::[disclaimer: bad language ahead...]
Rebekah Brooks, her husband Charlie and News International’s head of security conspired to conceal material from the police including hiding a laptop behind rubbish bins in an underground car park after a drop-off disguised as a pizza delivery, the Old Bailey heard earlier this week.
The prosecution detailed an elaborate plan in which Mr Hanna and a colleague retrieved a laptop and a jiffy bag that had allegedly been hidden by Mr Brooks behind a bin in the car park of his Chelsea Harbour flat. The material was allegedly then driven to News International’s Wapping offices while police raided the home.
“The coast was clear after that,” said Mr Edis.
Mr Hanna then hatched a plan to return the material to the car park in the guise of a pizza delivery to Mr Brooks, the court heard.
The associate of Mr Hanna who delivered the material to a hiding place behind bins, sent a text message to his controller that referenced a line from the film Where Eagles Dare: “Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Pizza delivered and the chicken is in the pot.”
In reply, the controller wrote: “Ha! Fuckin amateurs! We should have done a DLB [dead letter box] or brush contact on the riverside! Cheers mate, log in the hours as ‘pizza delivery’.”
However, the plot went wrong when a cleaner found the hidden material and gave it to his manager, who called the police.
Wednesday, 13 November 2013
Monday, 11 November 2013
Education
John Major is having a pop at the elite, allegedly!
In September, the New Statesman and the Intergenerational Foundation teamed up to run an essay competition for A level students. The topic was "has Britian robbed its children?" and the winning entry was by Conor Hamilton.
The message is clear: young people are lazily relying on the old. One reason this narrative is so effective is that there is a widespread anxiety today’s children will not value and uphold the efforts of the generations that came before them. It plays on a fear that young people are not fulfilling their part of an intergenerational contract, preferring to live their lives selfishly. However, what if the breach of contract is the other way around? What if older generations have been living an unsustainably extravagant lifestyle, leaving little for those that will come after them?
The immediate evidence for this would be the UK’s national debt, which has increased from 34 per cent of GDP in 1991 to 90 per cent. This debt is so large that the interest we pay on it is roughly the same size as our defence budget. Unfortunately, the interest will only increase as our debt shifts to just short of 100 per cent of GDP, as it is predicted to have done by 2015. It seems the taxpayers of tomorrow will be struggling with the debts of yesterday for a long time to come.
However, it is not only the profligacy of the last generation, commonly deemed synonymous with the previous Labour government, that will harm the young. The austerity measures pursued by today’s coalition are also unfairly weighted against young people. University funding and housing benefits for the young have been slashed, employment schemes have been abandoned and the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) has been scrapped in England.
Meanwhile, pensioners are exempted from caps on housing benefit, pensions remain triple-locked and universal benefits such as winter fuel payments, free TV licenses and free bus passes, all remain untouched. None of those benefits existed 16 years ago. Strangely, the current deficit reduction plan shows little concern for those who will have to pay the money back.
As a result, Britain’s homeowners have stopped investing in useful things like businesses, and have instead starting using their homes as an easy source of cash. Every time someone takes out a second mortgage or downsizes to make the most of their house’s increased value, they bring that over-inflated profit along, even though they have done relatively little to earn it. This cost is then paid by the people entering the market for the first time or looking to upscale. Yet again it is the younger generations that must over-pay because of the actions of the old - a cost which has been estimated at £1.3trn pounds in total.
This has dire consequences for the distribution of wealth, which has been shifting in favour of elderly in recent years. A Bank of England study found that in 2005, the average wealth of people aged between 25 and 34 had fallen to a third of its 1995 value, whereas the wealth of those aged 55-64 had tripled.
A lack of affordable housing and heaps of private and public debt won’t just deprive the young people of the chance to accrue material wealth, it will also delay their chances of becoming adults. This latest housing scheme does not address the real issue that WE ARE NOT BUILDING ENOUGH HOUSES!
In September, the New Statesman and the Intergenerational Foundation teamed up to run an essay competition for A level students. The topic was "has Britian robbed its children?" and the winning entry was by Conor Hamilton.
The message is clear: young people are lazily relying on the old. One reason this narrative is so effective is that there is a widespread anxiety today’s children will not value and uphold the efforts of the generations that came before them. It plays on a fear that young people are not fulfilling their part of an intergenerational contract, preferring to live their lives selfishly. However, what if the breach of contract is the other way around? What if older generations have been living an unsustainably extravagant lifestyle, leaving little for those that will come after them?
The immediate evidence for this would be the UK’s national debt, which has increased from 34 per cent of GDP in 1991 to 90 per cent. This debt is so large that the interest we pay on it is roughly the same size as our defence budget. Unfortunately, the interest will only increase as our debt shifts to just short of 100 per cent of GDP, as it is predicted to have done by 2015. It seems the taxpayers of tomorrow will be struggling with the debts of yesterday for a long time to come.
However, it is not only the profligacy of the last generation, commonly deemed synonymous with the previous Labour government, that will harm the young. The austerity measures pursued by today’s coalition are also unfairly weighted against young people. University funding and housing benefits for the young have been slashed, employment schemes have been abandoned and the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) has been scrapped in England.
Meanwhile, pensioners are exempted from caps on housing benefit, pensions remain triple-locked and universal benefits such as winter fuel payments, free TV licenses and free bus passes, all remain untouched. None of those benefits existed 16 years ago. Strangely, the current deficit reduction plan shows little concern for those who will have to pay the money back.
As a result, Britain’s homeowners have stopped investing in useful things like businesses, and have instead starting using their homes as an easy source of cash. Every time someone takes out a second mortgage or downsizes to make the most of their house’s increased value, they bring that over-inflated profit along, even though they have done relatively little to earn it. This cost is then paid by the people entering the market for the first time or looking to upscale. Yet again it is the younger generations that must over-pay because of the actions of the old - a cost which has been estimated at £1.3trn pounds in total.
This has dire consequences for the distribution of wealth, which has been shifting in favour of elderly in recent years. A Bank of England study found that in 2005, the average wealth of people aged between 25 and 34 had fallen to a third of its 1995 value, whereas the wealth of those aged 55-64 had tripled.
A lack of affordable housing and heaps of private and public debt won’t just deprive the young people of the chance to accrue material wealth, it will also delay their chances of becoming adults. This latest housing scheme does not address the real issue that WE ARE NOT BUILDING ENOUGH HOUSES!
Friday, 8 November 2013
Interest rates
Yesterday, in a shock move, the ECB [European Central Bank] has reduced the benchmark interest rate by a quarter to 0.25%. This was previously unchanged for the last twelve months. Reason unknown!
The official statement from the (ECB) says that it has cut the core interest rate in a bid to boost flagging economic recovery in the Euro area. However, there have not been many reports recently flagging any momentum that would require a change. The moved startled many investors while most economists thought the bank would wait to offer more economic stimulus at least until December.
The Bank of England yesterday kept its rates at 0.5% which have been stable for over four years now.
In addition to the ECB cutting its main refinancing rate to 0.25%, it held the deposit rate it pays on bank deposits at 0% and cut its marginal lending facility, or emergency borrowing rate to 0.75% from 1%. A lower refinancing rate makes it cheaper for banks to borrow from the ECB, in hopes that that lower rate will be reflected in what companies pay for credit.
The real question is this a reaction to the figures produced recently showing we are currently moving through a deflationary period.
The official statement from the (ECB) says that it has cut the core interest rate in a bid to boost flagging economic recovery in the Euro area. However, there have not been many reports recently flagging any momentum that would require a change. The moved startled many investors while most economists thought the bank would wait to offer more economic stimulus at least until December.
The Bank of England yesterday kept its rates at 0.5% which have been stable for over four years now.
In addition to the ECB cutting its main refinancing rate to 0.25%, it held the deposit rate it pays on bank deposits at 0% and cut its marginal lending facility, or emergency borrowing rate to 0.75% from 1%. A lower refinancing rate makes it cheaper for banks to borrow from the ECB, in hopes that that lower rate will be reflected in what companies pay for credit.
The real question is this a reaction to the figures produced recently showing we are currently moving through a deflationary period.
Thursday, 7 November 2013
DWP and computers
It’s going to be another uncomfortable day for Iain Duncan Smith. Today’s Public Accounts Committee report on Universal Credit is one of the most excoriating anyone can remember. Margaret Hodge and her colleagues warn that most of the £425m of public money so far spent on the programme is likely to be written off, that management of the project has been “alarmingly weak” and that the DWP has consistently failed to “grasp the nature and enormity of the task”, missing early “warning signs” and refusing to “intervene promptly”. He should have hired us and now he would have a working system :)
Labour, meanwhile, has focused its criticism on Cameron, not IDS. In her response to today's report, Rachel Reeves said: "Today’s report from the Public Accounts Committee is a shocking confirmation of David Cameron’s failure and another nail in the coffin of his Government’s promise to deliver Universal Credit on time and on budget. Families facing a cost of living crisis need welfare reform they can trust. Instead they’ve got an out of touch Prime Minister who has presided over chaos and waste."
It now turns out that behind the scenes IDS has been rallying support to blame the civil service on this latest fiasco. The work and pensions secretary took the rare step for a cabinet minister of publicly blaming civil servants after the release of a scathing report by the National Audit Office (NAO) on the introduction of universal credit. The report said the welfare changes had been poorly managed and were riddled with major IT problems, threatening to increase costs by hundreds of millions of pounds. How far does this have to go before it is stopped?
Labour, meanwhile, has focused its criticism on Cameron, not IDS. In her response to today's report, Rachel Reeves said: "Today’s report from the Public Accounts Committee is a shocking confirmation of David Cameron’s failure and another nail in the coffin of his Government’s promise to deliver Universal Credit on time and on budget. Families facing a cost of living crisis need welfare reform they can trust. Instead they’ve got an out of touch Prime Minister who has presided over chaos and waste."
It now turns out that behind the scenes IDS has been rallying support to blame the civil service on this latest fiasco. The work and pensions secretary took the rare step for a cabinet minister of publicly blaming civil servants after the release of a scathing report by the National Audit Office (NAO) on the introduction of universal credit. The report said the welfare changes had been poorly managed and were riddled with major IT problems, threatening to increase costs by hundreds of millions of pounds. How far does this have to go before it is stopped?
Wednesday, 6 November 2013
Fireworks
I'm currently following Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson at the Old Bailey, fascinating, there is soooo much to come out!
However, it was Guy Fawkes' Night last night, a traditional night of celebration when we let off fireworks and light bonfires. It commemorates an attempt in 1605 to blow up our houses of parliament when our King was addressing it.
It is a somewhat ambiguous celebration. Originally the celebration was ordered to celebrate the escape of the King from assassination but over time Guy has attracted more and more sympathy and many modern English people see the festivities as an anarchist celebration that someone had the balls to have a go at our rulers.
Of course, if we were to try this today we would naturally get into trouble, but sometimes it is worth considering tweaking the political nose a bit!
However, it was Guy Fawkes' Night last night, a traditional night of celebration when we let off fireworks and light bonfires. It commemorates an attempt in 1605 to blow up our houses of parliament when our King was addressing it.
It is a somewhat ambiguous celebration. Originally the celebration was ordered to celebrate the escape of the King from assassination but over time Guy has attracted more and more sympathy and many modern English people see the festivities as an anarchist celebration that someone had the balls to have a go at our rulers.
Of course, if we were to try this today we would naturally get into trouble, but sometimes it is worth considering tweaking the political nose a bit!
Monday, 4 November 2013
More reasons to ignore inflation
I have argued that inflation is a highly misleading variable, and should be dropped from macroeconomic analysis. To replace it, we would be better off looking at variables such as NGDP growth and nominal hourly wage rates. A paper by Coibion and Gorodnichenko illustrates the problems with using inflation (although they reach very different conclusions.) The paper starts off with a quote from Bob Hall:
“Prior to the recent deep worldwide recession, macroeconomists of all schools took a negative relation between slack and declining inflation as an axiom. Few seem to have awakened to the recent experience as a contradiction to the axiom.” Bob Hall [2013]
Not my school!! In my book on the Great Depression [which my publisher seems determined shall never see the light of day] I argue that the standard model is wrong, slack does not cause disinflation. For instance, prices rose sharply after March 1933, despite the greatest level of slack in US history. Rather falling NGDP causes slack, and is often associated with falling inflation.
Here is what they discovered about inflation expectations:
Specifically, we show that an expectations-augmented Phillips curve, using household inflation expectations as measured by the Michigan Survey of Consumers, can account for the absence of strong disinflationary pressures since 2009. The primary reason for the success of a household inflation expectation-augmented Phillips curve is that household inflation expectations experienced a sharp rise starting in 2009, going from a low of 2.5% to around 4% in 2013, whereas other measures of inflation expectations such as those from financial markets or professional forecasters have hovered in the close neighbourhood of 2% over the same period.
The public’s confusion was due to the fact that they focused on price increases from the supply-side, i.e. those that reduce living standards, not the demand-side:
“Prior to the recent deep worldwide recession, macroeconomists of all schools took a negative relation between slack and declining inflation as an axiom. Few seem to have awakened to the recent experience as a contradiction to the axiom.” Bob Hall [2013]
Not my school!! In my book on the Great Depression [which my publisher seems determined shall never see the light of day] I argue that the standard model is wrong, slack does not cause disinflation. For instance, prices rose sharply after March 1933, despite the greatest level of slack in US history. Rather falling NGDP causes slack, and is often associated with falling inflation.
Here is what they discovered about inflation expectations:
Specifically, we show that an expectations-augmented Phillips curve, using household inflation expectations as measured by the Michigan Survey of Consumers, can account for the absence of strong disinflationary pressures since 2009. The primary reason for the success of a household inflation expectation-augmented Phillips curve is that household inflation expectations experienced a sharp rise starting in 2009, going from a low of 2.5% to around 4% in 2013, whereas other measures of inflation expectations such as those from financial markets or professional forecasters have hovered in the close neighbourhood of 2% over the same period.
The public’s confusion was due to the fact that they focused on price increases from the supply-side, i.e. those that reduce living standards, not the demand-side:
Friday, 1 November 2013
The NHS just don't get it
Details have now been released that managers have been made redundant, given huge payments [millions of pounds] and then rehired at a later stage.
The people reporting this are saying that nothing illegal has taken place, how is that right?
In one instance it was a husband & wife team that were both laid off & paid off and then rehired. This is a joke!
Nothing will get done, it will just be swept under the carpet again, I would love to be sacked, given a huge cash amount and then rehired...
Why don't more people complain?
The people reporting this are saying that nothing illegal has taken place, how is that right?
In one instance it was a husband & wife team that were both laid off & paid off and then rehired. This is a joke!
Nothing will get done, it will just be swept under the carpet again, I would love to be sacked, given a huge cash amount and then rehired...
Why don't more people complain?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)