world countries to this bank and in return those countries would give land to this bank. This is designed so the Rothschilds can gain control of the third world which represents 30% of the land surface of the Earth.

    1988: Philippe de Rothschild dies.

    1989: The London and Paris Rothschilds announce the launch of a new subsidiary, Rothschild GmbH, in Frankfurt, Germany.

    1995: Former atomic energy scientist, Dr Kitty Little claims the Rothschilds now control 80% of the world’s uranium supplies giving them a monopoly over nuclear power.

    1996: Amschel Rothschild, 41, is strangled with the heavy cord of his own towel robe in his hotel room in Paris. French Prime Minister order the French Police to close their investigation, and Zionist, Rupert Murdoch instructs his editors and news managers around the world to report it as a heart attack, if they need to report it at all.

    1997: Edmond de Rothschild dies in Geneva of emphysema.

    1998: The European Central Bank is set up in Frankfurt, the city from which the Rothschilds originate. Now it gets REALLY REALLY deep..

    2001: On September 11th the attack on the World Trade Center is orchestrated by Britain, America and Israel under the orders of the Rothschilds as a pretext for removing the liberty of people worldwide in exchange for security, just as they did with the Reichstag fire in Germany where the citizens were lied to in order to give up liberty for security.

    They also will use the attacks to gain control of the few nations in the
    world who don’t allow Rothschild central banks and so less than one month after these attacks, US forces attack Afghanistan, one of only 7 nations in the world who didn’t have a Rothschild controlled central bank at that time. They do NOW. One week prior to the WTC attack, he Zim Shipping Company moves out of its offices in the WTC, breaking its lease and costing the company $50,000. No reason has ever been given, but Zim Shipping Company is half owned by the State of Israel (The Rothschilds).
    2003: The United States invade Iraq which was THEN one of six nations left in the world who didn’t have a Rothschild controlled central bank.

    2005: On 7 July the London Underground Network is bombed. Israel’s Finance Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu is in London on the morning of the attacks in order to attend an economic conference in a hotel over the underground station where one of the blasts occurred, but stayed in his hotel room instead after he had been informed by Israeli intelligence officials attacks were expected.

    There are now only 5 nations in the world left without a Rothschild controlled central bank:-

    (Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Cuba, and Libya).

    2006: Plans are drawn for a future strike against Iran as they will be the next domino to fall in this great chess game…

    2007: Plans are afoot to put the “first black man” in “The White House” – a plan hatched by Buffet, Soros – all Rothschilds agents…

    2008/2009: The final blueprint for the New World Order (Economics + Politics, Religious) is being drawn by the Illuminati’s power brokers (with the Vatican at the forefront)…

    2010: An ominous catastrophe set to come out of Israel which will reshape world geopolitics forever…

    “The New Dawn “ begins….

    The end of days – preparation for the final crisis!!!

  • kiki // November 26, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    Revelation Time / Hammer And Sickle

    http://555dubstreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/revelation-time-hammer-and-sickle/

  • art // November 27, 2009 at 8:39 AM

    The Nazis said many of these untrue things, that Jewish people did this and that. Then the holocaust and the death of 6M Jews by the hands of the Nazis. You say the Jews did it to themselves- you’re a bad man- not just bad, but eveil and misguided on your dream upon a star, with your dream for the extermination and demonisation of the Jews.

    Now you extrapolate and say Jewish persons are responsible for just about every war and crisis in recent times. You’re a stinking liar and you’re writing is offensive.

    Where in the world are people taught things like this still? I’ll tell you- in many countries of the Middle East, where it is sought by education of the youths to exterminate the Jews, where the myth of evil Jews continues to be propagated. You are wicked and misguided, though you probably don’t realise it.

    On the other hand, wicked and misghuided could well be too shallow, IMHO I think you are a closet extremist. Your preoccupation with angry black men is to convert them to your ways, whatever they are, and I want persons who read this to understand that.

    And Kiki’s collection of IP addresses should serve all at BU quite well sometime in the future, for whatever reason he is doing this thing, as all persons who go there can be catalogued, like the numbers the nazis used in the holocaust for extermination of my family members.

    Have a great day, y’hear- I am off to make an honest day in my little Jewish walk of life.

    Moron!

  • kiki // November 27, 2009 at 9:32 AM

    art
    I’m no anti-semite (promise)
    peace

  • kiki // November 27, 2009 at 10:29 AM

    but I am anti-corruption (of any or all creeds)

  • kiki // November 27, 2009 at 10:32 AM

    Sorry excuse typo
    s/b ’systemic corruption’
    ie. In finance, systemic risk is the risk of collapse of an entire financial system or entire market, as opposed to risk associated with any one individual …

  • Alex Fergusson // November 27, 2009 at 11:22 AM

    BY CLYDE MASCOLL

    NO TRAINED ECONOMIST would have described the 2008 Budget as deflationary since deflation is a steady decline of the price level. How could the imposition of $104 million in fees and taxation cause deflation? In fact, the Budget contributed to a rise in the price level and also assisted in contracting the economy.

    The clearest evidence of contraction in the economy is the significant fall in imports which has been identified by the Minister of Finance. So the idle boast that the Budget was not deflationary is as profound as saying that my mother is/was a female. Deflation is the opposite of inflation, which is a steady rise in the price level.

    Given the steady rise in oil prices last year that pushed electricity bills through the roof because of the fuel charge clause and the general rise of prices normally associated with higher oil prices, the imposition of millions of dollars of taxation cannot be described as trivial.

    This imposition cannot be trivial in the context of Barbadians having to cope with high food prices, escalating electricity bills, rising water rates, more professional fees, greater insurance costs, increased mortgage payments, higher land taxes and land prices, and growing cost of all services.

    How could the burdensome taxation be isolated from the circumstances confronting workers, households and businesses?

    The Barbados economy witnessed a return to moderate inflation in 2006 and signs of a world recession were in evidence in 2007.

    Former Prime Minister Arthur was courageous enough to speak to the pending economic difficulties during the last general election campaign, no doubt with the assistance and possible advice of his major consultant on fiscal matters.

    For this consultant to suggest that any criticism of Government policy, regardless of which party is in power, is born out of political bias or posturing is to elevate himself to the status of statesman and to reduce everyone else to the intellectual dump.

    If the consultant is doing work for the current administration, it should be stated in public such that his statesmanship is beyond question.

    In the post-1994 period when all kinds of observations were being made of the fiscal deficits and national debt, there were hardly any voices in support or in objection.

    Now the voices are being heard from on high and with increasing frequency. This is an excellent thing for the country!

    However, the economy needed fiscal stimulus since last year. It received fiscal neglect instead, as the Minister of Finance preferred to wait and see, while imposing excess taxation.

    Fiscal stimulus comes in two basic forms:

    (1) reduced taxation and

    (2) increased expenditure.

    The choice of one or the other is based on incidence, that is, who is to be affected: the household, the private sector or both.

    This choice is driven by the need to expand economic activity primarily to maintain jobs with the understanding that there may be some loss of foreign reserves.

    The loss of foreign reserves from enhancing spending in the economy is, however, grossly inflated as the estimate does not take into consideration the multiplier effects of spending a $1 and the high level of local value added to imported goods.

    The figure of 70 cents out of every $1 being spent on imports is absolute rubbish.

    This recession does not match up to the difficulties of 1991/1992 at the macro-level.

    Perhaps at the household level, individuals are now more highly leveraged/indebted, given the period of boom experienced in the aftermath of the previous recession.

    As a result, households have been living at the margin and as a consequence the working poor are feeling the impact of this recession because of limited room for manoeuvring in their budgets.

    In the circumstances, it was the Government’s responsibility to stimulate economic activity in the short term.

    The structural issues of the public sector and the economy as a whole can only be addressed in the medium to long term. The two should not be confused!

    Clyde Mascoll is a professional economist and former Government minister in the last Barbados Labour Party administration.

    Source: Today’s Weekend Nation

  • kiki // November 27, 2009 at 2:25 PM

    its debt consolidation time globally
    not much available credit around
    but high debt levels and insolvencies

  • Crusoe // November 28, 2009 at 1:55 PM

    Alex Fergusson, thanks for posting Mr.Mascoll’s peice.

    Two suggestions in that article are very disturbing.

    Firstly, reading the article it would appear that Mascoll was advoating Gov’t spending to increase last year, to achieve fiscal stimulus.

    While in theory alone, a recession does indicate the need for direct fiscal stimulus, the context of the issue must be considered.

    Firstly, we are already coming out of the previous administrations policy of extensive borrowing and expenditure, which has two effects.

    Firstly, it puts the current administration in a pickle when it wishes to borrow further, to use a stimuls package when it actually does need it.

    This is because, as we have seen, the debt level is not at an acceptable ‘pre-timulus’ level, thus will be further aggravated by more borrowing for fiscal stimulus during recession.

    Secondly, it means that the economy is still bearing some effect of over-heating, being stimulated at a time of boom, now to enter a recession.

    Over-heating results in inflation and in many cases, over-valuation.

    Therefore, instead of rushing to pump stimulus into over valuations resulting from overheating, some stability must first be achieved.

    Now is not the time for rushing stimulus, but rather maintaining a conservative approach to Gov’t borrowing and expenditure.

    There may come a time when such a stimulus is needed, but not yet.

    The second issue in the article that disturbs me, is the assertion that this recession does not match up to the 1991/1992 recession, at the macro-level.

    This statement would seem to be careless at best, if not altogether reckless.

    We have not yet seen the full effects of this recession worldwide, let alone in Barbados.

    As it is, international financial assessments clearly state that this is the worst incident since the war.

    But, Mr.Mascoll thinks otherwise.

    Strange.

  • David // November 28, 2009 at 2:02 PM

    @Crusoe

    Could we witnessing a situation where Mascoll’s known anti-Thompson/DLP stance MAYBE cluding his judgement?

    Have stated the above the uncertainty of the global recession added to the high debt:GDP which the government inherited puts us in a position where there is no absolute concerning the solution. We all have to admit as a nation we will have to go very cautiously.

  • Crusoe // November 28, 2009 at 2:22 PM

    I am not sure David, but I am still shaking my head at the article, it is downright peculiar.

    For the record I must say, I am not a ‘qualified economist’, nevertheless one does not have to be to use intelligence and commonsense.

    Indeed, the next two years are going to be hairy, not least because the globe itself is still going through turmoil, but I agree that caution is the best way.

    This is why I also believe that the IMF suggestion will come to pass i.e. increased tax sourcing which would most likely be by increased VAT and capital gains on property and shares.

  • dreamstarworld // November 28, 2009 at 9:30 PM

    THE DEBT BURDEN WILL CRUSH MAJOR ECONOMIES!!!

    Ever see one of those “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” statues or pictures? The ones with the three monkeys, one covering his eyes, one covering his ears, and one covering his mouth?

    This is the modus operandi of central bank governors, politicians, corporate main-street and the rest of us who would rather be hoodwinked into believing all is “peaches and cream” in our world…

    The FEDERAL RESERVE is not telling the average American that they fear another mortgage crisis in 2010 – 2011 because of the mortgage reset schedule which is coming.

    The Reserve is well aware of a major problem out there in the market … a problem at least as severe as the subprime mess.

    I’m talking about mortgages like Alt-A and Option-ARMs.

    From the second quarter of 2010 until the fourth quarter of 2011, hundreds of billions of dollars in these mortgages will reset to much higher rates!

    HENCE – GREATER DEBT BURDEN*.

    And many of them will end up becoming delinquent.

    Here’s why …

    Mortgage resets are bound to increase the number of foreclosures.

    Aggravating the situation is the fact that most of these mortgages were taken out when the housing bubble was at its height.

    So now, the loan-to-value ratios for many homes will be obscenely high.

    This means a tsunami of write-downs for the banking sector, probably as huge as the subprime write-downs, IF NOT GREATER (this include commercial properties).

    And it means a huge wave of foreclosures on borrowers who can’t afford the new, higher monthly payments.

    The ability to service a debt does not depend on rising GDP figures. It depends strongly on current income.

    That’s why high (and rising) unemployment rates are very bad news for the housing market and for the banks — AGAIN!!!

    DO I SOUND LIKE A PROPHET OF DOOM?

    Damn straight!!!

    Just look at DUBAI -

    Please read the NEWS* report and look at the numbers:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34182619/

  • dreamstarworld // November 28, 2009 at 9:41 PM

    BARBADOS IS IN DEEP SHITE*(excuse my French) AND THERE ARE FOLKS WHO WOULD LIKE TO HOODWINK* YOU INTO BELIEVING OTHERWISE….

    I offered the PM my advice 2 and a half years ago (FREE OF CHARGE*) – I have the emails to prove it…

    But some folks have to learn the hard way when they choose to pander to popular opinion and follow the “herd” mentality for the sake of political expediency and maintaining power at any cost…

    On the eve of ANOTHER* Independence anniversary – my country has lost it way, politically, economically, morally and spiritually…

    Where there is “NO VISION” – people perish!!!

    Enough said….

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 29, 2009 at 8:17 AM

    @dreamstarworld // November 28, 2009 at 9:41 PM
    “I offered the PM my advice 2 and a half years ago (FREE OF CHARGE*) – I have the emails to prove it…” [Would you be prepared to forward the relevant messages to David and myself, or anyone who is 'public' (such as ROK or Chris Halsall, if I can take names in vain), so that someone else could see this proof?

    Governments are not obliged to take advice, even if free. But the content and response to the messages may tell us something about how to better offer advice so that it is harder to refuse. My interest is largely as someone who has been in public and economic policy making for a long time, and having some sense of how processes can derail good ideas. Thanks.]

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 29, 2009 at 8:25 AM

    dreamstarworld // November 28, 2009 at 9:30 PM
    “The FEDERAL RESERVE is not telling the average American that they fear another mortgage crisis in 2010 – 2011 because of the mortgage reset schedule which is coming. ” [Some have argued recently that the Fed is VERY aware, see http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2009/11/25/the-fed-knows-another-mortgage-mess-is-in-the-offing/. But it is not a given that the next resets will be as you indicate, see Dallas Fed's Fisher's comments in May, http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Housing/idUSTRE54E3ET20090515.

    Whether you can understand what the Fed has been saying may determine if you feel you are being 'told'. The messages of pending problems in housing and other asset classes are there.

    Also, it is not clear which tile will push over a set of dominos. The resets are known events, but any number of unknows could occur before and with worse impact.]

  • David // November 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM

    Please crave our ignorance on the matter of mortgage resets. Why wouldn’t financial institutions forgo profit margins to protect the integrity of its loan portfolio. Simply put why not amend the mortgage agreement and reschedule the reset until a better time?

  • Straight talk // November 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM

    David:

    Stop being so reasonable.
    You are making a mockery of the plan.

    Sincerely.
    Lloyd Blankfein

  • Sargeant // November 29, 2009 at 12:35 PM

    Poor Dreamstarworld’s nose is out of joint because he “offered the PM my advice 2 and a half years ago (FREE OF CHARGE*) – I have the emails to prove it…” and it was rejected. Looks like we missed the boat on obtaining advice from an economics savant. Dreamstar, my advice is to keep plugging away someone out there may be listening; good things come to those who wait…..

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados // November 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

    @David, it is not necessarily a matter of profit margin, but cost of funding the loan. Long term assets are often funded from shorter term sources, so rates on loans are not often far off cost of funding. Wait for better times? If you can be sure when that will be you are a lucky guy. What if we never get back to ‘normal’?

  • dreamstarworld // November 29, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    DAVID* IS THE ONLY PERSON I WILL BE WILING TO SHARE ANY INFO WITH AND THAT WOULD BE ON A 1 TO 1 BASIS WHEN I HOPE TO BE IN BARBADOS IN JANUARY 2010….

    As to the comment regarding my (BIG) nose out of alignment over prophetic advice given to the King…. (nothing new there, just read the Scriptures) – too many instances of the words of the prophets, seers and advisers not being heeded, until the writing is suddenly on the wall…

    What is lamentable is that those who suffer are always the poor, dispossessed, marginalized and the affected working classes….

    The rich and infamous continue as always been…

    It’s easy for all of us (including myself) who live in the lap of luxury to point fingers, heckle from the sidelines while jeering and mocking as the Titanic goes down….

    “I TOLD YOU SO” – is a favorite BAJAN* maxim…. But then it seems folks like it that way….

    The attitude of a lot of Bajans (home & abroad) is crystal clear – “I DON’T CARE WA’ THEY DO, IT AIN’T MY BUSINESS”…

    As an educated & literate people, it appears that for most of us “IGNORANCE” knows no bounds!!!

    Again, I will reiterate my position as I did in times past – PM- DT is merely a man in a position of authority because the electorate has put him there…

    If you believe the BIBLE* (as some clearly DO NOT*) – the Word is clear: “GOD* sets up kings and take down kingdoms”…

    All we can do is pray for our leaders to make wise decisions while holding them accountable for those said decisions…

    Equally, we pray that the inspired advice given to our leaders will be acted on so they will do right by their people…

    That’s all any of us can do….

    Anything else is a colossal waste of time and energy!!!

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados // November 29, 2009 at 5:37 PM

    @dreamstarworld, share as you feel comfortable. However, it is to me intriguing that you wish to keep your good advice so close to your chest as it surely is meant to be for the general public good. Maybe one day we will see good advice as a ‘common’ good not proprietory? One presumes that the ideas will remain relevant. We live in hope for January 2010.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 29, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    @David // November 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM It’s hard to generalise, but once you start asking banks to hold impaired loans on their books (which would be one aspect of a rescheduling) other things start to happen. That may involve banks being asked to come up with more capital, for instance. It could also mean that borrowers are inclined to, or are forced to, ‘walk away’ from their loans and banks would then be left with the collateral–houses–which they do not want.

  • Sargeant // November 29, 2009 at 7:05 PM

    January is such a cold month, a letdown after the Xmas festivities with all the family get togethers, the social activities with the many friends and acquaintances some of whom you haven’t seen for a while. Now, I have something to look forward to in January, Dreamstarworld is going to share his plan to save the world or at least Barbados with David. Xmas? What Xmas?

    Delusions of grandeur anyone?

  • dreamstarworld // November 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM

    Hey Guys,

    I apologize for the act of public non-disclosure at this time due in part to an agreement between friends….

    I cannot share what is sacrosanct…

    Sorry to be a “Scrooge” at this festive time of year…

  • kiki // November 30, 2009 at 4:40 AM

    @ Denis the flip side of the current economical crisis is the theft of properties and institutionalised fraud performed within the legal circles. Firms are acting in collusion breaking data protection laws, with favour exchanges between each other manipulating the legal process undervaluing properties for foreclosures and racking up extortionate legal costs. Please do not defend the banking and legal scum.
    No sell out !
    p.s. I sent an anon posting to your blog which you are still sitting on, or must have disappeared up your backside

  • kiki // November 30, 2009 at 4:56 AM

    303.— General control of trustee by the court.
    (1) If a bankrupt or any of his creditors or any other person is dissatisfied by any act, omission or
    decision of a trustee of the bankrupt’s estate, he may apply to the court; and on such an application
    the court may confirm, reverse or modify any act or decision of the trustee, may give him directions
    or may make such other order as it thinks fit.
    I Need A Roof

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 30, 2009 at 5:38 AM

    @kiki // November 30, 2009 at 4:40 AM
    “p.s. I sent an anon posting to your blog which you are still sitting on, or must have disappeared up your backside” [My blog states very prominently, '*PLEASE READ COMMENTS POLICY--NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS, PLEASE*', so I may presume you did not want the comment published. If yours was "all trades..." I can assign a name to it and publish on confirmation.

    "the flip side of the current economical crisis is the theft of properties and institutionalised fraud performed within the legal circles. Firms are acting in collusion breaking data protection laws, with favour exchanges between each other manipulating the legal process undervaluing properties for foreclosures and racking up extortionate legal costs. Please do not defend the banking and legal scum." [So, did banks did lend for properties that were correctly valued or undervalued initially? If they are undervalued now 'for foreclosures', where is the residual value going? I cannot dispute 'extortionate legal costs', but that is a generic problem with the law as practised worldwide.]

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 30, 2009 at 5:41 AM

    @kiki, “manipulating the legal process” is meaningless. Laws are not absolute, and the mere matters of interpretation, presentation of arguments, and judgement, mean that the law is to be manipulated. If it were not so, one would need only have a ‘check box’ system and wait for results to pop out.

  • kiki // November 30, 2009 at 6:18 AM

    DJ yes you may i confirm the above anon statement. properties are being foreclosed by creditors and debt buyers without original loan notes for petty amounts. the extortionate legal costs was an understatement which should be treated as fraudulent.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 30, 2009 at 7:17 AM

    @kiki, the comment has been published.

    However, you want to look at it, nothing has an intrinsic value, and nothing other than a person’s life can be claimed to be truly owned. So when we discuss what something is worth, or who has rights to it, it’s a matter of degree how much anyone one can say the ‘property’ has been extracted. So, it we are to engage on that debate let’s not be partial, and we always need to go back to origin, rather than end points.

    We all engage in ‘games’ about value, and win or lose because they are all gambles of different order. Life is possible, but death is certain. In between, we take chances.

  • kiki // November 30, 2009 at 7:48 AM

    dj thanks for publishing the post eventually.
    re: mortgage or asset backed securities
    Instruments bundling sizable mortgage portfolios will by definition be big and highly lethal potential risk exposures especially when markets crash

  • David // November 30, 2009 at 7:55 AM

    BU stands by its previous comment regarding the amendment to mortgage agreements which would assist homeowners in the US who are out of work to keep their homes. If banks subsidize the cost of funds rate it supports the BU point that they will be giving up margins. Bare in mind the market in the US has a close to 0% interest rate on deposits for some time now if we want to talk about cost of funds. There is also the ridiculous situation where homeowners in the US have equity which they could use to offset current financial difficulties but for banks in the US it makes more sense to foreclose on the homeowner, they make more money if they do so is our read of the situation.

    Let Barbadians pray the banks in Barbados don’t go down that street.

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // November 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM

    @David // November 30, 2009 at 7:55 AM
    “If banks subsidize the cost of funds rate” [Once you say subsidy, you must accept that you are giving someone financial assistance. Your argument is that banks can afford to pay this and give up on some profit margin. But, the US banking system is currently running losses in major part, so their losses wont decline at best and will get bigger at worst. Also, with the current ownership, your subsidy is really a charge on government. That may be the best way to deal with it, and then tax payers can decide if that is what they want, and deal with repaying the debt/dealing with the deficit being created.]

    “market in the US has a close to 0% interest rate on deposits for some time now if we want to talk about cost of funds.”[Banks are not getting all of their money near to 0%. Maybe the best can for some of their funding. But look for instance at the WSJ table on rates, http://www.bankrate.com/rates/interest-rates/wall-street-prime-rate.aspx. If banks pass on the true costs of funds across all of their business it would be near zero.

    If equity value is less than the loan what do you expect to do with that? It was reported last week that 1 in 4 US borrowers is 'under water', ie has negative equity in housing, see http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/business/econwatch/entry5760111.shtml?tag=cbsContent;cbsCarousel. You cannot use negative equity to offset 'difficulties'.

    Banks dont really have a big incentive to foreclose as they end up with devalued assets for which the market is weak.]

  • kiki // November 30, 2009 at 2:19 PM

    Dennis,
    its the credit card companies that are
    ruthless cowboys, mortgage companies
    are not properties repossessing per se.
    but their offshoots are

  • David // November 30, 2009 at 2:40 PM

    Off interest about Credit Rating Agencies:

    Global credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s, which rules on a company’s or government’s ability to repay its debts, said the announcement "may be considered a [debt] default".

    Our correspondent said: "Standard & Poor’s and Moodys immediately downgraded all six state-backed corporations in Dubai, downgrading some to junk status." Junk is the term commonly used to describe bonds that are rated below investment grade by ratings agencies.

    full article

  • kiki // December 1, 2009 at 6:35 AM

    if you think about it..
    the one thing government’s really hate
    is dirty money that isn’t theirs..
    so maybe the global crisis is to force every one into penury
    to see who survives financially
    as they must be crooks (or agents)
    (b.t.w that’s the problem with the legal system)

  • kiki // December 1, 2009 at 7:50 AM

    financial legislations like the patriot act
    money laundering and surveillance technologies to fight against terrorism etc
    were looking in the wrong direction
    lawmakers are the lawbreakers

  • How Is The Barbados Economy Doing? « Barbados Underground | Best Debt Free Tips - Debt Reduction Tips // December 7, 2009 at 9:42 AM

    [...] post: How Is The Barbados Economy Doing? « Barbados Underground AKPC_IDS += "156,";Popularity: unranked [?] Share and [...]

  • Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) // December 8, 2009 at 9:00 AM

    Useful to see Barbados in its larger context, as reflected first by Moody’s comments about certain Aaa rated countries (such as UK, US, France, Germany, New Zealand, Switerland), http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abkKiCx36_oE&pos=3. Note important phrases such as ‘but which display, in our opinion, an adequate reaction capacity to rise to the challenging and rebound’.

    Note also that newswires report Greece has just been downgraded to BBB+ by S&P (see warning of this yesterday, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/6755179/Greece-put-on-standby-for-debt-downgrade.html). Again, note comments such as “unlikely to secure a sustained reduction in fiscal deficits and the public debt burden”.

    Heavily indebted countries using the Euro, such as Greece, have characteristics similar to Barbados in their being bound to not changing their exchange rates. As the report notes, ‘Some commentators suspect that Greece is particularly vulnerable to a fiscal crisis, since, as a euro member, it does not have the luxury of being able to devalue its currency or inflate its way out of a growing fiscal burden. It must either deflate and accept slow and painful economic stagnation, or default on its debts…’

Leave a Comment