Thursday, 10 May 2012

Why I would not invest a dime with Principalis Asset Management

This is precisely the half-witted nonsense that created the UK deficit in the first place. Oddly the deficit was not created by public sector pensions. It was created by bankers creating stupid financial instruments they were confident that government could not regulate, but which they (the financiers) failed to understand.

The nasty reality for the financial industry is that in western democracy those fools the plebs (non-bankers) get to vote, and even if the current government are not going to kick them where it hurts eventually the public will vote someone in who will. Then that really terrible thing happens called legislation which stops them continuing making money at the tax payer's expense. Nice friendly draconian legislation like that after the South Sea Bubble, the kind that disbands all public held companies and locks all the nice bankers in the jail for a few years. Anyway here is what the President of Principalis thinks,
My point is that the state as it currently exists in Western Europe cannot continue to exist - this is the end of the social welfare state.
The problem is that no-one in Western Europe wants to give up the social welfare state, so they have to find a way to fund its continuation and that means they can't deregulate the private sector.
Funny but deregulating the private financial sector was why we had the crisis, that had to be resolved by the intervention of the state through the central banks (the economic purists can say this is not the state as the central banks are independent, but who permits the printing of money? who send a monthly report to whom?).

So would you really put any money in a company which is lead by someone with this startling lack of vision? Someone who really knows how to annoy those with the legislative power? In a last ditch battle between politicians and financiers if it is a choice between the markets tanking or winning an election I know which way they will go. They do not want to be out of power and kicking a few billionaires and millionaires doesn't cost many votes. In the end the people hold them to account. It is either a friendly account at the ballot box, or if the financiers want to keep pushing it a less friendly one of the 1789 variety. If the financiers think this is not a possible outcome then lets look at history and politicians who found themselves in a financial crisis having to choose between their financier friends and holding on to power - Nero, King John, Philip IV, the French Revolutions, the Russian Revolutions ...

No comments: