Learning from Dogs

Integrity? Here is your quiz question for today:

Which international, taxpayer-funded organisation has an unelected crony of the British Prime Minister in an important – but not the top job – who earns more than the President of the United States and double the salary of Hillary Clinton?

Clue!

Yes, you’re right. It is the European Union. This is an organisation of member states that in principle is supposed to be

Baroness Ashton

about creating a free, democratic and open market in Europe. It has turned into a proto-state (in the eyes of the Brusselocrats) which – therefore – has to have a “Foreign Minister”, in this case Baroness Ashton.

This is a person with very little knowledge of international affairs sent by Gordon Brown to Brussels because he couldn’t afford to lose Peter Mandelson or David Milliband. This is a person never elected to any public post, yet who receives a vast salary and benefits package higher than that of ANY of the Presidents and/or Prime Ministers of ANY of the member states of the EU.

As “The Daily Mail” points out, in addition to this very large salary the Foreign Minister also enjoys an extraordinary raft of other benefits:

“Her basic pay of £250,000 is double that of her U.S. counterpart, Hillary Clinton (who’s on £124,000). And on top of that, Lady Ashton is entitled to a raft of benefits including a £38,000 yearly accommodation allowance, £10,000 annual entertainment budget, two chauffeurs, plus thousands of pounds more in sundry allowances and – if she survives – a pension of £64,000 pa (three times the average salary in Britain) plus a “golden handshake” of over £450,000.”

All this goes hand-in-hand with billions spent on the new EU “diplomatic service”.

But hang on a minute! The EU is NOT A STATE!

The EU has no army! Baroness Ashton as “Foreign Minister” can decide on practically nothing that the key heads of government do not agree to. So what is going on here? Is all this vast waste of public money in a time of financial crisis either A) the bloated pretention of Brusselcrats who have a delusional idea of their own importance or B) another brick in the wall which one day WILL be a United States of Europe.

One can see how the thinking goes: “We’ll set up a “Foreign Ministry” so big and powerful that one day they will just have to agree to creating a single state to justify it. And of course the more it costs, the more important it obviously is and therefore the more powerful we ourselves will be. And naturally, the more jobs there will be for us to go to on the Brussels merry-go-round.

Of course, it is both A AND B. And how can they afford these humungous salaries? Well, because they can get away with it. In theory they are accountable, but in reality? How many people even know who their European MP is? Once you get onto the Euro Gravy Train it disappears out of sight. Nothing the voter says or does seems to stop the bloated upward creep of salaries, allowances and pretentions.

How ANY Brusselocrat can justify such a ludicrous salary for an unelected and essentially unimportant  “minister” is a mystery. The main justification seems to be “self-interest”. The EU is NOT A STATE. States have Foreign Ministers.

It is dishonest and amounts to theft of public funds. But that is not the WORST of it. The saddest thing is that it damages the morale of those who – like me – used to believe in a Europe united but not “statefied”. I want a free and open market. I do NOT want a United States of Europe. But this is where they want to lead us, and – like a black hole – each year sees a tiny creep in that direction, or in the above-mentioned case, a BIG creep. I also do not want a venal, money-grabbing, bureaucratic elite in Brussels which makes 80% and rising of British law.

Once again, one wonders if delusional pretentions will bring the whole edifice crashing down and the baby go out with the bathwater …

By Chris Snuggs

Politics, history and daftness!

Blah

The Armenian “genocide” of WWI is once again in the news.  The Americans seem to be on the point of recognizing what happened as genocide, much to the fury of the Turks. (though Obama is – once again – apparently wobbling ….)

To my mind, what happened WAS genocide or as near it as makes no difference, but that judgement is best left to historians and is not what interests me in this matter. No, once again it is the absolute hysteria that nationalism can provoke that intrigues me. I take hysteria to be a form of insanity; it is certainly as potentially destructive. How can most of an entire nation be insane?

The point is – but logic seems to go straight out of the window when nationalist hysteria takes over – that this happened nearly ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO. Any Turks involved are long dead. Present-day Turks cannot POSSIBLY be blamed for what their predecessors did, no more than Germans today can be blamed for Hitler or indeed today’s Mongols for Genghis Khan.

What is the POINT of Turks protesting so loudly about what was the appalling mass killings of Armenians? Nobody is going to blame TODAY’S Turks, are they?

The Turks’ current position could be described as anything from wrong through illogical to insane. For goodness sake, just admit the truth and let’s get on with the future. It happened, it wasn’t YOUR fault but THE TRUTH must be told. Without the truth, we are lost.

The irony is – and irony is never far from human experience – that one supposes the Turkish reluctance to admit that it WAS a genocide or as near as dammit is because to do so would mean they “lost face” or “were guilty”, whereas in fact what is reprehensible is the very FACT that they refuse to admit it,  not the original events themselves for which THEY TODAY cannot be held responsible.

This seems to me such a self-evident truth that I truly do not understand the Turkish position. Perhaps someone else can help me here ……

As for “we must avoid damaging relations with Turkey”,  I can only throw up my hands in despair. The truth is the truth, and what is the VALUE of “relations” based on lies?

As for joining the EU, forget it. There is enough hysteria within our borders already without adding another 90 million people’s worth.

PS And while we’re on the Turks and Armenia, it is time that the Japanese made a more convincing admission that their army was guilty of appalling atrocities in WWII.

By Chris Snuggs

Fancy a Greek Isle?

Fancy a Greek Isle?

Germany is baulking at a Greek bailout ….. 84% of the people are opposed according to polls, and Frau Merkel is decidedly lukewarm. This is no surprise; the Germans are pretty commonsensical after all. They are  going through a “spot of fiscal turbulence” themselves and hardly in a mood to bail out a feckless, tax-avoiding, economic basket case on the flaky south of the Brusselian Empire ….

Instead, they have come up with a cunning plan; the Greeks should sell some of their islands. I can see the attraction; at knock-down prices, no doubt a good many Germans themselves – short of coast in the homeland – would be only too keen to snap up a firesale bargain.

But if I were Greek I would beware of Germans with cunning ideas. After all, it could be the islands today and the Acropolis tomorrow. Selling capital assets to clear debts built up on  a binge of tax-avoided short-term consumption is hardly the long-term solution, and it is remarkable how we humans do tend to go for short-term, quick-fix solutions (see my post on the Fat Pill) . Of course, in Europe at least the Sun (can I capitalize it? It is after all the source of my existence …) plays a large part here, for the further south you go the hotter it is, the more corruptly-shambolic the taxation system, the flakier the economy and the higher the debt. Of course, Britain is an exception to the rule, since it must be put in the Mediterranean basket of cases even though it is far up in the north. Still, Britain was ever exceptional ….

No, I would advise the Greeks to hang on to their islands for a rainy day and do the right thing, which is take the medicine, invest long-term rather than on frivolous consumption and in general live within your means. Selling the islands is desperation stakes, even if the ultimate solution would be to sell the whole country to the Germans and let them sort out the mess, and – more to the point – pay for it all as they did with East Germany.

But though this is hardly a laughing matter – especially for innocent Greeks (I assume there are some!!) – I did have a chuckle yesterday when I saw the headline.

“Greece calls for EU to play its part.” – in other words, bung in billions to bail them out. I am I confess mystified to understand exactly why the thrifty Danes should play their part in bailing out the hapless Greeks, though I suppose we do still owe them for democracy and stuff. When does the statute of limitations run out on this?

Well, good luck Greece, but don’t count on my pfennig, and don’t sell the islands either!

By Chris Snuggs

A rich and beautiful place in British History

View from Observatory Hill of Queen Anne's Palace, the old naval buildings & across the river Canary Wharf

Paul Handover recently published an article about “Daylight Saving” and the Greenwich Meridian.  THIS SITE with its photos and links is of particular interest to those with little personal knowledge of London.

Greenwich Park – where stands the magnificent Royal Observatory – is one of the jewels of London. Steeped in history, it provides the perfect day-out for the family, including foreign tourists. Forget the jostling crowds in the frenzied den of useless consumption that is Oxford Street and take a train out to Greenwich. There you will find a magnificent park, wonderful views of London and the Thames, the Royal Observatory and the National Maritime Museum. Too much to mention in detail, but if for nothing else just go to see the clocks of John Harrison, horologer extraordinaire in a time when chronometry meant everything to men at sea. You don’t have to be British to take pleasure in the great skills and achievements of British sailors and explorers, backed up by men of science responsible for some of the most important advances in scientific history.

I can’t count how many times I’ve been to Greenwich Park, but every time I get back to London from my current home in Germany, I try to take my son there.  I want him to see this rich place in British history, but also to enjoy its enormous beauty.

A Magic Pill for Everything?

I am always struck by Man’s desperate groping for a Magic Solution to each and every problem. It is a bit pathetic but also of course rather funny, especially if one tries to see things from the perspective of a visiting alien from outer space.

Looking for a Magic Pill?

Let’s take “The Fat Pill”. What we really want is not to eat properly and cut down our vast consumption of just about everything but especially burgers, chips, popcorn swamped in sugar, honey or chocolate, giant steaks and pizzas, crisps, candy, and of course alcohol and simultaneously combine this with a healthy lifestyle involving regular exercise that makes us pant (to get the heart going – nothing to do with sex, though Tiger Woods is clearly pretty fit)!

No, what we prefer is to keep on stuffing ourselves and then take a FAT PILL! Whoever invents this is going to make Bill Gates look like a starving rickshaw- puller in India.

Then there is the ALCOPILL. Rather than drink in moderation to the benefit of all and sundry many of us prefer to binge ourselves to the point of death and then, just before hitting the sack (if we make it that far), grope for the magic pill. I believe pharmaceutical companies worldwide are working furiously on this in the hope of hitting the jackpot. Much more profitable than boring old stuff with malaria, which kills millions every year.

It may be cynical old age, but I’m currently off magic solutions. As a language teacher, I saw the desperate scrambling for nirvana when language laboratories came in. Every school had to have one; every timetable was hacked about; teachers would become redundant ….. Oh dear … most language labs are now broken-down, dusty and abandoned piles of junk at the bottom of some rubbish tip somewhere.  Are wind-turbines in the same category?

dot.com? This was the magic pill of the late 1990s! The new paradigm. Everything would be different; billions could be made without doing any real work. Oh, and does this remind us of the banker’s world? Of course, they are an exception because DESPITE everything they can STILL make billions for doing no real work.

As for government finance (a quite different animal), the current British magic pill is to print money and bung it into the economy in the hope of stimulating “growth”. None of this “living within our means”, taking “a bit of strong medicine” stuff. No, we’ll go for the magic pill so we can get back to normal levels of debt and spending. Patience, virtue, moderation and commonsense are much less fun than the magic pill of printing money.

And there is a VERY GOOD reason for this of course: the GENERAL ELECTION is around the corner and we don’t want any pain BEFORE then, do we? After, of course – if we get the right result – we will have a bit of commonsense back. Not that we want to, but it’ll be forced on us by the markets … but then we can blame it all on someone else. In Britain’s case, Mrs. Thatcher will probably still come in for considerable stick, even though she left power nearly twenty years ago.

Magic? Sadly, one can see the same desperate groping for the easy solution in religion. We are metaphysically, morally, spiritually and practically lost, so let’s look for some magic to provide a solution, even if there is not the slightest proof of the existence of God that would stand up in court.

Our epitaph may well be: Homo Sapiens – the Magic Species. Unfortunately, magic is best left to conjurors; it is not a recipe for managing society.

by Chris Snuggs

A friend on another site just posed this question.

Why is it that a recession is described as two or more successive quarters of “negative growth”, but being out of recession is just one quarter of (estimated) growth?

I felt emboldened to pen an answer as follows ….

In Britain, the definition of recession-emergence is from the same school of economics as growth predictions for next year (any year), which are always about 5 zillion% more than actually turns out to  be the case.

Recession in Britain

The cunning  idea is that future growth will be vast enough to cover the even vaster existing debts and commitments. And, of course, by the time we KNOW what the growth actually turned out to be, most people will have forgotten the predictions on growth from the financial and economic wizards running the country. That’s also one of the great things about a new mess or crisis; it always takes the mind off previous crises, which are likely to be ongoing but less in the media and therefore not to be bothered about too much.

This is, of course, in addition to the fact that growth in itself is incompatible with reducing global warming, but here we are getting a bit too technical.

Well, that’s how we do it in Britain anyway. How do you manage it over there?

by Chris Snuggs

A reply from a U.S. economist.

Hello there Chris!

Recession in the U.S. is also defined as two successive quarters of negative GDP growth.  At least, that’s how its officially defined.  And to add my answer to your friend’s question — either the economy is either in a recession — i.e., two or more consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth — or it isn’t, which means that the string of negative GDP growth rates is broken.  And that only takes one quarter of positive growth.

Most of the economists I know personally tend to look at a bigger picture than the stated GDP figures, however.   I focus on capital and labor utilization rates as I believe that they are more important measures of a well-functioning economy.  The final GDP figures in both of our countries are national income accounting figures, and have all the weaknesses of any income statement variable.   They are flow variables, which ignore the stock of economic wealth.   For example, if you invest $100 this year in the stock market, and it grows in value by $20, only the $100 is counted. The increase in wealth is never captured in measures of GDP.

Another problem with current measures of GDP and GDP growth is that government spending is considered on par with private spending, which brings into question the sustainability of growth measures based on GDP, although President Obama and perhaps Prime Minister Brown are both fine with growth rates being fueled by large increases in government spending.  Finally, a significant fraction of economic activity, like the value of work in the home — is not measured.

So, yes, the official measurement of GDP is all wrapped up in technicalities.  But most economists I know pay little attention to it.  They are more concerned with how well the economy is functioning, whether the growth is sustainable, and whether people who want to work can find work.  If you are unemployed, the economy is in a recession, regardless of what the GDP figures say!

by Sherry Jarrell

Toyota – How not to do business!

Learning from Dogs was created by a few people who felt compelled to promote the values of “integrity”, which is often in short supply in the modern world, though perhaps it always has been to some extent in all civilisations. Is dishonesty an eternal part of Human Nature? We like to think not …..

Well, “Integrity” includes being honest, open and dedicated to the truth, even if this is personally inconvenient. It may seem a somewhat forlorn hope to promote something that for an important minority of people is and will probably remain an alien concept, these being people who put self above group. However, the recent Toyota fiasco reminds me that perhaps integrity’s time has indeed arrived, for this is THE INFORMATION AGE. It is NO LONGER easy to hide the truth, which tends to come out now with greater frequency due to a variety of factors including most importantly the Internet. But there are other reasons, too. To take Britain, for example, we now have the “Freedom of Information Act”, which – despite some limitations – has done wonders in allowing the free press (another essential ingredient of course, and sadly lacking in so many countries) to reveal wrong-doing, principally by appallingly-incompetent governments.

Toyota chief Akio Toyoda

As for Toyota, what has staggered me is that the company KNEW of these accelerator & brake problems several years ago. Indeed, people began having crashes as far back as 2006. Yet only recently has it done anything serious about putting things right.  One has to wonder what on earth possessed the Toyota bosses to think that they could get away with it, which on the face of it seems to be exactly what they were trying to do. Who was advising them? It seems to me to have been INEVITABLE that the truth about their cars’ problems  would come out, so even from a cynical and selfish point of view they should have recalled the defective cars at least two years ago. But quite APART from the wisdom of doing that in practical, business terms (the result of delay being to devastate the company’s image to a far greater extent than would otherwise have been the case) there was a MORAL aspect to the problem, too. By ALLOWING the problems to go unresolved they put people at risk. And not just ANY people, but their customers! As has been said before, but sadly with all too much frequency, “You couldn’t make this up.”

How could the world’s number one car manufacturer get it so utterly and totally wrong, both from a moral and practical point of view? I am wondering if Toyota can recover from this. Yes, I know they are big, but there are PLENTY OF CHOICES for people seeking to buy a vehicle. Who in their right mind is now going to buy a car from a company which A) made defective cars (and MILLIONS of them) and B) HID THE TRUTH while people were dying in crashes?

One reason may again be the Japanese obsession with “face”. It was probably difficult for the world’s number one company, which seemed capable of nothing but success, to admit publicly that it had got things badly wrong. The Chairman is now admitting this, but to be frank it reminds me of the old expression about getting blood out of a stone, or being dragged kicking and screaming to the confessional.  And from what I read today he seems to be blaming the troubles on the fact that “the company may have grown too quickly.” I could describe this utterance with an extremely rude word or two but as this is a family site I will refrain. Let’s just say that the company WASN’T HONEST.

I remember as a kid growing up in the shattered London of the1950s the lessons I got from teachers and parents. One of those which stuck in my mind was “Honesty is the best policy.” This has never been more true as it is now. For the Brave New World we dream of honesty is a sine qua non. We must be honest with ourselves, our friends, families, companies and the public. There is no other way to happiness. Will Toyota’s disaster be a lesson for other companies?  NOBODY can get it right all the time and there is no dishonour in the occasional failure, only in the lies involved in trying to cover it up. How many times has this been demonstrated? Had Nixon come clean at once about Watergate he might have survived, but the cover-up was worse than the deed.

On a practical note, I sincerely hope that the families of those killed or maimed in Toyota accidents will sting the company for every yen they can; that is no more than the company deserves.

By Chris Snuggs

[BBC News had an item on the 24th that makes interesting watching. Ed.]

Who do the Earth’s raw materials really “belong” to?

So once again the Falkland Islands have hit the headlines, and as usual for the wrong reasons. The British have given the green light for oil exploration around the islands and Argentina has resisted by imposing restrictions on shipping movements, if not (yet) an all-out blockade.

Who knows where this one will end? It could either fizzle out or erupt into another full-scale confrontation, since big issues are involved, and none bigger than nationalism, for Argentina claims the islands as “its own”.

The history of the Falkland Islands is long and complex, but the idea that Argentina has any fundamental right to these islands is surreally silly. Argentina is owned and ruled by descendants of the Spanish, who took over the land that now forms Argentina (a state in its own right only since the early 19th c) as part of the European colonisation of the world. By all means let us return the Falklands to their original owners, except that the first people to settle there were French for a start. And if you are going to adopt the principle of returning land to its original owners, then we can look forward to most of the population of Argentina returning to Spain and returning the land to the Indians, can we?

The other argument often advanced is that “the islands are near Argentina”. Well, I don’t know when these people last looked at a map but 300 miles isn’t exactly “near”. But in any case, if we are to adopt nearness as a criteria for the reapportioning of land then I look forward to England once again reclaiming France, a mere 21 miles away. And what on earth is Corsica doing as part of France? But of course France must have the Channel Islands, as they are very near – and so on. “Continental shelf”? “We own the land under the sea?” Go down this route and we’ll need a whole new generation of map-makers.

When all the idiotic, overblown, childish and nationalistic guff (which sadly  led to many hundreds of dead in the 1972 war) is stripped away from this debate, we are left with two fundamentals:

• the right of self-determination
• the way the Earth’s resources are used

As for the first, there have been British people living on the islands since at least 1833. They have – as I believe all people have – the right to determine their own fate.  This is called self-determination. Unfortunately, it is a noble principle to which the world all too often pays only lip-service. The nation state has become an entrenched, solidified system, mostly because it confers great power on the leaders of each state, who – especially when democracy has not taken root – use the statehood to advance their own power and megalomania. Statism has for centuries run roughshod over people’s fundamental rights. Iraq was a “state”, but one where the Kurds (denied their own state by British cynicism) suffered cruelly under the jackboot of a fascist psychopath. That the British eventually helped to remove this monster (suffering enormous criticism from in particular the country that inspired the world with its own Revolution in 1789) is only a tiny compensation for the original injustice done to the Kurds. They are by no means alone; minorities all over the world suffer in different degrees from arrogant statism: Tibetans; Basques,; American Indians and Australian aborigines among many others. Yes, injustices were done centuries ago, but you cannot wind back history, or where would it end?  How would Europe cope with all those Yanks for a start if they gave the USA back to Sitting Bull’s descendants? Apparently, we all came originally from Africa. Should we all return there and leave our countries empty?

Well, on the Falklands are Brits, and Britain did them the honour of allowing them freely to choose whether they want to be annexed to Argentina. This would in fact give them innumerable advantages, plus of course potentially-disastrous disadvantages. As trust is in short supply, these people prefer not to take the risk and so remain British. That is their right. In refusing to discuss “sovereignty”, Britian is doing no more than strike a blow for self-determination. To give Britain its due, it has pursued the same policy – albeit modestly – towards the (in the eyes of some of them) oppressed Welch, Scots and Irish.

So much for fundamental 1. The Argentinian case is pathetic.

What about the RESOURCES question?

Well, resources are another area where the state jackboot falls with great weight. We all breathe the same air, share the same sun, the same water; but where the stuff under the ground is concerned, it’s every state for itself. Yet casting aside state arrogance, isn’t it ridiculous that state A can derive vast wealth from “its” oil, gold or whatever, while state B alongside it is mired in poverty and misery? So much for “share-and-share” alike. Even belonging to the same race is no help; while some Arabs built extraordinary palaces and Audi Quattros made of solid silver, poor Somalis, Yemenis, and even Egyptians are mired in abject poverty. (Check out this Arab Palace in Dubai, and Mugabe’s presidential palace in Zimbabwe, which is by no means untypical of poverty-stricken Africa)

One day, in a joined-up world which recognizes that we are all brothers, we will share resources “fairly”. Britain could show the way by offering to share any oil resources with – not only Argentina – but all of Latin America (though we could leave out Venezuela …) What a blow for brotherhood that would be!

By Chris Snuggs

Mr Sepp Blatter demonstrating how a foot may be placed in a mouth!

John Terry

Sepp Blatter, or Blabber as he is more affectionately known, is never at a loss for words, and generally good entertainment value.  However, this week he surpassed himself with a pontification of pretty unsurpassing silliness about the moral values of South-Western Europe.

For those who do not follow the minutiae of British football, John Terry, Captain of the English football team, was unfortunate enough to have his name dragged through the media in connection with his adultery, or as some alleged, serial adultery. Now the question of whether it is anyone else’s business what the Captain of England does in his “private”  life is an interesting one, but  I am today more concerned with Blabber’s response, and two things struck me about it in particular.

Here’s a quote from a piece in the UK newspaper The Guardian.

Fifa president Sepp Blatter has claimed that in some countries, John Terry would have been applauded rather than sacked as national team captain for having an alleged affair.

First of all, I am puzzled as to why Blabber feels he can elect himself as spokesperson for the whole of “latin” Europe? He is a football functionary, not a moralist. I must say that had I been latin I would have found his remarks offensive. As an Italian lady was quoted as saying: “If my husband slept with my sister I would not find it in the least amusing or applaudworthy.”

Secondly, let us suppose – for the sake of argument – he was right to say that

Sepp Blatter, FIFA

latins would have applauded Terry’s behaviour.  This would mean that the vast majority of European Catholics were totally and utterly hypocritical. After all, “Christians”, nominal or otherwise, still go in vast numbers to churches for weddings, baptisms and funerals, don’t they? Here in Bavaria, whenever you pass someone in the street you say “Gruss Gott.” Is Blabber really saying that all these people just take the easy bits of Christianity and laugh at the tricky stuff, like adultery, rich people and eyes of needles, treating their neighbour as thy brother and so on?

And that IS in effect what he said. Insults don’t come a lot grosser, do they? In fact, this was a DOUBLE WHAMMY. First he insulted all of Catholic Europe and simultaneously he insulted all the Anglo-Saxons by describing the furore over Terry’s philanderings as “Anglo-Saxon in nature”. And of course, the term “Anglo-Saxon” is one of fairly strong abuse, especially among the French elite.  This by the way has always amused me, since most of the Germans started off as Saxons, and the Germans are very PC, whereas the British certainly are not PC, even if half of us originally CAME from Saxony!

As for adultery, well, let’s be clear, it isn’t “good”, is it? OK, “There but for the grace of God go I.” , “Let no man cast the first stone”, “Forgive and Forget” and so on, but for society it isn’t really desirable that people should treat their marriage vows as casually as Blabber seems to think half of Europe does, is it?

In Britain for a start (but we are not alone)  there is the lowest level of marriages for over 100 years and very high levels of divorce, This isn’t “good” for society, is it? And of course, I’m thinking especially of the children involved.

And when you marry, you make vows. Do these now mean nothing to people like Blabber, who thinks that Catholic latin Europe would laugh at Terry’s adultery?

Well, people in positions of power and responsibility should reflect more before they speak, because many lesser mortals may make the mistake of giving their remarks a credibility they do not deserve.

And of course, the Captain of England is a role model, and – possibly unfairly – not only on the field.

By Chris Snuggs

More holes than in a Swiss Cheese!

There is currently a merry old ding-dong spat going on between the German and Swiss governments. Basically, someone has got hold of information about German citizens with bank accounts in Switzerland where they are hiding large sums on which they should pay German taxes.

This or these enterprising whistleblower(s) are offering to sell this data to the German government for a hefty fee. The German government is on the point of accepting to buy this “illegally-obtained” information from the (from the Swiss point of view) criminals who have stolen their secret bank data.

This story raises a large number of fascinating questions. It has long been common knowledge that Switzerland offers banking facilities with few questions asked. Any self-respecting criminal or tax evader has or had a secret, numbered Swiss account.

What has always amazed me is how they have got away with this for so long, stuck as they are in the centre of Europe. How is it possible that other countries have allowed Switzerland to become a haven for money obtained illegally in other countries?

For it is clearly immoral to profit from the illegal activities of foreign nationals, isn’t it? What exactly is the difference between this behaviour and “receiving stolen goods”? Worse, we have to remember that the largest sums come from drugs. Anyone willing to look after (or launder) drug  money is complicit in the misery and deaths of millions of drug addicts worldwide. Yet the Swiss have pulled off this trick for decades. The Swiss banking (and government) fraternity has never shied away from shady dealings, being until the end of WWII covert supporters of the Nazis.

Well, Angela Merkel is going to do a deal with presumably Swiss “criminals” (according to the Swiss government) in order to recoup money it is owed by German criminals (according to Germany). What a merry old moral maze we have here. But in truth, the world is now too small and inter-connected to allow either tax evasion on a vast scale  or the safeguarding of criminal funds.

Switzerland has to decide whether to remain as a supporter of tax evaders and gangsters (including of course African Presidents who have ripped their countries off in a big way) OR to join the real, civil, honest and inter-connected world.

The rest of us should stop tolerating this connivance with crime. “Client secrecy” is no excuse for condoning and profiting from crime.

More on the whole  Nazi gold in Switzerland story is here.

By Chris Snuggs