Is Dan Hannan with us or agin us?

Here he is on September 29th, 2008:

Replacing EU membership with a Swiss-style bilateral free trade accord …

Here he is on November 29th, 2009:

I’d abolish the Common Agricultural Policy, thereby giving a greater boost to Europe’s economies than any number of bail-outs and stimulus packages.  Scrap the directives that tell us what hours we can work, what vitamins we can buy …

The European Commission could then be reduced to a small secretariat, answering to national ministers. The European Court of Justice could be replaced by a tribunal that would arbitrate trade disputes. The European Parliament could be scrapped altogether.

You will, of course, have spotted the flaw in my plan.

Yes, we have spotted it and it doesn’t look good at first sight.

Now Dan, you more than anyone have seen what happened at the protest in the parliament, the way you were stood over and vilified, the way they handle their politics, the underhanded and secretive manner, the draconian laws at the ready, the regions in England ready to become operational.

And yet you suggest remaining inside and trying to change the very people we’re up against – changing their minds?  Since when has the EU ever relinquished a power it had subsumed?  Since when did it ever say to a British politician: “You’re right and we’ll restructure and reform within three years, just because you asked us to?

I’m at a loss how to react to this seeming naivety.  It smacks of toeing the Cameron line, truth be told.  Since when was it a wise policy, as mice, to remain within the cat’s reach and to plead with it not to eat us?

We need out of the EU because it is a ravening monster.  We want a referendum on in or out.  David Cameron has said we’re not going to get either and you, Dan, have said very little about which way you’re newly committed.

Would you please clarify where you stand on both the referendum and withdrawal from the EU?

The real state of the recovery

keen 1keen 2keen 3Money injection doubled in four months [govt base money]:keen 4Broad money supply collapsed though [banks hanging on to it and not lending]:keen 5

The money multiplier theory does not hold water this time around.

So, to expect history to repeat itself, meaning post-war period is being delusional.  The history is going to repeat itself then it’s the … history from the 1930s, when deleveraging ruled the roost..  [Steve Keen, 30:01]


How has it ever been resolved?  Major external crisis or war.  Watch 2012.

Quiz at Nine – what’s in a name?


Film and music:

1. What was Citizen Kane’s first name?

2. What’s another name for Annie Mae Bullock?

3. By which name is Allen Konigsberg better known?

4. Who is Julia Wells?

5. Nicholas Coppola used which name in films?


Charles, Tina Turner, Woody Allen, Julie Andrews, Nicholas Cage

The stability of ferries

Another ferry sinking in Indonesia and this highlights a problem I’ve been going on about for a long time – unsafe designs and exceeding designed passenger carrying capacity.

Obviously, we can’t do anything about Indonesia but we can do about our own ferries – we’re an island nation [for now].  Look again please at the photo below.

Oasis-Of-The-Seas-302262Courting disaster

In the article in which that pic was posted, I argued that there are designs which on paper and under ideal conditions might work but that this is unrealistic in the real ocean and under real wind conditions.  Commercial considerations are why a ferry runs in the first place but shifting that to the hull design and cutting corners with seaworthiness is plain criminal.


All it would have taken were two amas [outriggers], for very little overall cost and they would have avoided much of the risk:

Even on large ferries, these are possible to fit. They may look a bit less beautiful than the westernized “stabilizers” but they don’t fail when the chips are down.

As for the overcrowding, well, nothing can compensate for that.