Skip to content

It’s Raining!

July 4, 2017

By Paul Homewood

It’s raining so hard even the ducks are complaining!

So a quick post on a couple of articles in yesterday’s Business Telegraph:

First is from Liam Halligan:

Eonomists at big, powerful institutions generally think alike. From HM Treasury to the Bank of England, consensus views dominate. Whether it’s the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development or the International Monetary Fund, dismal scientists tend to converge towards a single “house view”.

This is hardly surprising. You don’t generally make your career within a large, hierarchical organisation if you like thinking “outside the box”. More fundamentally, these “top” institutions are essentially political and strategic in nature – with the strategy determined elsewhere. For all the scientific pretence, resident economists will overwhelmingly serve up what their political masters want to hear.

These realities explain why economics, or at least the “official” economics that dominate our newspapers and airwaves, is so often captured by “groupthink”. An example of groupthink from a few years ago was that the UK should join the single currency. Any economist who thought otherwise was treated like a pariah. A more recent illustration was that if the UK voted to leave the European Union, that would spark, in the Treasury’s words, “an immediate and profound economic shock”.

An ongoing example of groupthink, which holds right across the Western firmament of “leading” economists, is that quantitative easing is a good idea. Any economist who objects, or asks awkward questions about what happens when QE ends, is – once again – dismissed as unsophisticated or wilfully obtuse.

Groupthink indulges lazy, line-of-least-resistance analysis. Yet, the main economic research bodies across the Western world, taxpayer-funded and granted widespread respect, are drenched in it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/07/01/avoid-another-crisis-need-end-qe/

Now who does that remind you of?

Meanwhile Ben Marlow has a short piece about the sale of Rio Tinto’s Australian coal business to China’s Yancoal:

Last week saw a rare public defeat for Glencore’s Ivan Glasenberg, as his long pursuit of Rio Tinto’s Australian coal business ended in failure. Rio opted to sell Coal & Allied to China’s Yancoal for $2.7bn (£2.1bn) despite two bids from Glencore.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/07/01/qatars-airline-ambitions-look-like-pie-sky/

Yancoal is the Australian based subsidiary of Yanzhou Coal, in turn owned by the Yankuang Group. The latter is the Chinese state owned company, which is mainly based around coal mining.
So, simple question- why is the Chinese state owned company so keen to get hold of yet more Australian coal mines, when we are told China is wanting to pull back from coal?

Advertisements
7 Comments
  1. dangeroosdave permalink
    July 4, 2017 11:56 am

    Maybe they want coal to feed all the coal powered electric utilities they’re building. Or maybe China is full of bad kids and Christmas is coming soon.

  2. theguvnor permalink
    July 4, 2017 12:09 pm

    Some rainy day information you might like to review if you haven’t already.
    http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86528#disqus_thread

  3. Richard permalink
    July 4, 2017 12:17 pm

    Keep telling it like it is Paul.
    Some people DO listen.

  4. July 4, 2017 12:35 pm

    “Outside the box” describes President Trump’s cabinet picks. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is a highly successfully businessman and Treasury Secretary, Steven Mnuchin is a banker and film producer. Budget Director, Mick Mulvaney, from the US House of Representatives, holds a law degree from my graduate institution, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (but we won’t hold that against him). He also has experience in development and real estate.

    Of course this has the collective establishment panties in a wad. Instead of a list from the “faculty lounge” he has chosen, for his cabinet, successful people who actually have dealt with their department duties. Obama, on the other hand, had the perfect faculty lounge cabinet. No one had ever held a real job, let alone run a business, but they could state the faculty lounge position perfectly.

  5. Don B permalink
    July 4, 2017 2:46 pm

    Why does China want coal reserves? The answer is obvious.

    “These Chinese corporations are building or planning to build more than 700 new coal plants at home and around the world, some in countries that today burn little or no coal, according to tallies compiled by Urgewald, an environmental group based in Berlin. Many of the plants are in China, but by capacity, roughly a fifth of these new coal power stations are in other countries.

    “Over all, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, according to Urgewald’s tally, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world’s coal-fired power capacity by 43 percent.

    http://joannenova.com.au/2017/07/coal-boom1600-new-plants-in-62-countries-around-the-world-increasing-43/

  6. Athelstan permalink
    July 4, 2017 3:12 pm

    The green blob are forever swallowing the PRC’s BS line concerning…. it’s drive for ruinables and ‘green solutions’, when everyone knows full well that China thinks ‘green energy’ is a western mental disease – they’re right: we are presided over and ordered by the green loonies and mental politicians who all drank the green kool aid poison.

  7. stephen m lord permalink
    July 4, 2017 6:35 pm

    It’s one thing to say publically that China will cut back on coal but this is about real money. The Chinese are smart and have not fallen for the global climate foolishness
    The people running the Chines communist party have no intention of sharing the loot with UN bureaucrats.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: