Category Archives: Anchor Opinion

+++ M.P.O. (BBG) Bitcoin Newbies Are Getting Crushed as Old Timers Pledge to HODL

M.P.O.

Dear All

I have written quite a few Personal Opinions on this “thing” the Bitcoin, all of them warning people of the dangers.

I have even compared it to tulip mania of the XVII century in the Low Countries.

This site has also published dozens of articles warning on the dangers incurred by investing in this “thing”.

In all fairness I don’t know what more could I have done.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

Please See:

+++ P.O. Bitcoin price chart

«P.O.

   Bitcoin price chart

…47.3% down from it´s peak…

…I don’t know if this is the end of this idiocy or not…

…But one thing I think I know…

…When everybody around you starts talking about something that has gone up a     lot,gold, stocks,or anything for that matter,the time is to get out…

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira»

+++ O.P. (JN) Warren Buffett acredita que as criptomoedas “não vão acabar bem”

«O.P.

Eu subscrevo e concordo integralmente com o Senhor Warren Buffett.

FCMP

(JN) O famoso CEO da Berkshire Hathaway admite que nunca vai investir em algo sobre o qual nada sabe.

Warren Buffett, chairman e CEO da Berkshire Hathaway, acredita que o entusiasmo em torno da bitcoin e de outras criptomoedas não vai ter um bom desfecho. Em entrevista à CNBC, o conhecido “guru” dos mercados, admitiu que nunca investirá em moedas digitais.

“No que respeita às criptomoedas, em termos gerais, posso dizer, quase com certeza, que não vão acabar bem”, afirmou Buffett. “Quando vai acontecer, ou como, não sei”.

“Tenho problemas suficientes com coisas sobre as quais penso saber qualquer coisa”, acrescentou. “Porque é que havia de ter uma posição curta ou longa numa coisa sobre a qual nada sei?”

Os comentários de Buffett surgem um dia depois de o CEO do JPMorgan ter admitido estar arrependido  de ter dito que a bitcoin é uma fraude.

“A ‘blockchain’ é real. Podemos ter cripto ienes e dólares e coisas assim”, afirmou Dimon, em entrevista à Fox Business. “A questão da bitcoin, para mim, sempre teve a ver com o que os governos vão fazer, à medida que se torna uma coisa realmente grande. Só tenho uma opinião diferente das outras pessoas. E não tenho muito interesse no assunto”.

A palavra “fraude” foi usada pelo CEO do JPMorgan, em Setembro, para descrever a moeda criada por Satoshi Nakamoto, que disparou mais de 1.400% no ano passado.

Esta quarta-feira, a bitcoin está a descer 4,25% para 13.936,05 dólares, elevando para quase 17% a desvalorização acumulada nas últimas três sessões.»

P.O. (BBG) Bitcoin Drops Toward $13,000, Down More Than 30% From Record

«P.O.

I will have to check the averages ( and i can’t find a decent chart), but as i suspected the end of this idiocy seems to be in sight.

I took a taxi a few days ago that asked me what was my opinion on the Bitcoin…

A sure sign the bubble was about to burst…

Francisco ( Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(Bloomberg) — Bitcoin slides 15% to $13,123.13 as of 11:22 a.m. in Hong Kong on Friday, extending its drop from a Dec. 18 intraday peak to 33%.
 * Digital currency is heading for fourth straight daily decline
 * READ: Bitcoin Trust Plunges as Cryptocurrency Slides Below
 $16,000»

+++ O.P. (JN) Futuros de bitcoin estrearam este domingo

«O.P.

Como diriam os Anglo Saxónicos “I am afraid” (receio) que isto seja mais uma imbecilidade e das grandes…

A saber:

O Bitcoin não representa nada.

E é uma bolha especulativa de grandes dimensões, com finalidades mais que obscuras…

Ora a primeira grande bolha especulativa conhecida foi a dos bolbos de tulipas no século XVII nos Países Baixos.

In Wikipédia:

«Em 1630 surgiram contratos de futuros para negociar os bolbos das tulipas mesmo antes mesmo antes da colheita.

 Um bulbo de tulipa passou a ser vendido pelo preço equivalente a 24 toneladas de trigo. Por volta de 1635, a venda de 40 bulbos por 100.000 florins foi um recorde. Para efeito de comparação, uma tonelada de manteiga custava algo em torno de 100 florins e oito porcos graúdos custavam 240 florins.[5] O recorde foi a venda de um dos mais famosos bulbos, o Semper Augustus, por 6.000 florins, em Haarlem.

Em fevereiro de 1637, os comerciantes de tulipas não conseguiam mais inflacionar os preços de seus bulbos e então começaram a vendê-los. A bolsa de valores estourou. Começou-se a suspeitar que a demanda por tulipas não duraria e isso propagou o pânico no mercado. Alguns deixaram de segurar contratos para compra de tulipas, estabelecidos a preços que agora eram dez vezes maiores que os preços de mercado; outros acharam-se na posse de bulbos cujo preço era muito inferior ao que haviam pago. Consequentemente, milhares de holandeses, incluindo executivos e membros da alta sociedade, ruíram financeiramente.

Tentativas de resolver a situação fracassaram. Os juízes consideraram os débitos como contratados através de especulação e portanto, sem corroboração legal. Assim, as pessoas permaneceram abarrotadas de bulbos comprados antes da quebra, já que nenhuma Corte determinaria a execução do pagamento desses contratos.»

Portanto é só fazer o paralelo.

Quanto o preço não subir mais, todos os detentores de Bitcoins vão querer se desfazer deles e esta bolha vai rebentar como todas as outras rebentaram.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(JN) A compra e venda de contratos de futuros relacionados com a criptomoeda deu o pontapé de saída na Cboe. Na semana que vem, é a vez do CME Group disponibilizar um serviço semelhante.

A negociação de futuros associados à criptomoeda bitcoin, que arrancou este domingo, 10 de Dezembro, através da Cboe Global Markets, ficou marcada por uma forte subida no arranque, influenciando igualmente a cotação da divisa electrónica no mercado.

Nos primeiros minutos de negociação, os futuros que começaram a negociar nos 15.000 dólares, atingiram os 16.660 dólares, segundo dados da Bloomberg, tendo sido movimentados menos de 120 contratos com prazo em Janeiro nos primeiros sete minutos de transacção. Ao fim de uma hora eram pouco mais de 680.

A negociação dos futuros levou a cotação da bitcoin também a uma forte subida por volta das 23:00 – hora de início da transacção daqueles derivados – para próximo dos 16.000 dólares (15.905 dólares). Recua agora 2,68% para 15.224,650 dólares.

A Cboe antecipou-se à CME Group na estreia deste tipo de produtos – esta bolsa iniciará um serviço semelhante a 18 de Dezembro – em que será poderá ser possível apostar em subidas ou descidas desta moeda, no âmbito de contratos de compra e venda com preços e datas pré-estabelecidos.

Além da Cboe e da CME Group, também a Cantor Fitzgerald LP obteve aprovação para negociar um outro instrumento financeiro associado à bitcoin, neste caso opções binárias. A garantia que estas instituições deram à U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) que os produtos em causa cumprem com o previsto na lei – auto certificação -, viabilizou o início da sua transacção em mercado.

Apesar de esta auto certificação permitir algum controlo sobre a divisa – que é, na sua génese, avessa a qualquer tipo de controlo oficial e centralização -, a Bloomberg conta que a Futures Industry Association avisou para o facto de os contratos de futuros terem sido viabilizados apressadamente, sem se analisarem devidamente os riscos que envolvem.

“A subida acentuada a que assistimos na bitcoin nas últimas semanas foi provavelmente ditada pelo optimismo anterior ao lançamento dos futuros. O mercado vai abrir-se a muitas pessoas que não investem actualmente em bitcoin,” afirmou Randy Frederick, vice-presidente da área de trading e derivados da Charles Schwab à Reuters.»

(Bloomberg) — For Bitcoin investors, these are the times
that try one’s soul.
After surging to almost $20,000 in December following the
introduction of regulated futures contracts in the U.S., the
world’s largest cryptocurrency has lost more than half its
value, plummeting to as low as $7,614 on Friday.
Particularly hard hit are those who got swept up in the
mania just before what skeptics ranging from Jamie Dimon to
Nouriel Roubini have labeled as one of the biggest asset bubbles
in history began showing signs of deflating. Selling by “weak
hands,” as latecomers are sometimes called in the crypto world,
contrasts with the view of early advocates pledging to HODL —
one frenzied trader’s entreaty to hold onto the tokens during an
earlier rout that has become the mantra of Bitcoin purists.
Bitcoin’s rise in mainstream consciousness was brought on
in part by retail investors’ fear of missing out after viewing
the approval of futures as an endorsement of the establishment.
As more novice investors jumped in, Bitcoin shot above $10,000,
then $15,000, then as high as $20,000 on some exchanges, in a
span of only a few weeks.
Some of Bitcoin’s biggest backers even warned the euphoria
had gotten out of hand. Billionaire Mike Novogratz, who shelved
his plans to open a $500 million cryptocurrency hedge fund and
instead wants to build a crypto merchant bank, warned that
Bitcoin would fall to as low as $8,000. Thomas Lee of Fundstrat
said the cryptocurrency would slide to as low as $9,000 before
shooting back up.
Recent hacks and tightening regulation “has weighed on
confidence,” Lee said in a telephone interview Friday.
“Investors are staying on the sidelines until there’s some
visibility, but nothing fundamental has changed. It’s healthy;
you need drawbacks sometimes as nothing goes up in a straight
line.”
Those highs helped increase the scrutiny regulators as the
total market capitalization climbed to more than $800 billion at
one point in January. A steady steam of headlines since about
officials cracking down on the market sparked jitters and caused
those same retail traders who got in at the highs, to panic
sell, hoping to avoid even greater losses.
But the hordes of people wanting to trade crypto, which
repeatedly crashed San Francisco-based exchange Coinbase Inc.
when the market was rallying, are still there. More than one
million people have signed up for “early access” to the
brokerage app Robinhood Financial’s cryptocurrency section since
it said it would offer no-cost trading in digital coins last
week.
Charles Hayter of research website CryptoCompare sees good
news on the horizon, as Bitcoin developers are making
breakthroughs in technology that will help the network process
transactions faster. Also, Hayter said an emerging regulatory
framework and investor protections will be positive for
cryptocurrencies in the long term.
Meanwhile, many investors who got it earlier aren’t
budging. Bitcoin was worth about $1,000 at the beginning of last
year and about $450 at the start of 2016, so those who bought
then are shrugging off these losses — they’re still up more
than 600 percent.
“It’s just early year market blues,” said  David Mondrus, a
long-time crypto enthusiast and chief executive of Trive, a
blockchain-based research platform. “In 12 months we won’t even
remember it.”
For more Bitcoin coverage:
Bitcoin Whipsaws Investors as Bubble Shows Signs of Bursting
Roubini Says Bitcoin Is the ‘Biggest Bubble in Human History’
Long Blockchain Backs Off Bitcoin Mining as Cryptocurrency Falls
Big Investors Circle Telegram Offering as Crypto Insiders Pass
To the World, They’re Crypto Bros. To Each Other, a Brotherhood

+++ V.V.I A.O. (BBG) Trump Weighs Breaking Up Wall Street Banks, Raising U.S. Gas Tax

Anchor Opinion

Here is something that I have always said!

Always since Glass-Steagall Act a.k.a, The Banking Act of 1933, was declared by President Bill Clinton “no longer appropriate” in November 1999, even if by that date it had already been so amputated, that it was already virtually deal.

The more important amputation was done in 1998 when Citibank was permitted to affiliate with the Salami Brothers.

I beg your pardon …Salomon Smith Barney is the correct name, but all of us in the markets called them the Salami Brothers…

The culmination of this amputation was in 1999 with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms.

Please visit Wikipedia Glass-Steagall legislation

The repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act was the Mother of All Evils in banking, and created the environment for the numerous banking scandals and crises that followed.

By combining conventional banking, which should be a very conservative and dull business,and with very tight rules, with investment banking which is precisely the opposite, highly leveraged,looking for a maximum return, taking a lot of risk on the bank’s book, and using the client’s funds for that, was a recipe for disaster.

Investment banking has to do with fear and greed.

It is precisely the opposite of what commercial banking should be.

I have written on this issue extensively for many years.

In this measure, of reinstating a modern version of the Glass-Steagall Act,  President Trump has my unconditional,total,institucional,and public support.

Better late than never!

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(Bloomberg) — President Donald Trump said he’s actively considering a breakup of giant Wall Street banks, giving a push to efforts to revive a Depression-era law separating consumer and investment banking.

“I’m looking at that right now,” Trump said of breaking up banks in a 30-minute Oval Office interview with Bloomberg News. “There’s some people that want to go back to the old system, right? So we’re going to look at that.”

Trump speaks during a Bloomberg interview in the Oval Office on May 1.

Trump also said he’s open to increasing the U.S. gas tax to fund infrastructure development, in a further sign that policies unpopular with the Republican establishment are under consideration in the White House. He described higher gas taxes as acceptable to truckers — “I have one friend who’s a big trucker,” he said — as long as the proceeds are dedicated to improving U.S. highways.

In other news, Trump said he’d be willing to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, against the recommendations of his political advisers, to avert a military confrontation with the U.S. adversary. He also said that a Republican replacement for the Affordable Care Act would protect Americans with pre-existing conditions at least as well as Obamacare.

Glass-Steagall

During the presidential campaign, Trump called for a “21st century” version of the 1933 Glass-Steagall law that required the separation of consumer and investment banking. The 2016 Republican party platform also backed restoring the legal barrier, which was repealed in 1999 under a financial deregulation signed by then-President Bill Clinton.

A handful of lawmakers blame the repeal for contributing to the 2008 financial crisis, an argument that Wall Street flatly rejects. Trump couldn’t unilaterally restore the law; Congress would have to pass a new version.

Trump officials, including Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn, have offered support for bringing back some version of Glass-Steagall, though they’ve offered scant details on an updated approach. Both Mnuchin and Cohn are former bankers who worked for Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

The KBW Bank Index of 24 major U.S. lenders had climbed as much as 1.2 percent before Trump’s comment, before dropping about 1 percentage point. It soon recovered most of that, and was up 0.9 percent as of 1:07 p.m. in New York. Firms including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Bank of America Corp., the nation’s two largest banks, were among companies that swooned.

The Glass-Steagall law essentially split banking into two categories: deposit-taking companies backed by taxpayers that primarily made loans to businesses and consumers, and investment banks and insurers that trade and underwrite securities and create or focus on other complex instruments. Severing those businesses would prevent Americans’ nest eggs from flowing into more volatile capital markets, Congress reasoned at the time.

Economic Stimulus

Trump said the tax cuts he’s seeking would, along with renegotiated trade agreements, serve as badly needed stimulus for the economy.

The president called first-quarter economic growth, which the Commerce Department said declined to a 0.7 percent annual rate, “really bad.”

Although he’s taken credit for monthly job growth figures and stock market gains since entering office on Jan. 20, Trump said he’s not responsible for the GDP number.

“That’s really a left over from — in all fairness, I just got here,” he said. “So you’re growing at 1 percent or less, so we need a stimulus.”

Trump touched on a host of foreign and domestic issues during the interview.

‘Honored to Do It’

Addressing the most urgent foreign policy and national security issue before him, Trump said he’d be willing to meet with North Korean leader Kim “under the right circumstances” if it would result in defusing tension on the Korean Peninsula.

“If it would be appropriate for me to meet with him, I would absolutely, I would be honored to do it,” Trump said.

“Most political people would never say that,” he said, “but I’m telling you under the right circumstances I would meet with him.”

No U.S. president has had direct contact with the North Korean regime and any contacts between the two nations have been limited since the signing of an armistice that halted the Korean War in 1953. Kim has never met with a foreign leader since taking charge after his father’s death in 2011 and hasn’t left his isolated country.

Trump also defended his White House invitation to Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who’s come under criticism from human rights groups for a brutal crackdown on the drug trade.

“The Philippines is very important to me strategically and militarily,” Trump said. “He’s been very, very tough on that drug problem but he has a massive drug problem.”

Anchor Opinion (BBG) Banks Likely to Lose Passporting With Brexit,U.K. Off Says

Anchor Opinion

Trying not to lose perspective, the point is that , by a large majority the UK voters think that immigration issues are far more important than jobs.

I don’t think at all it’s going to be the case, but,rightly or wrongly,and given the choice between not controlling immigration or “dumping” the City, the UK voters would chose “dumping” the City and controlling immigration by a large majority.

They fear that unrestricted immigration would trigger an irreversible end of the UK as they know it.

And you know what…?

I Francisco think they are right.

One thing is a Country to absorb and integrate a controlled number of immigrants each year.

Another thing is a Country being “flooded” by an immense number of immigrants, and among which, there are large numbers that do not want to be integrated at all.

The UK voters are defending their Queen and Country and their way of Life.

Nothing wrong with that, on the contrary, in my opinion.

I would do the same.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

Post Scriptum: In Switzerland the voters have decided in a referendum the same way.

(BBG) Global banks will probably lose their current legal rights to provide services in the European Union after Brexit, the U.K.’s trade minister said in the most detailed outlineyet of the government’s thinking.

Passporting, which allows London-based lenders and insurance companies to sell their services anywhere in the single market, is unlikely to continue after the U.K. leaves the 28-nation bloc, Mark Garnier said in an interview. He added that an alternative system that’s been floated, known as equivalence, was probably not going to be “good enough” for banks.

Mark Garnier
Mark Garnier
Photographer: Jason Alden/Bloomberg

Garnier, who is also government envoy for financial services, instead touted a better version of equivalence that might work well for London-based banks. The drawback is that Britain may have to accept all future EU regulations as they are handed down from Brussels, he said. Resentment toward EU bureaucracy and a backlash against immigration were drivers behind the June referendum.

“If we can create a special hybrid version of that, with a better version of equivalence or a different version of passporting, then that’s what we will try to achieve,” Garnier said by phone. “What we are not trying to do is fit into an existing box. We are trying to create a new model.”

Asked if this meant passporting was likely to end but would hopefully be replaced with something else, he said: “Exactly.”

 

As the government gears up for tough talks with the EU, it’s also facing pressure at home. The opposition Labour Party will push for full access to the single market and resist what it calls a “Bankers’ Brexit,” the chief voice for economic policy, John McDonnell, will say on Thursday.

McDonnell, who shadows the position of Chancellor of the Exchequer, says the government is favoring financial industries over the needs of manufacturers and small businesses, according to prepared remarks released by his office ahead of a speech in London. The Tories “want to turn Britain into a Singapore of the North Atlantic,” McDonnell will say.

At stake is conserving a key motor of the British economy that contributes about 10 percent of gross domestic product. Finance executives have threatened to move staff out of the U.K. if Prime Minister Theresa May’s team of Brexit negotiators doesn’t secure a deal allowing them to serve European clients from London.

Global investment banks such as JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley have the most to lose as they operate European business out of London and don’t have the same links to the continent as local lenders such as Societe Generale SA and Deutsche Bank AG. The British Bankers’ Association warned that leading lenders are poised to press “the relocate button” in early 2017.

Garnier stressed that no “hard and fast” plans had been made on what form of deal would be made. With negotiations due to begin before the end of March, pressure has been mounting for the government to provide more clarity, particularly to banks, to avoid a possible exodus of business from the City of London.

The government’s stock response has been that it does not intend to provide a running commentary on its thinking though there has been a charm offensive to improve communication and reassure the finance world that its interests won’t be ignored.

Garnier elaborated on why the system known as equivalence, whereby London-based banks could keep operating in the single market if British and EU financial rules are compatible, “wouldn’t necessarily work.” Many international banks, he said, would regard this equivalence with suspicion because the status can be withdrawn at 30-days notice.

“It is entirely possible that we will just have to adopt the rules of the EU as they come down with regards to financial regulation,” he said. A new arrangement along these lines would depend, he added, on creating “the right dialogue” to craft a system that works for both the U.K. and the EU.

Inflation Woes

Apart from preserving London as a financial hub, another consideration for the government is the pound’s slump since the Brexit vote. While ministers have argued it is a boost for exporters, others have highlighted the impact it could have on consumers at home by driving up prices. Garnier agrees that inflation is “just inevitable.”

A row broke out earlier this month when Tesco, the country’s largest supermarket, halted online sales of Marmite, after the maker of the savory spread, Unilever, said they wanted to increase the price due to the fall in the value of sterling.

“We have had Marmageddon,” Garnier said. “Consumers are going to start to see rising prices and there’s nothing we can do about that. That was a well-predicted effect of Brexit. The point was very clearly made by everybody: Brexit could easily result in a slump in the value of sterling. That has transpired.”

Anchor Opinion – On Brexit and the European Union

Anchor Opinion

The European Economic Community was the twentieth century’s best idea.

The then EEC morphed into the European Union , which was based in the concept of relinquishing a bit of sovereignty for the common good.

All well until then.

But then things started to change when France forced Germany into the Euro, and Germany accepted it with it’s own designed rules, which gave way to the Maastricht Treaties and the ones that followed suit.

And the current form of the European Union took form, and it isn’t pretty nor fair.

Nor viable in the long run, with the current rules, in my opinion.

The Union is anything but fair.

It is governed by unelected officials and bureaucrats, that in practical terms are accountable to no one, and that have a complete diplomatic immunity from prosecution, something that does not exist in any democratic country in the World.

The EU completely lost the notion of reality and above all the notion of common sense.

I quote Mr David Schrieberg in the prestigious US magazine Forbes:

«What happened?

In short, European Union leaders and officials failed on critical fronts that now come home to roost:

They created a bureaucracy that lost touch with its constituencies and constituents, and created virtual lifetime sinecures for its bureaucrats.

They legislated a seemingly infinite web of regulations that has bred resentment among many of the 508 million inhabitants even as on balance they have made life better across the 28 member states.

They grew too fast, incorporating countries that weren’t yet ready to meet the union’s standards and a union population that wasn’t prepared to accept them all – even as they needed their lower-cost labor across open borders.»

I will not take sides in the UK Referendum.

But regardless of it’s outcome, it has already served one purpose:

To put in front of every one’s eyes the unfairness and wrongdoings of the EU, and that have blinded most of us from seing it’s positive achievements.

In conclusion:

If the EU wants to survive , it needs an urgent overall from top to bottom.

Including the creation of an Upper House, a Senate, with an equal number of Senators for each Country, big or small, like in the US.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

+++ A.O./ V.V.I. (FT) Editorial: The productivity puzzle that baffles the world’s economies

Anchor Opinion  

This productivity puzzle is extremely important, because a halt in productivity increases will cause voters in various Western Countries to became more intolerant and vote in Political Parties that embrasse xenophobia.

The World is already dangerous, and will become much more dangerous.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(FT) Slowing output per hour is worrying but little understood.

Global economy
© Dreamstime

There can be few problems that are so important and yet command so little consensus about their source and solution as the general slide in productivity growth across the world’s economies.

The Conference Board, a research organisation, said last week that labour productivity as measured by output per hour was likely to fall in the US for the first time in more than three decades. America is not alone; across the developed world and, more recently, the emerging markets, productivity has been slowing for a decade or more.

The implications are stark. A weak expansion in productivity will only put more downward pressure on real wage growth, which has already been anaemic in many advanced economies. To the extent that stagnant real wages feed economic populism, it will endanger political stability and a respect for liberal values even in established democracies. It will also threaten the solvency of pension schemes, which rely on future tax revenues and profits.

Yet while most economists concur that slowing productivity is one of the most serious problems in their field today, there is little agreement on the cause and still less on the right response. Only one thing seems obvious: the productivity slowdown has hit such disparate economies that a single global solution is unlikely to have much effect. Policymakers must experiment and be eclectic in their response.

Sometimes, there is a common international problem that has a clear solution, even if it has to be applied country-by-country. Inflation in many countries was out of control in the late 1970s and early 1980s; it needed tighter monetary policy to drive it out of the system. Advanced economies exited the early 1990s recession with large structural deficits; judicious efforts to reduce those deficits were appropriate.

But weak productivity is not one of those. For example, the theory that regulations are stifling innovation seems odd given that the slowdown has affected relatively liberalised economies like the US as well as more regulated economies in Europe and the emerging markets. A wholesale tossing-out of protections for workers and rules on health and safety seems unlikely to jump-start global growth.

It is possible, though, to look at the weakness of each economy, or type thereof, and come up with particular solutions. In mature economies with weak investment, such as the US, UK or Germany, very low long-term interest rates justify increased public spending on infrastructure both to boost demand directly and productive capacity. In some advanced economies, such as Italy, where there is less scope to go on a borrowing spree, obvious gains are to be made in microeconomic improvements such as reforming the sclerotic judiciary, an important part of Prime Minister Matteo Renzi’s plans.

And in many emerging markets, there are gains to be made from more traditional deregulatory reform, together with switching money from wasteful subsidies on fuel or other goods to education and training.

The productivity slowdown is far from being a clear-cut problem with obvious solutions. Indeed, some suggest the real picture is better than official data show, because they under-record gross domestic product in service-based economies where output is harder to measure.

Yet there are problems in individual countries, or groups of them, that seem clear enough to make suggestions about changes in policy. The inability of modern economies to generate more from the same labour supply may not be a fast-moving crisis but it is a problem that needs urgent and sustained attention.hnnnjjkkoooiyhtmçç

+++ A.O./V.V.I. (FT) Germany to push for progress towards European army

Anchor Opinion

We all know were this ludicrous idea leads us to…

As far as I am concerned…

Not in a thousand years!

Enough is enough!

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira


(FT) Germany is to push for progress towards a European army by advocating a joint headquarters and shared military assets, according to defence plans that could ricochet into Britain’s EU referendum campaign.

Although Berlin has long paid lip-service to forming a “European defence union”, the white paper is one of the most significant for Germany in recent years and may be seized by anti-integration Brexit campaigners as a sign where the bloc is heading.

Initially scheduled to emerge shortly before the June 23 referendum vote but now probably delayed to July, the draft paper seen by the Financial Times outlines steps to gradually co-ordinate Europe’s patchwork of national militaries and embark on permanent co-operation under common structures.

In this and other areas, its tone reflects Germany’s growing clout and confidence in pursuing a foreign policy backed by elements of hard power. Initiatives range from strengthening cyberwarfare abilities to contentious proposals to relax the postwar restrictions on army operations within Germany.

“German security policy has relevance — also far beyond our country,” the paper states. “Germany is willing to join early, decisively and substantially as a driving force in international debates … to take responsibility and assume leadership”.

Jan Techau, a former defence official at Carnegie Europe, said: “This is the time of a new Germany. This is probably the first time a German defence white paper is something like important.”

At the European level, the paper calls for “the use of all possibilities” available under EU treaties to establish deep co-operation between willing member states, create a joint civil-military headquarters for EU operations, a council of defence ministers, and better co-ordinate the production and sharing of military equipment.

“The more we Europeans are ready to take on a greater share of the common burden and the more our American partner is prepared to go along the road of common decision-making, the further the transatlantic security partnership will develop greater intensity and richer results,” the paper states.

The creation of a European army is a long way off, but it is a strategic necessity to implement important steps to pave the way towards it now

Roderich Kiesewetter, Bundestag member

Resistance to serious defence integration is well entrenched in many EU states and has hobbled efforts to make meaningful progress in common defence. Co-ordinated hard military power in Europe remains largely the preserve of Nato.

However, about 37 EU security missions have been launched since 2003, including recent operations in Mali and against piracy. If vigorously pursued in Brussels, Germany’s call for joint civil military headquarters would be an important step in enhancing the bloc’s capabilities and ambitions.

“The creation of a European army is a long way off, but it is a strategic necessity to implement important steps to pave the way towards it now,” wrote Roderich Kiesewetter, a Bundestag foreign affairs committee member, in a recent paper.

Berlin is aware that its call for more European defence — long a bugbear of British Eurosceptics — could inadvertently resonate in the UK referendum campaign. Although publication was first expected in early June, this has been delayed to July, according to people familiar with the process.

Their every instinct is to move towards European defence co-operation. The problem is that while they are unwilling to spend money, it is a dangerous fantasy that diverts money away from Nato

Liam Fox, former UK defence secretary and Brexit supporter

Liam Fox, former UK defence secretary and Brexit supporter, said that “many in the European project see Nato as an impediment to ever closer union”.

Mr Fox added: “Their every instinct is to move towards European defence co-operation. The problem is that while they are unwilling to spend money, it is a dangerous fantasy that diverts money away from Nato.”

The paper says that the EU’s defence industry is “organised nationally and seriously fragmented”, raising costs, handicapping it in international competition and making it difficult for national militaries to operate together.

“It is therefore necessary that military capabilities are jointly planned, developed, managed, procured and deployed to raise the interoperability of Europe’s defence forces and to further improve Europe’s capacity to act,” the paper states.

However it adds this should not impinge Germany’s “own technological sovereignty” over crucial technologies. It comes against the backdrop of a series of embarrassing equipment failures in recent years when Germany deployed its military overseas.

The white paper also lands in the middle of the growing debate in Germany about whether the military should be deployed domestically in the event of terrorist attacks and other threats to law and order.

While German troops already assist in civil emergencies, such as floods, and have helped in the refugee crisis, deployments to deal with violence or threats of violence have long been banned for fear of evoking Nazi-era practices. The draft proposes ending that ban given “the character and dynamic of current and future security-political threats”.ddfbtynnmjui

+++ A.O./V.I. (BBG) ECB Deep Freeze on 500-Euro Note Risks German Cold Shoulder

Anchor Opinion

High value currency denominations have been a fundamental freedom of the individuals against state oppression around the World, and in all times.

And more so today, in a World in which everything is computerized.

To phase out large bank notes, is an invitation, for rogue states around the World, to oppress their citizens, and  foreign residents.

And not only rogue states…

It’s Orwell !

I Francisco say no to this idea.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(BBG) When European Central Bank policy makers discuss the fate of the 500-euro note this week, they may want to consider the case of Fabio Rizzi.

After the local politician in the Italian region of Lombardy was arrested on corruption charges in February, police found more than 17,000 euros ($19,500) including 500- and 200-euro bank notes stashed in his home, according to the arrest warrant. Some of the cash had been hidden in Rizzi’s freezer, press reports confirmed by his lawyer Monica Alberti said.

While holding large amounts of cash is itself not a crime and Rizzi has not yet been convicted of one, the case strengthens the image already present in policy circles that large-denomination notes areused only by those up to no good. The European Central Bank may decide as soon as Wednesday to start phasing the 500 out, even though it faces suspicion in German-speaking countries that by doing so officials are trying to abolish cash altogether.

“The whole debate has a certain taste to it. The argument that it is used in the shadow economy won’t cut it, as you can easily find substitutes,” said Stefan Schneider, chief international economist at Deutsche Bank AG in Frankfurt. “And in Germany, at a time when trust in the ECB is at record lows, it will certainly be seen as a further step in the direction of the removal of cash.”

Reasons for the unease over changes to the composition of cash in Germany, Austria and Luxembourg range from a simple preference for an anonymous payment method to the fear that if cash is abolished altogether, central bankers can drive interest rates on bank deposits further below zero. Without adequate denominations of physical money, it’s more difficult for the public to withdraw their savings in defense.

Bin Laden

That said, most Europeans would hardly notice if the bank note were to disappear. The 500 euro is rarely used in daily transactions; in Spain it has even been nicknamed “Bin Laden” for its elusiveness. Europol’s director has called it the “currency of choice” for criminal and terrorist networks.

Bank tellers raise suspicious eyebrows when presented with one, as the transcript of a phone conversation contained in Rizzi’s arrest warrant testifies.

Cashing in 500-euro notes “is a mess,” an acquaintance complains to Rizzi according to the document. Bank clerks “complain about 200-euro notes. What do you do with the 500 euro big bills you have upstairs?”

Bank of Italy data show that 500-euro notes circulate in the country’s economy only infrequently. In 2015, almost 7.5 billion euros-worth of them were returned to the central bank by lenders, companies or individuals, while only 65 million euros were issued.

Social Consequences

The controversy over the Rizzi case “is just the umpteenth example of the risks attached to large notes,” according to Giuseppe Ascoli, partner at Rome-based tax advisory firm CMS. The 500-euro notes “are often used to finance terrorism, illegal activity and money laundering. This has also social consequences,” he said.

Rizzi’s lawyer Alberti declined to comment further on the case on behalf of her client.

ECB Executive Board member Benoit Coeure said in February that the central bank is “actively considering” whether to phase out the 500-euro bill, even as other officials look for stronger evidence from authorities that it actually abets crime. At the same time, officials are also considering the costs of such a move.

The current thinking at ECB headquarters in Frankfurt is that the easiest way to phase out the 500 would be to simply stop producing it, and let wear and tear do the rest, according to officials familiar with the matter.

Psychological Debate

This would also imply omitting the 500 from the new line of euro banknotes that is gradually being introduced by the ECB, one of the officials added, speaking under condition of anonymity as the debate isn’t public. An ECB spokesman confirmed that the matter is on the agenda for discussion at the May 4 non-monetary policy meeting.

The problem with this option is that it would require stepping up production for 50, 100, and 200 euro notes in relatively a short time, the person said, while banknote production schedules are usually set years in advance. By value, about 300 billion euros of the 1.1 trillion euros in cash currently in circulation is made up of 500-euro banknotes.

The total cost, including transportation, could be as high as 500 million to 600 million euros, Austrian central bank official Kurt Pribil said on Thursday.

Even so, the officials anticipate that there will be consensus among Governing Council members to abolish the 500-euro note, the people said, as the moral case for it trumps logistical and economical considerations.

For example, Bank of France Governor Francois Villeroy de Galhau is in favor of scrapping the note, according to a report in Les Echos published Monday.

At a time when only one in three Germans say they have trust in the ECB and its policies have come under direct attack from politicians, President Mario Draghi may need to communicate carefully the reasoning behind such a decision, or risk opening a new front with the public of the euro area’s largest economy. Clemens Fuest, head of Germany’s influential Ifo Institute, said in an interview on Bloomberg TV on Monday that there’s “no justification” for removing the 500 note.

“We risk running into a general debate about abolishing cash — that debate isn’t justified, but it’s there,” European Central Bank Governing Council member Ewald Nowotny said on Thursday. “I have learnt that central-bank policy must be 50 percent psychology. I believe that for those psychological reasons we should be very careful, and my personal view is that we shouldn’t aim for phasing out the 500-euro bill.”

+++ A.O./V.I. (BBG) Global Stocks Rally Sputters as Crude Slides, China Shares

Anchor Opinion

…Watch China…

…It is the most important thing to watch, in my opinion.

…If the Chinese markets collapse, the destruction of money will be of such proportions that it will cause major deflationary head winds around the globe.

…And of an unimaginable scale.

…I personally doubt, that if events would turn out that way, and let’s hope they don’t, that it would be possible to control events.

…Just think…

…If Japan has not been able to get rid of deflation for more years than I can    remember, how could deflationary head winds of a much greater scale be tamed?

   But China is not a democracy like Japan.
   Consensus decision-making is not exactly what is usual in China…
   So the government has more powers to control events.

   Anyway, let’s hope that nothing of this happens.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

Post Scriptum: As a suggestion please read the superb book by David Graeber
“Debt: The First 5000 Years”

(BBG) The global stocks rally stumbled as Chinese equities dropped by the most since February and oil sank toward $40 a barrel, while demand for haven assets lifted sovereign bonds.

The Stoxx Europe 600 Index failed to extend a three-month high and the Shanghai Composite Index fell more than 2 percent as the People’s Bank of China signaled a reduced appetite for monetary easing. Crude oil also weighed on equities after Kuwait workers said they would end a strike and Japanese government bond yields fell to records. BHP Billiton Ltd. and Rio Tinto Group paced miners higher after BHP cut its iron ore production forecast for its Australian operations, spurring gains in the material’s price.

Global equities have climbed more than 15 percent from this year’s low, spurred by signs of stabilization in China’s economy and oil prices, after a sliding yuan and tumbling crude costs drove a $7 trillion selloff in the first half of January. Wednesday’s pullback in Shanghai shares came after PBOC research bureau chief economist Ma Jun said late Tuesday that future policy operations, while observing the need to continue supporting growth, will pay attention to heading off macroeconomic risks. Also casting a chill on global financial markets was an end to aworker strike in Kuwait, which had propped up oil prices after major producers failed to agree to output curbs at weekend talks in Doha.

“It’s difficult to find a major positive trigger from here,” said Otto Waser, chief investment officer at R&A Research & Asset Management. “Central banks are done so we don’t expect anything positive from them anymore. Earnings trends are not positive enough in Europe to support a major positive market.”

The MSCI All-Country Index was little changed at 7:01 a.m. New York time after falling as much as 0.2 percent. West Texas Intermediate crude dropped 2 percent to $40.26 a barrel.

Turkey’s central bank to cut its overnight lending rate in line with economist forecasts. U.S. companies including Coca-Cola Co. and American Express Co. are releasing earnings on Wednesday. A U.K. jobs report Wednesday showed unemployment rose for the first time in seven months and pay-growth excluding bonuses was unchanged.

Stocks

The Stoxx 600 fell 0.1 percent with health care and retail companies posting the biggest losses. BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto added more than 2 percent.

Despite recent gains, the European gauge has still tumbled 16 percent since reaching a record a year ago, and optimism over European Central Bank stimulus has given way to skepticism about its ability to boost growth.

Investors are also awaiting the ECB’s next meeting on Thursday for clues about the path of monetary policy. While economists are virtually certain ECB President Mario Draghi won’t touch interest rates, recent history shows that increased stock volatility is still likely. Intraday swings for the Euro Stoxx 50 Index averaged 4.1 percent during the ECB President’s past four policy updates, or about double that for all meetings since 2010.

Futures on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index were little changed after the gauge closed above 2,100 for the first time since since Dec. 1. Of the benchmark’s 60 members to have reported first-quarter earnings by Tuesday, 77 percent have beaten profit estimates, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Intel Corp. dropped 2.4 percent in premarket trading after its first-quarter revenue and forecast for the next three months missedanalysts’ estimates. U.S. Bancorp slid 2 percent after its quarterly profit fell.

Benchmark share gauges fell across Asia’s developing economies and the MSCI Emerging Markets Index retreated from a five-month high. Japan’s Topix index closed up 0.2 percent, after earlier climbing as much as 1.3 percent. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. tumbled 15 percent, its biggest loss in more than a decade, after the company said it would brief media on “improper fuel economy” tests. It subsequently admitted to manipulating test data involving 625,000 vehicles in order to improve fuel-economy claims.

The Shanghai Composite Index posted its lowest close this month and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index was down 1.2 percent.

Currencies

The yen was little changed at 109.22 per dollar after strengthening as much as 0.4 percent following comments by Bank of Japan Governor Haruhiko Kuroda that monetary easing is not a promise of a weaker currency or stronger equities. Japanese exports dropped 6.8 percent from a year earlier in March, while imports declined 14.9 percent, data showed Wednesday.

The New Zealand dollar retreated from its strongest level since June. The kiwi weakened 0.6 percent to 70.04 U.S. cents after breaching the 70-cent mark on Tuesday for the first time since June.

The won rose as much as 0.7 percent to a five-month high, before closing 0.1 percent higher in Seoul. China’s yuan weakened for the first time in four days.

The MSCI Emerging Markets Currency Index rose 0.3 percent to the highest since July.
India’s rupee climbed 0.6 percent, the most in a month, after the nation’s trade deficit narrowed to a five-year low. Malaysia’s ringgit rose 0.6 percent.

Turkey’s lira rose 0.6 percent. Policy makers, who met for the first time under their new central bank chief, Murat Cetinkaya, cut the upper band of a three-pronged rate corridor by 50 basis points to 10 percent.

Commodities

West Texas Intermediate crude oil was lower after rising 3.3 percent on Tuesday amid a three-day labor strike that reduced Kuwait’s output by as much as 1.7 million barrels a day. The country is OPEC’s fourth-largest producer.

“The size of the disruption, had the strike persisted, would have been quite significant,” Ric Spooner, a chief market analyst at CMC Markets in Sydney, said by phone. “It took quite a lot of oil out of production.”

Silver gained as much as 1.8 percent, before trimming its advance to 0.4 percent. The metal surged 22 percent this year and entered a bull market on Tuesday after money managers last week increased their net-long positions by 30 percent to a record.

Iron ore futures traded on the Dalian Commodity Exchange climbed as much as 5.9 percent to the highest level since June 2015 on BHP Billiton’s production forecast cut. Rio de Janeiro-based Vale SA, the largest iron-ore miner, is expected to report record output for the first quarter on Wednesday.

Bonds

Treasuries rose as demand for the safest assets was fed by declines in stocks and oil. The yield on 10-year U.S. Treasuries fell one basis point to 1.77 percent. It may drop to a never-before-seen 1.25 percent in 2016 as investors seek alternatives to lower-yielding securities elsewhere in the world, according to Robert Tipp, the head of global bonds and foreign exchange for the fixed-income division of Prudential Financial Inc.

While the yield on 10-year Treasuries was less than half a percentage point from its record low reached in 2012, the securities offered a yield pick-up of 160 basis points over similar-maturity German bonds and about 188 basis points over Japanese government debt.

Japan’s 40-year bond yield fell to a record low, meaning all the nation’s sovereign bonds yield less than 0.3 percent, as investors rush for securities with positive income.

The cost of insuring corporate debt against default rose for the first time this week. The Markit iTraxx Europe Index of credit-default swaps on investment-grade companies climbed one basis point to 72 basis points. A measure of swaps on junk-rated businesses rose two basis points to 305 basis points. Both indexes remain near the lowest in about a month.

Malaysia is moving closer to selling global Islamic bonds. It may price the 10- and 30-year dollar notes at 150 and 165 basis points over U.S. Treasuries, according to a person familiar with the matter who isn’t authorized to speak publicly. Based on current market yields, that would suggest a coupon rate of 3.27 percent for the shorter-maturity notes and 4.23 percent for the longer-term debt.

+++ A.O./V.V.I. (BBG) Pound Declines as Cameron Hits Obstacles at ‘Brexit’ Summit

Anchor Opinion

The future of the EU is at stake here.

One should not think for a Nanosecond, that this issue concerns only the UK.

I have said this for years:

The EU , as it is, and with the current framework and rules, does not work, and self generates more and more crisis of different nature, as time goes by.

If the UK leaves the EU, the odds are, that several Members States will also leave, or try to leave, and the EU will implode.

There is, in my opinion, no way around it.

The EU is adverse to change, even if, in some cases, the rules are obviously wrong.

It’s best chance to change, and survive, is to accommodate the UK requests, and even go way further in reform.

But I am afraid  I am rather pessimistic on the EU being able to reform itself.

In my opinion, a Union cannot be built from bottom to top, which is the case of the EU.

When a wrong rule is approved, it is almost impossible to change it,  and it stays there doing harm to everybody.

Also there is no balance in the EU, between large Member States and smaller ones.

The EU should, in my opinion again, have an Upper House, a Senate, like in the US, with a equal number of Senators for every Member State, large, or small.

And elected on a uninominal basis.

And the “powers” of the Union versus the States should be clearly defined and not subject to change, unless by referendum across the Member States and with double approval.

One size does not fit all!

And the main  EU Officials should be elected , directly, by popular vote.

And the EU should have a constitutional framework of “Checks and Balances”, just like the US has.

And also the EU should have a Supreme Court, also like the US has.

And with the same rules.

Just copy !

With the obvious changes for Member States that are Kingdoms.

The persons who wrote the Constitution of The United States of America where very intelligent and smart.

They were brilliant !

Do not try to invent something better, because the odds are that it will not be possible.

Do us all a favor…

Just copy !

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

Here is a summary of the US Constitution:

 Summary of the US Constitution

Summary of the US Constitution ( 1 uscitizenpod.com)

The Preamble

The Preamble lists the reasons that the 13 original colonies separated from their mother country, and became an independent nation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, make good government & laws insure domestic Tranquility, peace in our homes provide for the common defense, national security promote the general Welfare, healthy communities and secure the Blessings of Liberty freedom to ourselves and our Posterity, family & friends do ordain and establish give authority
this Constitution the supreme law of the land for the United States of America.

The Seven Articles of the US Constitution

The Constitution is our plan for government. The Articles of the Constitution talk about the duties of the three main parts of government: the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch.

The articles also talk about the separate powers of the Federal and State government, and how to change the Constitution.

Article 1: Legislative Branch: the U.S. Congress makes the laws for the United States. Congress has two parts, called “Houses,” the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Article 2: Executive Branch: the President, Vice-President, Cabinet, and Departments under the Cabinet Secretaries carry out the laws made by Congress.

Article 3: Judicial Branch: the Supreme Court decides court cases according to US Constitution. The courts under the Supreme Court decide criminal and civil court cases according to the correct federal,state, and local laws.

Article 4: States’ powers: States have the power to make and carry out their own laws. State laws that are related to the people and problems of their area. States respect other states laws and work together with other states to fix regional problems.

Article 5: Amendments: The Constitution can be changed. New amendments can be added to the US Constitution with the approval by a two-thirds vote in each house of Congress (67, 281) and three-fourth vote by the states (38).

Article 6: Federal powers: The Constitution and federal laws are higher than state and local laws. All laws must agree with the US Constitution.

Article 7: Ratification: The Constitution was presented to George Washington and the men at the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787, Representatives from twelve out of the thirteen original states signed the Constitution. From September 1787 to July 1788, the states meet, talked about
and finally voted to approve the Constitution.

The Twenty-seven Amendments to the US Constitution

1st People have freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition the Government. 1791.

2nd People have the right to have a weapon to protect themselves. 1791.

3rd Soldiers cannot take or live in a person’s house. 1791.

4th The government cannot arrest a person or search their property unless there is “probable cause.” 1791.

5th The government must follow the law (due process) before punishing a person. 1791.

6th A person has the right to a fair and speedy trial by a jury. 1791.

7th A person has the right to a jury trial for civil cases. 1791.

8th The government cannot demand excessive bail or fines, or any cruel and unusual punishment. 1791.

9th The Constitution does not include all of the rights of the people and the states. 1791.

10th Any powers that the Constitution does not give to the federal government belong to the states. 1791.

11th Citizens cannot sue states in federal courts. (There are some exceptions). 1795.

12th The President and Vice President are elected on a party ticket. 1804.

13th Slavery is illegal in the United States. 1865.

14th Every person born in the USA is a citizen. An immigrant can become a naturalized citizen. 1868

15th All US male citizens have the right to vote. 1870.

16th Congress can tax income. 1913.

17th The people can elect US Senators. 1913.

18th Alcohol is illegal. (Prohibition). 1919.

19th All US female citizens have the right to vote. 1920.

20th The President is inaugurated in January. Congress begins to meet in January. 1933.

21st Alcohol is legal. Each state can make laws about making, selling, and drinking alcohol. 1933.

22nd The President cannot serve for more than two terms. 1951.

23rd The US Citizens in the District of Columbia have the right to vote for President. 1961.

24th It is illegal to make a citizen pay a voting fee or take a reading test to vote. 1964.

25th If the president dies or cannot serve, the vice-president becomes president. If both die, the Speaker of the House becomes president. 1967.

26th US citizens who are 18 years old or older have the right to vote. 1971.

27th Congress must limit when and how much its members are paid.1992.

(BBG – click to see) The pound fell as David Cameron’s efforts to reach a deal with fellow European leaders over the terms of U.K. membership of the bloc entered a second day after hitting a stumbling block on Thursday.

With talks set to resume Friday, expectations for price swings in the pound against the euro over the next six months climbed to the highest since 2011. While the U.K. prime minister encountered goodwill from his 27 EU counterparts in Brussels, he also ran into resistance from eastern European states over demands for more welfare curbs.

Cameron had been aiming to seal a deal at the discussions, setting him up to announce a referendum as soon as June 23 on his country’s place in the EU. Leaders took “a few steps backward on a U.K. deal,” Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi said as the session broke up after 2 a.m. in the Belgian capital. French President Francois Hollande said he would push for financial regulation to apply to all centers in Europe when talks resume.

“It’s likely we’ll still get something that gets us a referendum on this in June but that there will be enough questions within the agreement to encourage the ‘out’ camp,” said Kit Juckes, a global strategist at Societe Generale SA in London. “I can’t imagine it becoming clear who will win, so I’ve got another four months of uncertainty on the currency. Is the market now bearish enough on sterling? My bias is still negative.”

The pound dropped 0.2 percent to $1.4310 as of 10:20 a.m. London time, extending this week’s loss to 1.3 percent. It depreciated less than 0.1 percent to 77.49 pence per euro after reaching 78.98 on Feb. 11, the weakest since December 2014.

Six-month implied volatility for the pound versus the euro, a measure of price swings based on options, touched 12.01 percent, the highest level since October 2011.

With traders already pushing back bets on the timing of a Bank of England interest-rate increase, the prospect of a vote on leaving the world’s largest trading bloc is causing further concern, helping push down the pound against all but one of its Group of 10 peers this year. Even so, U.K. government bonds are 2016’s best performing major securities in Bloomberg World Bond Indexes, while the nation’s stocks are outperforming other major European markets by declining at a slower pace than their peers.

Gilts advanced for a second day on Friday. The 10-year yield dropped three basis points, or 0.03 percentage point, to 1.41 percent. The price of the 2 percent security due in September 2025 rose 0.28, or 2.80 pounds per 1,000-pound face amount, to 105.21.

summary-of-the-US-Constitution

+++ O.A./M.P.O. (JN) PCP quer propinas congeladas, manuais gratuitos, mais subsídio social de desemprego e menos IMI

Opinião Âncora

…E mais isto e  mais aquilo…

…E a factura…?

…Como já escrevi, não me recordo de uma única medida sugerida pelo PCP, em quarenta anos, que fosse boa para a economia Portuguesa, antes pelo contrário…

   E o PCP é aliás o grande responsável pelo estado em que Portugal se encontra.

   Com as “nacionalizações e Expropriações” de 1975, que são a “Mãe de todos os males”, transformaram Portugal num País capitalista, com capitalistas sem capital …!

   Não existe no Mundo outro caso tão absurdo e cretino como este!

   É uma das razões pelas quais a dívida externa privada portuguesa  é muito elevada,e também a razão pela qual há muita dificuldade em manter empresas grandes (pelo critério português…), incluindo Bancos, em mãos nacionais.

   Portanto o PCP, que é, um Partido próprio de um estado totalitário (é só ler os Estatutos),devia ter vergonha na cara, e dar se ao respeito.

   E parar de sugerir/impor medidas que, ou só servem os seus próprio interesses, (ver Lenine, neste site),ou os interesses de um grande numero de militantes/sócios e que pagam quotas da Intersindical.

   Como é o caso da reversão das concessões a privados da exploração dos transportes urbanos de Lisboa e Porto,

   Com a exploração dos transportes urbanos de Lisboa e Porto nas mãos de privados, como é que conseguiriam que uma greve geral tivesse sucesso…?

  Todos os argumentos que dizem por aí, são tentativas de justificação do injustificável…

  E relembro que existem vários Estados Europeus, em que o símbolo dos que advogam o comunismo(foice e martelo), tais como os partidos de extrema-direita, são constitucionalmente proibidos.

  Polónia, Lituânia, Geórgia, e Moldávia.

  Ver as minhas Opiniões Pessoais sobre o 25 de Abril de 1974, e as suas consequências.

Opinião Pessoal: Ainda bem que choveu o dia todo!

O.P/M.P.O. 40 anos de políticas económicas cretinas!

O.P. Esses senhores do MFA que por ai se pavoneiam

  Disse.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(Negócios) O líder parlamentar comunista adiantou quatro propostas de alteração ao Orçamento do Estado 2016 do Governo PS que estão “em melhores condições de avançar” na discussão em sede de especialidade, na Assembleia da República.

O congelamento das propinas do ensino superior em 2016, a progressiva gratuitidade dos manuais escolares, a alteração das condições do subsídio social de desemprego, para garantir a melhoria desta prestação social, que se segue ao fim do subsídio de desemprego, e a redução da taxa máxima do IMI de 0,5 para 0,4 são as iniciativas destacadas por João Oliveira, no parlamento.

“Obter mais receita para o Estado, com mais justiça fiscal, não tributando aqueles que menos têm e, sobretudo, indo buscar os impostos a quem os pode pagar porque tem mais rendimentos ou mais lucros”, é o objectivo do PCP, que defenderá ainda mais “imposto sobre património mobiliário”, o “aumento das contribuições do sector energético” ou o “aumento da taxa adicional de solidariedade em sede de IRS nos rendimentos acima de 80 mil euros, de matéria colectável por sujeito passivo”.

A proposta do OE para 2016 vai ser discutida e votada na generalidade na segunda e terça-feira (22 e 23 Fevereiro). O debate na especialidade decorrerá entre os dias 24 de Fevereiro e 4 de Março.

“Esta pressão de chantagem que está a ser feita por parte da União Europeia sobre o nosso país dá razão àquilo que o PCP tem vindo a dizer há muito tempo: é preciso libertarmo-nos destes condicionamentos e constrangimentos externos para podermos estar em condições de dar resposta aos problemas que o país tem e encontrar um caminho de desenvolvimento soberanamente definido”, afirmou ainda o deputado comunista.

Para o chefe da bancada do PCP, a atitude das instituições europeias, nomeadamente a exigência de um “plano B” em termos orçamentais, “visa perpetuar as medidas que foram tomadas anteriormente e impedir qualquer caminho de reversão dessas políticas de exploração e empobrecimento”, numa espécie de “amarramento dos países a critérios e condições que não lhes permitam libertar-se desse colete-de-forças”.

“Este processo particular, desenvolvido em torno do orçamento do Estado, acaba por ser o pretexto para um conjunto de imposições”, concluiu, embora sublinhando que a proposta de OE2016 já contempla “duas propostas em que o PCP insistiu” – o fim da isenção de IMI dos fundos imobiliários e o aumento das contribuições do sector bancário.

+++ A.O./V.V.I. (BBG) Editorial: David Cameron Needs Help to Keep the U.K. in the EU

Anchor Opinion (A.O)

I am introducing to you our new sub menu “Anchor Opinions”.

This section will in the future contain my Personal Opinions that are anchors of my way of seing things, and that usually I have exposed a long time ago, or that are related with something that I have exposed in that way.

Today, focusing on the status of the UK in the EU, this is the way I have been seing events for a long time…

It is obvious to me, that the proposed changes in the UK’s status in the EU, and the changes in the EU rules, are miles away from what is needed, and clearly not enough.

I am also of the opinion, that, as they are proposed now, these changes will not be accepted by the UK’s euro-skeptics.

And all others things being equal, and i underline this, and as we stand today, the UK voters would probably vote to leave the EU.

And the changes are also needed for the other Member States.

The EU is in an existential crisis, and the more important one since the signing of the original Treaty of Rome.

Either the EU and it’s Member States realize this, and take the initiative to deeply reform the EU, or it will probably implode.

I will repeat my long standing Anchor Opinion,

With the current rules and procedures, the EU is not viable and doesn’t work.

And the discutions on the EU’s reforms and rule changes should start immediately , with no pre conditions or limits.
Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(BBG – click to see) First things first: Britain needs Europe, and Europe needs Britain. Both U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron and European Union President Donald Tusk agree on this point, and they need to be more emphatic about it in the debate over the U.K.’s membership in the EU.

A referendum on that question could happen as soon as June, and opinion in the country is closely divided. Cameron has followed a risky strategy of promising voters he would force (desperately needed) reform on the EU as a condition of the U.K.’s continued membership.

Last Tuesday, Tusk gave Cameron a proposed set of changes to the union’s rules. The plan, which Cameron has welcomed, will be up for debate at an EU summit on Feb. 18. It includes measures to shield non-euro-zone countries from euro-zone policy, and to put U.K. financial regulation more firmly under U.K. control. It includes new thinking on national sovereignty. It reaffirms the commitment to improve competitiveness. It tweaks the rules on migrants.

Will Britain Leave the EU?

These ideas are worthwhile but far from radical: They won’t satisfy the euroskeptics in Cameron’s own party. At the same time, they’re unlikely to sail through unopposed by other EU leaders. This puts the prime minister in a tight spot: The forthcoming summit may present him with a diminished version of a plan that’s just been mocked as worthless by much of the U.K. press.

Cameron set himself up for failure in promising fundamental reform on such a tight schedule. Nonetheless, Tusk’s proposals aren’t worthless. Valuable in their own right, they also offer grounds for hope that the EU is capable of further reform — which, to be sure, it needs. The plan is a basis for compromise.

What must happen to put that compromise into effect?

Britain’s hard-line euroskeptics won’t ever be assuaged, but those who think that Britain is better off in Europe, whatever their opinion of Cameron and his party, need to rally in support of his effort to close this deal and sell it to the country. Let Cameron-bashing wait for the moment. There’ll be plenty of time for politics as usual later.

In the same way, Europe’s other leaders need to quell any desire they may have to punish Cameron’s assertiveness by embarrassing him at the summit — either by blocking Tusk’s proposal or by dismissing it as weightless.

In closing the deal, the main sticking point for both sides is migration within the EU. Other EU leaders have been reluctant to budge on this, and rightly so: Restrictions on free movement of EU citizens clash with a core principle of the union. Yet anti-immigrant sentiment is running high in Britain, as elsewhere in the union, and shouldn’t be flatly ignored. Tusk proposes allowing temporary restrictions on migrants’ ability to claim in-work benefits — less than Cameron led voters to expect, but good enough.

Giving ground there, Cameron should ask for more on the issue of sovereignty — and it would serve the interests of the other EU countries to go along. Tusk’s proposal says the union’s treaty commitment to “ever closer union” is about promoting “trust and understanding among peoples living in open and democratic societies” and not a commitment to political integration. EU leaders should affirm and formalize this understanding.

The fate of “ever closer union” is often dismissed as unimportant — just words. Yet words matter. The EU’s underlying problem is that too big a gap has grown between its system of governance and its citizens. Recognizing this problem is the first step toward solving it.

Novo Sub Menu “Opiniões Âncora”

Opiniões Âncora

A todos:

Sentimos a necessidade de criar um novo sub menu, onde se pudessem facilmente encontrar aquelas opiniões, que são as âncoras da minha maneira de ver as coisas.

Normalmente são opiniões que já tenho há muito, ou que resultam dessas opiniões.

Por exemplo…

Todos os leitores habituais sabem o que eu penso das três principais Agências de Rating…

Ou dos Height Frequency Trades…

Ou do (segundo ele…) “perigo de inflação” de que falava o Economista Chefe do Banco Central Europeu, “one of my favorite victims”, e que teve direito a vinte e nove opiniões pessoais…

Que não diziam muito bem dele não …

Ou de “Um País Capitalista com Capitalistas sem Capital”…

Ou sobre o que eu penso sobre a Intolerância, e sobre a Intolerância Inter Étnica…

Ou o que eu penso sobre as “regras” da União Europeia”…

União Europeia essa, que está numa crise existencial gravíssima.

E Portugal que está numa encruzilhada da sua História.

E os Portugueses precisam, em minha opinião, de reflectir sobre os problemas para os quais eu chamo a atenção.

Por isso, e também por já se encontrar no sub menu “Opiniões Âncora”, chamo a atenção para esta, que merece uma reflexão séria e também para os links que redireccionam para outras opiniões relevantes:

+++ O.P./M.P.O. e V.V.I. (DE) António Costa: Mais um banco oferecido a Espanha?

Obrigado pela vossa atenção.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira»

+++ O.P./M.P.O. e V.V.I. (DE) António Costa: Mais um banco oferecido a Espanha?

M.P.O. / O.P.

Nunca nenhum País no Mundo se desenvolveu e prosperou sem uma banca nacional, controlada por pessoas desse País.

Vidé o alerta do Dr Vitor Bento, publicado neste site:

+++ V.I./M.I. (Observador) Vítor Bento avisa que em breve nenhum dos grandes bancos portugueses será nacional

As pessoas têm de racionalizar de uma vez por todas o seguinte:

São os Bancos Comerciais, e não os Bancos Centrais, que criam a maior parte da moeda, ao concederem créditos ás Empresas e aos Particulares.

Agora pensem se acham bem que o poder de criar moeda esteja nas mãos de um País estrangeiro…

E cito um extracto do artigo muito bom do António Costa, o Jornalista:

“E, já agora, alguma vez o Governo de Madrid permitiu que um banco português pudesse crescer em Espanha? Nunca.”

Os Portugueses não venham depois reclamar que o País não se desenvolve muito, que não há empregos suficientes, e de qualidade, para os Jovens, que não se conseguem manter as empresas em maos Portuguesas etc.

Pois se assistem, impavidos e serenos, durante 40 anos a um desfilar de políticas económicas cretinas…

O.P/M.P.O. 40 anos de políticas económicas cretinas!:

«Opinião Pessoal

Nota prévia:

Como é evidente, durante os últimos 40 anos, não houve exclusivamente decisões políticas, e decisões sobre políticas económicas que eu considero cretinas.

O problema é que os períodos em foram decididas e implementadas políticas sensatas, estas estavam, ou condicionadas pelos gravíssimos erros anteriores, ou estavam a corrigir os efeitos dos “desmandos” anteriores.

Tudo isto vem a propósito de uma, como sempre, muito lúcida intervenção do Dr Vítor Bento, (“Futuro, que reformas”), economista e Conselheiro de Estado, no Forum Empresarial do Algarve.

 cito, reproduzindo a partir de um texto do Observador:

«”O economista, que foi o último presidente do BES e o primeiro do
Novo Banco, avisou que Portugal está a alienar o seu futuro e
que em breve não haverá nenhum grande banco português.”

“Nós vamos alienando o nosso futuro”, alertou o Conselheiro de Estado.

O economista Vítor Bento estimou este sábado que dentro de três a
cinco anos nenhum dos grandes bancos portugueses será nacional e
sublinhou que não conhece nenhuma economia desenvolvida na
qual o sistema bancário esteja nas mãos de estrangeiros.

“Eu neste momento estimo que nos próximos três a cinco
anos nenhum dos grandes bancos portugueses é
nacional“, afirmou, alertando para que essa situação reflete as
“consequências estratégicas das opções macroeconómicas que vão
condicionar o futuro do país” e a sua capacidade de
desenvolvimento.»

Fim de citação.

Isto conduz nos à situação em que o País se encontra, e sobre a qual eu já escrevi várias vezes mas de que destaco:

“Ainda bem que choveu o dia todo!”

e

“Esses senhores do MFA que por ai se pavoneiam”

Ora vejamos:

«Opinião Pessoal

Ainda bem que choveu o dia todo!

Eu nunca vou à rua no dia 25 de Abril.

É tempo de nos deixarmos de hipocrisias e paninhos quentes.

Assim, e a saber:

A transição para a democracia era indispensável, até porque o Regime anterior era um Regime estúpido.

Tão estúpido,que em vez de promover uma transição ordeira para a Democracia,provocou a génese, (induzida do estrangeiro),do golpe de estado, que foi o que houve no dia 25 de Abril de 1974.
A revolução veio depois.

E tão estúpido que adormeceu toda a classe dirigente portuguesa, que se se tivesse unido, tinha há muito corrido com o “Guardião do Templo”, o Almirante Américo Thomaz, que é o primeiro responsável,por não ter havido uma transição ordeira para a Democracia,e muito mais do que as pessoas julgam, e também por ter havido um golpe de estado.

Quanto ao 25 de Abril,foi um acto criminoso de uns quantos, alguns conscientes,
outros não, que traíram a Pátria e venderam se aos Norte Americanos.

A documentação do envolvimento dos EUA é publica.

Até a Marcha do Movimento das Forças Armadas ,”A Life On The Ocean Wave”,
é uma marcha utilizada pela Marinha dos EUA, e não só.
Ver anexos.

A descolonização tinha de ser feita, mas não assim, tão tarde, sob pressão, e daquela forma.

O 25 de Abril foi um acto criminoso,(contra um Regime podre),que levou a um suicídio da Pátria, e cujo expoente máximo da estupidez foram as nacionalizações.

Nacionalizações essas, que são “A Mãe De Todos Os Males”.

Um País capitalista, com capitalistas sem capital… !

Nada de tão cretino e absurdo existe no Mundo.

Portanto, e por ter dado lugar à Revolução que houve a seguir, não há nada, medindo os prós e os contras, para comemorar neste dia.

Porque a Liberdade viria sempre.

E poderia ter vindo mais cedo, não fosse o Almirante Américo Thomaz.

Devia antes ser um dia didáctico, em que fosse explicado às pessoas, um caso de
Talent de Mal Faire.

Disse

Francisco de Curiel Marques Pereira
Cidadão Português

Post Scriptum

A Liberdade é um valor absoluto e fundamental em si mesma.

Mas da mesma forma que é condenável privar um animal selvagem da Liberdade,
é igualmente condenável restituir o animal à Liberdade sem que reaprenda a conseguir os seus alimentos sozinho, ou o repor em liberdade num habitat em que não haja alimentos.

Foi o que aconteceu em Portugal com as nacionalizações.

E, tenham paciência mas não me venham com o argumento do crescimento económico.

Portugal já faliu três vezes desde o 25 de Abril de 1974…

Na ultima década antes do 25 de Abril,(1960 a 1973), o PIB Português crescia a uma taxa média anual de 6.9 % (a preços constantes).

Portanto crescimento económico viria sempre.
Com uma diferença…
Teria sido maior…!
Ver anexos

Notas
O Autor teve o cuidado de verificar as suas fontes, e falou com Pessoas ligadas ao anterior Regime,à transição e às Oposições.

O Autor já era vitima da Censura no anterior Regime, e vem por esse facto mencionado no livro do Dr Pedro Feytor Pinto, (que era recurso da Censura na ausência do Dr Geraldes Cardoso), “Na Sombra do Poder”.2011. Editor: Livros d’Hoje.

(E tem ficha na Torre do Tombo, no acervo documental da Polícia Internacional e de Defesa do Estado/DGS…)

Epes Sergeant and Henry Russell (1812-1900)
Marcha utilizada pela Marinha Mercante dos EUA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuCQzIJwpDI

Crescimento económico
em Portugal nos anos de 1960-73:
alteração estrutural e ajustamento
da oferta à procura de trabalho
Edgar Rocha

Envolvimento da CIA

A primeira vez que vim a Portugal foi em 1974.

Os jovens do vosso País estavam a ser chacinados em guerras coloniais que não podiam vencer e os vossos recursos estavam a ser esbanjados por uma ditadura cujo único interesse era o de preservar o seu prestígio mítico.

Os vossos generais mais inteligentes e alguns oficiais mais jovens tinham-se apercebido de que o custo dessas guerras em termos humanos e materiais era um preço que Portugal não se podia dar ao luxo de pagar.

Foi pedido ao meu País que ajudasse a criar uma situação que permitisse a Portugal libertar-se desta temeridade colonial sem sentido, e foi pedido à CIA ( Central Intelligence Agency) que entrasse em contacto com oficiais-chave e ajudasse a desenvolver um plano que alcançasse estes objectivos.

O resultado foi a bem sucedida revolução de 1974, em que não houve derramamento de sangue; uma revolução cujo objectivo secundário era garantir que o Partido Comunista Português não lucrava com a mudança de Governo.

A equipa de que eu fiz parte passou um dia em Portugal em discussões com o marechal Costa Gomes, um antigo simpatizante da CIA, o general Spínola e alguns outros militares, e foi delineado um plano para garantir que não haveria derramamento de sangue e que as tropas possivelmente leais ao Governo existente permaneceriam nos seus quartéis.

A história confirmou a audácia, o brilhantismo e os benefícios sociais e políticos dos nossos planos.

Assim, senhoras e senhores, se me é permitido dizer, sinto que tenho algum mérito no processo que criou a nação estável e democrática que Portugal é nos dias de hoje.(…)

Foi deste modo que falou, em 24 de Julho de 2002,
o ex-segundo da hierarquia da CIA na Europa,

Oswald Le Winter,

na Assembleia da República, durante a audição dos

“depoimentos relevantes” do caso CAMARATE.

in
Desmantelar a América
(pags 166 e 167.)»

E também:

«O.P.

No seguimento do brilhante artigo escrito pelo Dr Nuno Melo publicado no Económico  “Abril e Novembro”, ocorreu escrever estas linhas.

Esses senhores do MFA que por ai se pavoneiam, deviam ter vergonha na cara e
noção do ridículo.
E quem os apoiou e continua a apoiar também.

Esses senhores são uns dos responsáveis pelo estado a que o País chegou,
porque promoveram e consentiram que se fizessem as “nacionalizações e expropriações” que são,conforme eu já escrevi, a “Mae de Todos os Males” económicos em Portugal, e responsáveis pelo País se ter transformado num caso único no Mundo:

Um País capitalista, com capitalistas sem capital…!

E em consequência, são responsáveis pelo facto de ser muito difícil manter as empresas médias e grandes em mãos nacionais.

Pois se não há capital…

E os centros de decisão…

Atente se, por exemplo, ao caso da Cimpor, que prácticamente desapareceu…

Eu alertei um ano antes da sua venda, que essa mesma venda não servia o Interesse Nacional.

E agora vamos à “vergonha na cara”…

O Movimento das Forças Armadas começou por ser uma pura revindicação salarial.

Para os mais novos, teve a ver com o salário dos Oficiais Milicianos (Oficiais não pertencentes ao quadro de pessoal das Forças Armadas), versus o salário dos Oficiais de carreira (e portanto do quadro de pessoal).

Muito tempo depois é que começou a politizar se.

Ora quem é que arranjou e foi o autor dessa trapalhada que depois se tornou impossível de resolver…?

O Marechal Costa Gomes…

Ah…

O mesmo que, tempos depois, aparece com o Marechal Spínola a liderar o 25 de Abril…

E o mesmo que era “simpatizante da CIA” segundo declarou no Parlamento, em 24 de Julho de 2002 o ex-segundo da hierarquia da CIA na Europa,
Sr Oswald Le Winter.
(ver a minha O.P. de ontem “Ainda Bem que Choveu o Dia Todo”)

Sr Le Winter esse que também disse que tinha sido a CIA que tinha montado o 25 de Abril.

Que também disse que tinha vindo a Lisboa conversar, para combinar o Golpe de Estado, com os Marechais Costa Gomes e Spínola.(e outros)

É evidente que o Marechal Costa Gomes criou o problema de propósito, para dar no que deu.

E essa documentação existe.

Portanto esses senhores do MFA original, e quem andam por aí a emitir opiniões e a vangloriar se, executaram um Golpe de Estado organizado pela CIA, que posteriormente deu origem a uma Revolução liderada pelo Partido Comunista, e que destruiu o tecido económico Português.

E que serviu os interesses na altura dos Norte Americanos…

E que deu economicamente no que deu…

Tenham vergonha na cara e noção do ridículo !

Francisco de Curiel Marques Pereira
Cidadão Português

Anexos

Envolvimento da CIA

A primeira vez que vim a Portugal foi em 1974.

Os jovens do vosso País estavam a ser chacinados em guerras coloniais que não podiam vencer e os vossos recursos estavam a ser esbanjados por uma ditadura cujo único interesse era o de preservar o seu prestígio mítico.

Os vossos generais mais inteligentes e alguns oficiais mais jovens tinham-se apercebido de que o custo dessas guerras em termos humanos e materiais era um preço que Portugal não se podia dar ao luxo de pagar.

Foi pedido ao meu País que ajudasse a criar uma situação que permitisse a Portugal libertar-se desta temeridade colonial sem sentido, e foi pedido à CIA ( Central Intelligence Agency) que entrasse em contacto com oficiais-chave e
ajudasse a desenvolver um plano que alcançasse estes objectivos.

O resultado foi a bem sucedida revolução de 1974, em que não houve derramamento de sangue; uma revolução cujo objectivo secundário era garantir que o Partido Comunista Português não lucrava com a mudança de Governo.

A equipa de que eu fiz parte passou um dia em Portugal em discussões com o marechal Costa Gomes, um antigo simpatizante da CIA, o general Spínola e alguns outros militares, e foi delineado um plano para garantir que não haveria derramamento de sangue e que as tropas possivelmente leais ao Governo existente permaneceriam nos seus quartéis.

A história confirmou a audácia, o brilhantismo e os benefícios sociais e políticos dos nossos planos.

Assim, senhoras e senhores, se me é permitido dizer, sinto que tenho algum mérito no processo que criou a nação estável e democrática que Portugal é nos dias de hoje.(…)

Foi deste modo que falou, em 24 de Julho de 2002,
o ex-segundo da hierarquia da CIA na Europa,

Oswald Le Winter,

na Assembleia da República, durante a audição dos

“depoimentos relevantes” do caso CAMARATE.

in
Desmantelar a América
(pags 166 e 167.)»

Ora, tivemos um Golpe de Estado promovido pela CIA em 1974, e uma Revolução promovida essencialmente pelo Partido Comunista Português em 1975.

 Cito-me a mim próprio em  Esses senhores do MFA que por ai se pavoneiam:

«Esses senhores (MFA) são uns dos responsáveis pelo estado a que o País chegou, porque promoveram e consentiram que se fizessem as “nacionalizações e expropriações” que são,conforme eu já escrevi, a “Mae de Todos os Males” económicos em Portugal, e responsáveis pelo País se ter transformado num caso único no Mundo:

Um País capitalista, com capitalistas sem capital…!

E em consequência, são responsáveis pelo facto de ser muito difícil manter as empresas médias e grandes em mãos nacionais.

Pois se não há capital…

E os centros de decisão…

Atente se, por exemplo, ao caso da Cimpor, que prácticamente desapareceu…

Eu alertei um ano antes da sua venda, que essa mesma venda não servia o Interesse Nacional.»

E mesmo anteriormente às nacionalizações e expropriações, o PCP , que nunca que me lembre, sugeriu uma medida válida para a economia portuguesa, se tinha encarregue de destruir o tecido económico Português forçando aumentos salariais de 30 e de 40 % em alguns casos, logo a seguir ao 25 de Abril.

É claro que , quando um ano depois ocorrem as nacionalizações , já as empresas estavam muito descapitalizadas, porque não conseguiam fazer reflectir nos preços os aumentos brutais de encargos que tinham tido.

Isto é um exemplo perfeito do que eu chamo uma medida cretina!

Distribuir o que não existe, destruindo as empresas, e os capitais em mãos nacionais…!

E depois as indemnizações foram muito baixas porque tinha sido destruída riqueza e já não havia para mais.

Podem agradecer ao PCP…

Foi a partir daqueles eventos que o País começou a perder a sua independência…

Porque não há capitais próprios suficientes em mãos Portuguesas…

Conforme está à vista de todos…

Menos da extrema esquerda…

Também em verdade se diga, que nenhum governo desde o 25 de Abril implementou uma política que promovesse a acumulação de capitais em mãos Portuguesas.

Mas num País em que a inveja é a regra…

É a última palavra dos Lusíadas…Inveja.

E com uma falta de cultura económica generalizada, e uma Imprensa de esquerda…

Agora atente se às medidas económicas cretinas que foram anunciadas…

Então num País em que um dos principais problemas é a falta de capitais, o “melhor” é afugenta-los…

Os poucos que existem…

Anunciando tributações sobre o património e anunciando a reintrodução daquele que em tempos foi apelidado de “imposto mais estúpido do mundo”…

O Imposto sobre Sucessões e Doações.

Até o Sr Professor Doutor Daniel Bessa que foi Ministro de um governo socialista é da mesma opinião.
(Ver Expresso deste fim de semana)

E depois claro, estímulos ao consumo interno com as consequências que se conhecem,e os aumentos de encargos do Estado que podem eventualmente vir a tornar a nossa continuação no euro inviável.

Além de prejudicarem a nossa competitividade.

E claro, a reversão das concessões dos transportes públicos em Lisboa e  e no Porto.

 E existe alguma justificação económica para tal…?

Não, embora tentem inventar muitas…

A verdade é que, e como muito bem referiu o Sr Dr Vítor Bento num Ensaio recente, é que o PCP apenas está a aplicar a doutrina de Lenine…

Então como é que seria possível uma greve geral ter sucesso com as empresas de transportes privatizadas…?

Além da clientela numerosa da Intersindical (que pagam quotas) existente nessas empresas…

Disse.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

Cidadão Português

Fim das reproduções

Esclarecidos ?

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira»

 

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

(Económico – click to see) Artur Santos Silva, Fernando Ulriche o CaixaBank recorrem a uma falácia – a participação do BPI na concentração bancária em Portugal – para pedirem outra vez um deslindamento dos direitos de voto do banco, o que não é mais doque uma forma de dar o BPI aos catalães “de borla”. Porquê?

Por acaso a gestão  do banco deixou de fazer alguma coisa por causa da blindagem de direitos  de voto nos últimos anos? Não. Até  apresentou uma proposta pelo Novo  Banco, recusada por causa do preço.

O tempo do BPI como o conhecemos está a acabar, o prazo termina no dia 10 de Abril. Até lá, o BPI tem de reduzir a sua exposição a Angola, ao banco angolano BFA de que é accionista, por imposição do BCE, a bem ou a mal. Senão, os seus rácios de solidez serão muito afectados, eventualmente até abaixo do limite legal. Mas isto já se sabe há mais de um ano  e todas as soluções não passaram no  necessário acordo comum do Caixabank e de Isabel dos Santos.

Esta nova tentativa de desblindar  os estatutos, isto é, de permitir que todos os accionistas votem com as acções  que controlam, é apenas mais um passo numa guerra accionista no BPI, em que Santos Silva e Ulrich tomaram partido por um accionista contra os outros. Até contra accionistas históricos, como a família Violas, que votou contra a proposta da administração de convocar uma assembleia-geral para votar este ponto dos estatutos. Além de Isabel dos Santos, que tem 20% do banco, precisamente o limite dos direitos de voto. E, para efeitos de declaração de interesses, sou consultor editorial da Forbes, uma revista de economia e negócios da ZAP, empresa controlada por Isabel dos Santos. E também comentador da TVI, da espanhola PRISA.

Como é evidente, o CaixaBank tem 44% do BPI e se os direitos de voto caírem neste momento fica a mandar no banco sem necessidade de gastar mais um cêntimo. Basta, para isso, lançar uma OPA, a que estará obrigado se essa mudança se verificar, a um preço inaceitável para todos os outros accionistas. Os catalães ficarão a mandar com 44%, com prejuízo de todos os outros accionistas, portanto. Nota de rodapé: a OPA lançada pelo Caixabank sobre o BPI foi lançada a 1,32 euros por acção e o conselho, sim, Santos Silva e Ulrich, disse ao mercado que o preço mínimo adequado era de 2,25 euros por acção. Hoje, o BPI está abaixo dos dez cêntimos, por isso, poderão imaginar o preço de uma eventual oferta. E o que dirá o conselho?

A guerra no BPI é mais complexa do que apenas um conflito de interesses accionistas, tem também em pano de fundo uma decisão estratégica do BCE de considerar Portugal uma região de Espanha para efeitos bancários. Está, por isso, a fazer o que pode para a banca portuguesa passar a falar castelhano na sua totalidade, e, claro, também o BPI. Assim, será mais fácil de supervisionar.

O interesse de Portugal e das empresas portuguesas é outro. Será, por isso, outra oportunidade para António Costa fazer o que anuncia e não ficar pelas palavras. Portugal precisa de bancos como o Santander, claro, o único em Portugal que passou a crise sem ter prejuízos. Mas também precisa de bancos com outros poderes accionistas. Desejavelmente portugueses, mas, na impossibilidade de isso se verificar, de outros países europeus ou africanos. Por razões evidentes: se a banca estiver totalmente controlada a partir de Madrid, os critérios de avaliação de risco no financiamento vão apertar de tal forma que só algumas das empresas – as líderes – terão acesso a crédito. E, já agora, alguma vez o Governo de Madrid permitiu que um banco português pudesse crescer em Espanha? Nunca.

Para que fique claro, as blindagens de estatutos nos bancos, como nas empresas cotadas, devem ser eliminadas porque prejudicam os pequenos accionistas, tiram valor à acção, são um factor impeditivo de um mercado de capitais a funcionar em pleno. Mas, já que existem, que sejam eliminadas quando for o melhor para todos e não apenas para alguns, neste caso o BPI, o mais relevante deles. Percebe-se agora porque é que o Caixabank convidou Isabel dos Santos a entrar no capital e a comprar metade da posição que era detida pelos brasileiros do Itau. Os catalães ficaram com a outra metade e, assim, passaram para os actuais 44% e ainda conseguiram fugir à obrigação de uma OPA que, naquela altura, seria muito mais pesada.

Por exemplo, porque é que o BPI não avança para a fusão com o BCP e, nesse contexto, elimina a blindagem de estatutos? Já houve essa proposta, de Isabel  dos Santos, que até admitia um aumento  de capital de 1,2 mil milhões de euros, mas foi recusada. Não pelo BCP, nem por Nuno Amado, mas pelo Caixabank. Porque, nesse caso, o CaixaBank passaria a ter menos de 33,3% do banco e apesar de maior accionista não poderia mandar sozinho. Hoje, claro, porque Angola está em crise, porque o país que servia para resolver os problemas dos portugueses sem emprego e das empresas que procuravam novos mercados – e também do BPI – está a afundar com a queda do preço do petróleo, é fácil escolher um lado, o mais frágil. Mas não é o lado certo. Até porque desse lado estão todos os outros accionistas, muitos portugueses.

A história do BPI tem tudo para correr mal, a contagem de tempo corre, convém começar a anotar o que está agora a ser feito para memória futura.

M.P.O. The exhaustion of the Chinese Model

M.P.O. 

On China, the anti-corruption drive, and the latest developments.

The World was surprised by the sudden disappearance and the following reappearance of Mr Guo Guangchang the Chairman of Fosun, China’s self styled Warren Buffett.

Fosun has been on an acquisition spree abroad, and owns  quite a number of very well known companies in the West, and has substantial investments in Portugal.

The official explanation for the four days absence , and a face saving one, was ” four days out of sight while assisting a judicial investigation” (Financial Times).

Even if it is not uncommon in China for public and private officials to assist an investigation, no one is buying that version of the events.

Because Mr Guangchan was not charged of any wrongdoing, and Fosun said that the investigations had nothing to do with the Company.

This bizarre situation comes after Mr Guangchang having been advised, more than a year ago,  to get a second, and of different Country, passport.

But he said he did not need one because he had been “behaving well”…

A lot of private entrepreneurs have been “pested” by the various authorities since the Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping announced his anti-corruption campaign following the 18th National Congress which was held in November 2012.

And recently, in another article in this site, Mr Xu Ming, a former business ally of disgraced Chinese politician Bo Xilai has died in prison of illness, months before he was due to be released.

Probably he knew too much…

From The FT:

“The death of Xu Ming, founder of property conglomerate Dalian Shide Group, who testified against Bo’s wife Gu Kailai in 2013, is the second high-profile death in recent months of a person involved in the downfall of Bo and Gu, the biggest political scandal in China since the trial of the Gang of Four more than three decades ago.”

Then you have the military confrontation with the US, clearly provocative, the interference in Taiwan’s elections, with the “meeting of two gentlemen, the admission, (finally), that there is a serious pollution problem, the trial of lawyers including the famous and prominent Mr Pu Zhiqiang , the massive capital flight, the persecution of financial market players, blaming them because he market went down, etc, etc, etc.

The statement by Fosun saying that from now on , the Company was going to focus on China, clearly is in response to pressure by the authorities, that have been trying to control the massive capital flight.

And that have been pesting the companies that try to list abroad, because it is an obvious way to expatriate capital.

President Xi Jinping is a very astute person, and reportedly the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Tse Tung.

Or even more powerful,some people say.

He knows that the growth model based on exports with  cheap labour and highly polluting factories is no more.

He also knows that the clean up is going to take decades.

He also knows that China , traditionally, has been a corrupt society, in part due to the very low wages.

He knows that his currency is devaluating and that he can do very little about it.

He wants to keep the power in the Communist Party.

And in consequence, and as usual in these kind of Countries (vidé Russia), he has to crackdown on anything that resembles power, and promote everything else that distracts the people’s attention from the fact that China is not growing what it used to in the past.

And that past growth was the people’s excuse to tolerate the system.

Which is under more and more scrutiny.

This is what all this is about, in my opinion.

Let’s hope it stays peaceful.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

P.O. (BBG) Greece Raised to CCC+ From CCC- By S&P, Outlook to Stable

P.O.

Ah Ah Ah

Laughing at the “crook” Rating Agencies…

What difference does it make to be in 9th junk level or the 7th…? From triple-C minus to triple-C plus …? Is anyone going to decide anything at all based on these ratings…?

The tree big ones have been convicted of almost every conceivable crime, in various Countries and jurisdictions. And not laughing at all at Greece, or at the Greek People, for which i feel sorry, and to who I wish all the best of lucks.

I reiterate my long standing opinion:

– The tree large Rating Agencies should be banned from, at least, Sovereign Ratings.

– They have plenty of conflicts of interest, very seldom get anything right, and are self fulfiling prophecies in downgrades.

– And they cause more harm than they do good.

– And, by the way… They didn’t see anything when Greece was “cooking the books” in it’s accounts, did they…?

I refer you to Professor John Ryan’s (1) working paper “The Negative Impact of Credit Rating Agencies and proposals for better regulation”(2), and his publication “Credit Rating Agencies and Their Credibility Problem” (3).

Please see the attachments.

I rest my case.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

—————————–————————————————-

(BBG) Greece Raised to CCC+ From CCC- By S&P, Outlook to Stable

The upgrade reflects Greece’s improved liquidity perspective following last week’s consent, in principle, from the Eurogroup to the three-year loan program for Greece via the ESM, alongside the provision of EUR7.16 billion in three-month bridge financing to the Greek government, S&P says.
* S&P sees Greek economy down 3% this year
* Probability of Greece leaving the eurozone remains higher than one in three but less than 50%, S&P says
* Greece’s default on its stock of commercial debt is no longer inevitable in the next six to 12 months: S&P
* Greece long-term rating raised to CCC+ from CCC-, outlook to stable from negative

 

 

 

(WSJ)News

(1)Professor-John-Ryan-—-The-Von-Hügel-Institute-11

(2)The_Negative_Impact_of_Credit_Rating_Agencies_KS

(3)Credit-Rating-Agencies-and-Their-Credibility-Problem-_-Policy-Review