PPCC - Pisitófilos Creditófagos - HoT SuMMeR 2021

[Derby]

https://thesoundingline.com/banks-are-picking-up-less-than-a-percent-to-carry-mortgages/

Banks Are Picking up Less Than a Percent to Carry Mortgages

Imagine that you are financial institution with capital that you need to make a return on.

You can either:

Hire accountants, managers, sales people, customer service, marketing, advertising, compliance, HR, etc… and get into the byzantine business of being a regulated retail bank writing 30-year mortgages yielding 2.8% before defaults and inflation in a grossly overheated housing market, assuming you can find enough people to lend to – which you likely cannot.

Or….

You can fire everybody and buy 100% risk-free 30-year treasuries yielding just 0.89% less.



So, what have banks decided to do?







The charts above show that banks’ loan-to-deposit ratios have catered since the era of forever accommodation started in 2009, their treasury and security holdings have risen nearly 500%, and bank employment has dropped.

Somebody might want to explain to the Fed that endlessly low interest rates might not be the panacea of good capital allocation decisions that they imagined… In fact, it is transforming the banking system into the vestigial organ of finance, a sort of intermediary holding zone for Treasury debt on its way to the Fed that still writes some loans to people with little-to-no credit risk out of force of habit.

[Derby]

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-9895829/Pret-founder-Staff-crisis-driving-restaurant-bills.html

Founder of Pret a Manger warns that restaurant prices are set to rise by more than a fifth because of the soaring cost of staff

*Julian Metcalfe said the pandemic had brought a 'perfect storm' which made 'massive' wage increases to up to £15 per hour inevitable

*The entrepreneur, who is now chief executive of Itsu, said his shipping costs were four times higher than pre-pandemic

*Pubs and restaurants have struggled for staff, leading some to increase wages, while a shortage of lorry drivers has also led wages to rise

*Industry leaders have reported a rise in the price of meat and fresh produce of up to a seventh, while beer prices around London have rocketed

[el malo]

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-9895829/Pret-founder-Staff-crisis-driving-restaurant-bills.html

Founder of Pret a Manger warns that restaurant prices are set to rise by more than a fifth because of the soaring cost of staff

*Julian Metcalfe said the pandemic had brought a 'perfect storm' which made 'massive' wage increases to up to £15 per hour inevitable

*The entrepreneur, who is now chief executive of Itsu, said his shipping costs were four times higher than pre-pandemic

*Pubs and restaurants have struggled for staff, leading some to increase wages, while a shortage of lorry drivers has also led wages to rise

*Industry leaders have reported a rise in the price of meat and fresh produce of up to a seventh, while beer prices around London have rocketed

Que me diga eso el dueño de Casa Paco que pone menús del día a 8,95€ vale, pero que me lo diga el dueño de Pret a Manger que cobra 5 libras por un sandwich infecto, paga lo mínimo a sus curritos y con impuestos más bajos que en españa..

A ver si lo caro va a ser el pastizal que pagan por el alquiler de sus locales en zonas prime de las grandes ciudades.

Por cierto no recuerdo haber visto nunca a un ingles de pura cepa, de esos de 8 apellidos ingleses, atendiendo en un Pret. Ni siquiera chavalines que lo usan como primer trabajo.

Según estoy escribiendo esto me doy cuenta que a lo mejor el dueño de Pret quiere tener beneficios de verdad y no las limosnas con las que se conforma Paco después de trabajar 15 horas al día, 6 días a la semana y pagar todos los gastos e impuestos   

[Negrule]

“I just finished reading Jonathan Levy's "Ages of American Capitalism", one of the best books I've read recently on American economic history. He discusses the various stages of American economic development and the key role played by the government in...“

“setting the conditions for each stage. In the latest stage – beginning in the late 1970s-1980s – he argues that the government now enforces the "political economy of asset appreciation", in which weak income growth is supposed to be ameliorated by rising asset prices.“

“One problem with this approach, of course, is that because assets are not distributed equally, this locks the economy structurally into rising income inequality.“

https://twitter.com/michaelxpettis/status/1427139928278851585?s=21

[Negrule]

Joan Roca: “Ir a un restaurante va a ser más caro en el futuro”

El cocinero anticipa una crisis por falta de personal en el sector de la restauración y la hostelería

“Ir a un restaurante va a ser más caro en el futuro, debido a que se incrementarán los costes de personal. De hecho, hay una migración a otros sectores, a otras actividades, que permiten llevar otro tipo de vida, y eso supone un problema para la restauración”.

“Necesitamos reflexionar para cambiar las cosas, sobre todo para ver cómo nos relacionamos con los equipos, tenemos que ofrecer vida y hacer que el personal de los restaurantes sea estable”, afirma Joan Roca, que cuando compara el antes de El Celler de Can Roca, esto es, cuando el equipo trabajaba 14 horas, y el después, cuando el turno es de ocho horas ininterrumpidas, observa un hecho significativo: “el equipo antes nos duraba uno o dos años y ahora permanece con nosotros”.

https://www.google.es/amp/s/cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2021/08/12/fortunas/1628794177_412569.amp.html

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-9895829/Pret-founder-Staff-crisis-driving-restaurant-bills.html

Founder of Pret a Manger warns that restaurant prices are set to rise by more than a fifth because of the soaring cost of staff

*Julian Metcalfe said the pandemic had brought a 'perfect storm' which made 'massive' wage increases to up to £15 per hour inevitable

*The entrepreneur, who is now chief executive of Itsu, said his shipping costs were four times higher than pre-pandemic

*Pubs and restaurants have struggled for staff, leading some to increase wages, while a shortage of lorry drivers has also led wages to rise

*Industry leaders have reported a rise in the price of meat and fresh produce of up to a seventh, while beer prices around London have rocketed

Que me diga eso el dueño de Casa Paco que pone menús del día a 8,95€ vale, pero que me lo diga el dueño de Pret a Manger que cobra 5 libras por un sandwich infecto, paga lo mínimo a sus curritos y con impuestos más bajos que en españa..

A ver si lo caro va a ser el pastizal que pagan por el alquiler de sus locales en zonas prime de las grandes ciudades.

Por cierto no recuerdo haber visto nunca a un ingles de pura cepa, de esos de 8 apellidos ingleses, atendiendo en un Pret. Ni siquiera chavalines que lo usan como primer trabajo.

Según estoy escribiendo esto me doy cuenta que a lo mejor el dueño de Pret quiere tener beneficios de verdad y no las limosnas con las que se conforma Paco después de trabajar 15 horas al día, 6 días a la semana y pagar todos los gastos e impuestos   

[newclo]

Buenos días

Bolsas con crecimiento exponencial, deudas más que exponenciales, 3 planetas para mantener el ritmo de consumo... y le calculo 2 añitos fácil de economía dopada... ah ! y la pandemia ! que se me olvidaba que estamos dejando pasar el velo/catalizador o, bueno, igual todavía se agrava el tema y aún nos vale como culpable.

Cuando esto pete la explosión la van a oír hasta los turistas espaciales.

El tema es que mientras tanto hay que seguir viviendo e ir tomando decisiones; porque lo mismo se nos pasa la vida esperando que llegue el verano (sí, soy del norte)

Ahora mismo me empiezan a preocupar especialmente los movimientos en Afganistán y China; estos chinos no son de improvisar demasiado y me da mí que todos eso controles que están poniendo a la creación de monopolios  y recalentamiento son algo así como una declaración de intenciones; aquí mando yo, y podrán jugar a capitalistas los que yo quiera y serán tan ricos como yo quiera mientras yo quiera y caiga quien caiga.
Véase Alibaba, Evergrande....

En esta partida de ajedrez global que se mueva la Reina y se sacrifiquen alfiles y caballos ya es cosa seria

Quizás China quiere dejar claro que la estrategia de los QE, tapering y Green Revolution no está en manos de quienes se creía... aquí son ellos los que marcan el paso; sea el virus chino, americano o natural, sea el bloqueo del Canal de Suez un accidente o no, o incluso el minado de criptos y las propias criptos causa o consecuencia... aquí ya se sabe que China es el productor del mundo, el principal acreedor y que nos pueden estrangular si no tenemos cuidado

P.D... Seguro que alguno de ustedes puede aclararme el tema de Afganistán; cuáles son los verdaderos intereses allí, y refrescarme un poco ya de paso los actuales bloques de poder y los distintos frentes abiertos (no sólo en Afganistán)
Y digo que seguro que pueden hacerlo porque ya lo han hecho en anteriores ocasiones.

Muchas gracias !

[pollo]

No me cabe duda de que cometeremos los mismos errores, y me llama la atención qué desde Europa se permita.

Ya tenemos involucrados a los sectores más politizados, blanco y en botella…leche

https://www-ft-com.proxy.choate.edu/content/677e6d7f-14e9-47d8-bd08-448713286487

As the biggest ticket item in Spain’s recovery plan, the energy efficiency programme will prove a crucial test of whether the country will take advantage of the windfall of EU funds to transform its economy — or instead repeat the errors of the past.

He and Ribera hope banks and energy companies will also step up to help finance the modernisation — and that advisory one-stop shops will help people carry out the improvements.

“Things have to be easy and there needs to be an economic motivation to activate the change in mentality for millions of property owners,” said Ribera. “But a country that invented a system of mortgages that facilitated the construction boom should be able to do something similar to facilitate all this process of rehabilitation.”

Y ojo, en España hace falta que los edificios no sean máquinas de desperdiciar energía a cholón. El problema como siempre, es que es lo que menos importa y ya se están poniendo los habituales a la cola para recibir "lo suyo". Harán cuatro chapuzas sin visión a largo plazo, y cuando se acabe, se acabó.

[Derby]

En el caso que se considere necesario o el tema dé para más, abrimos hilo nuevo sobre Afghanistan. De momento, lo posteo aquí pero puede trasladarlo donde sea sin problemas.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/16/20-years-invasion-afghanistan-unnecessary-post-imperial-fantasy

It has taken 20 years to prove the invasion of Afghanistan was totally unnecessary, Simon Jenkins

Western involvement in the country was a post-imperial fantasy that has led to the current ghastly situation

The fall of Kabul was inevitable. It marks the end of a post-imperial western fantasy. Yet the west’s reaction beggars belief. Call it a catastrophe, a humiliation, a calamitous mistake, if it sounds good. All retreats from empire are messy. This one took 20 years, but the end was at least swift.

The US had no need to invade Afghanistan. The country was never a “terrorist state” like Libya or Iran. It was not at war with the US; indeed the US had aided its rise to power against the Russians in 1996. The Taliban had hosted Osama bin Laden in his mountain lair through his friendship with the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. At an immediate post-9/11 “loya jirga” in the southern city of Kandahar, younger leaders pressed the mullah to expel Bin Laden. Pakistan would probably have forced his surrender sooner or later. After the 2001 invasion the US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld demanded that George Bush “punish and get out”.

Yet neither Bush nor Tony Blair listened. Instead they experienced a rush of blood to the head. They commandeered Nato, which had no dog in the fight, and began “nation building”, as if nations were made of Lego. It would be an age, said the political scientist Joseph Nye, of the “velvet hegemon”. For reasons never fully explained, Blair declared a “doctrine of international community” and pleaded for Britain to be in the first bombing run over Kabul. He then sent Clare Short as the minister for international development to stop the Afghans growing poppies. Afghan poppy production soared to an all-time high, spreading from six to 28 provinces, probably Britain’s most successful farm product of all time. Opium floated the Taliban back to power.

When I visited Kabul in 2006, I had heard nothing but bombast about what already seemed a doomed venture. A British army of 3,400 volunteered to suppress resurgent Taliban rebels in Helmand. The defence secretary John Reid promised that only “remnants” of the Taliban remained and that “not a shot needed firing”. His general, David Richards, said it would be “just another Malaya”. Seven year later, British troops left defeated and the Americans took over before also being defeated. The local Pashtun are masters at humiliating outside powers.

From then on, retreat was only a matter of time. What is happening now is ghastly. Twenty years of dependency on lavish western taxpayers means that soldiers, interpreters, journalists, academics and aid workers are seeing friends threatened and killed. Years of assistance and training is at risk. A reputed trillion dollars of American money has been wasted. Britain alone has wasted £37bn.

How many times must it be drummed into British heads that the British empire is over? It is dead, finished, outdated, not to be repeated. Yet Boris Johnson has just sent an aircraft carrier to the South China Sea. Britain has no need, let alone right, to rule other countries, to “make the world a better place”. No soldier need die for it, let alone 454 British soldiers and civilians in Afghanistan. The best Britain can now do is establish good relations with a new regime in Afghanistan – in liaison with Kabul’s neighbours Pakistan and Iran – to protect at least some of the good it has attempted to do this past 20 years. The world is not threatening Britain. Terrorism does not need state sponsors, nor will it be ended by state conquest.

[Derby]

http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/957732/uk-house-prices-drop-for-first-time-in-2021-rightmove-data-957732.html

UK house prices drop for first time in 2021 - Rightmove data

The property website said asking prices between July 11 and August 7 fell by around 0.3%, weighed down by a 0.8% decline in houses of four bedrooms or more

[Derby]

https://www.ft.com/content/7ed490ed-2652-41f0-9aff-08aa0d3685a0

Actually, it doesn’t matter who runs the Fed

Edward Price argues central bank independence is too theoretical for any appointment to make a difference.

Along with the pace of tapering, the big question in US monetary policy right now is whether Joe Biden will replace Jay Powell as Fed chair. But Edward Price, a former British economic official and current teacher of political economy at New York University’s Center for Global Affairs, argues that — from a monetary policy perspective — it doesn’t matter who heads the Federal Reserve.

Truth be told, it doesn’t really matter who runs the Fed. Should that vex, consider this: if modern central banks are independent, why do they act as anything but?

The evidence for this charge is plentiful.

Today, low policy rates are no longer a countercyclical tool. Instead, they are a structural feature of the financial system. Want to counteract a financial crisis? Low rates. Want to sidestep a market meltdown? Low rates. Want to encourage the labour market, tout consumption, protect the debt stack, banish a pandemic or save a single currency? You guessed it. Low rates.

In fact, central banks appear studiously indifferent to the business cycle. Instead, over the past decade of swelling balance sheets, central bank swap lines and near zero interest rates, monetary accommodation has become a simple fact of life.

Is this how central banking was supposed to work? Probably not.

Let’s remember the basic plan. The third stab at creating an American central bank occurred in 1913 in a bid to tackle perennial banking crises and to introduce some degree of deflationary policy control over the US financial system. This was a countercyclical goal. If private actors introduce excessive inflationary pressures, and then panics, the Fed’s job was to counter with monetary policy. In 1977, however, the Fed was given a second job: targeting full employment. If the private sector can grind to a halt, the Fed, it was determined, should inject inflationary pressures to counteract those too.

The result was the dual mandate that targets both financial stability and full employment. Regrettably, however, the mandate is a contradiction in terms. The first task, encouraging activity, undoes the other task, discouraging the same. In fighting the worst excesses of the business cycle, the Fed must encourage its worst insufficiencies and vice versa. There is always either an inflationary or deflationary drift. As a result, the Fed’s actions can easily be procyclical.

As such, sceptics have long suspected that central bank independence isn’t worth spit. Instead, the de facto reality is simple. If their aim is cheap money, presidents and Congress alike will bash the American monetary authorities into submission. This may be so. And eventual inflation is certainly convenient for governments mired in debt. But the ultimate source of what we might call the Great Accommodation is far simpler than that.

To coin a phrase, it’s the international dollar standard, stupid.

Since the 1970s, the combination of fiat currencies, floating exchange rates, international capital mobility, financial innovation and post-crisis monetary policy have led us down the path of pecuniary profligacy. Call it currency wars or quantitative easing (QE). Call it an accommodative posture or animal spirits. Call it a flexible average inflation target (FAIT) or call it securitisation. Call it what you will. The demon of currency debasement goes by many names.

Here’s the truth. The 2006 asset bubble never burst: it was simply transferred from private to public ownership, from an assumption the Fed would bail the system out to the reality that it did. In fact, during the Great Moderation, an unregulated American financial system intervened — unchecked — in the prerogatives of the Fed. In essence, it printed excessive claims on dollars. When things went south, in 2007-8, the Fed rushed to fill in the gap. We might call the result not so much inflation targeting as asset-price targeting and not so much balance-sheet policy as balance-sheet capture.

Still, we have no choice. As the economist Robert Triffin pointed out, if the dollar is to survive in the world it must be both omnipresent and omnipotent. But if omnipresent, its omnipotence is greatly reduced. Supply enough dollars and, eventually, dollars won’t be worth much. Alas, the same is true in reverse. Protect dollar omnipotence, by curtailing the dollar supply, and dollar omnipresence vanishes overnight.

Meanwhile, the tottering US debt structure is plain for all to see. Nobody imagines serious tapering, or significant hikes, even if the market has an occasionally freak out. It’s hard to escape the obvious conclusion. Whoever runs the Fed doesn’t matter. A dove, or a dovish dove. Take your pick. They must continue the dollar’s expansion or face ruin.

What kind of ruin? Again, you name it. In this environment any sort of hike would cause a down cycle or even a crisis. In recent years, policymakers have discussed the ‘zero lower bound’ exhaustively. But the lower bound may be far less worrisome than whatever the ‘𝑥 upper bound’ may be. Presumably, there is some higher Federal Funds Rate that would see the financial system, and debt structure, collapse. What is this upper bound? A Federal Funds Rate of 2 per cent? Of 1 per cent? Who knows? There may be no policy space below us, but there’s also very little above.

Is everyone concerned? Not at all. The Fed claims recent inflation is transitory and its forecast is still muted for the rest of 2021. Sundry academics write at length about how dollar dominance has no alternative. Many think central bank independence is alive and well. As a recent Financial Times editorial has put it, “the Fed’s independence [is] intact, [and] on Powell’s watch it has used that independence to shift its policy framework in a markedly dovish direction.” Unfortunately, that’s another contradiction in terms. Avoiding markedly dovish directions is exactly what central bank independence was for.

Never mind. None of this will last forever. To paraphrase Leon Trotsky, the dollar may not be interested in inflation, but inflation is certainly interested in the dollar. At some point in the 2020s, expect runaway prices, a fiscal roll back, swift interest rate hikes, a stock market implosion, a period of low growth and, whisper it, even international capital controls.

Until then, the Great Accommodation will continue. Continue, that is, until one day the hawks swoop down and the doves scatter. Then, whoever runs the Fed may matter once again.

[sudden and sharp]

[...] P.D... Seguro que alguno de ustedes puede aclararme el tema de Afganistán; cuáles son los verdaderos intereses allí, y refrescarme un poco ya de paso los actuales bloques de poder y los distintos frentes abiertos (no sólo en Afganistán)
Y digo que seguro que pueden hacerlo porque ya lo han hecho en anteriores ocasiones.

Muchas gracias !

No sé si podré aclararte tus dudas.

Pero sí que te puedo decir lo que no me cuadra a mí. Un grupo de (supuestos) zarapastrosos toma un país inmenso en una semana sin pegar un tiro, o casi. Ni hablar. Se han ido las fuerzas de ocupación --has leído bien--, y han salido a la calle desde el interior de sus casas.

Los llamados "talibanes", ojo llamados así por las fuerzas de ocupación, son esencialmente los afganos. Sin más. Y ahora recuperan su país. E impondrán sus leyes y costumbres. Que serán lo que tu (o yo) quieras (o queramos) pero que son las suyas.

Hasta las pelotas estarán de que les salven. Cuanto ha llovido desde la invasión soviética. Ojo, soviética.






¿Y que quieren los diversos ocupantes? Pues... todo lo que haya y además, controlar el cruce de caminos. (P.ej., la ruta de la seda desde el mismísimo imperio romano... )

¿Y que querían al irse? Pues posiblemente una guerra civil al estilo sirio.



Conclusión: solo una y personal e intransferible. Lo que nos cuentan no es verdad. (O no es toda la verdad.)




[ Salvo que pienses que fuimos allí a llevarles la democracia. ]

[Derby]

La conexión entre el inmobiliario y el blanqueo de capitales...

https://gfintegrity.org/report/acres-of-money-laundering-why-u-s-real-estate-is-a-kleptocrats-dream/

Acres of Money Laundering: Why U.S. Real Estate is a Kleptocrat’s Dream

What do the Iranian government, a fugitive international jeweler, and a disgraced Harvard University fencing coach have in common? They have all used U.S. real estate to launder their ill-gotten gains. In Acres of Money Laundering: Why U.S. Real Estate is a Kleptocrat’s Dream, Global Financial Integrity (GFI) dives into the murky world of global money laundering and demonstrates the ease with which kleptocrats, criminals, sanctions evaders, and corrupt government officials choose the U.S. real estate market as their preferred destination to hide and launder proceeds from illicit activities.

To tell the story of why U.S. real estate continues to remain a favored destination for illicit activity, GFI built a database of more than 100 real estate money laundering cases from the U.S., UK, and Canada, reported between 2015 – 2020. The database and accompanying regulatory analysis in this report provide conclusive evidence that the current U.S. regulatory approach, using temporary and location- specific Geographic Targeting Orders (GTOs), has critical shortcomings that will require comprehensive reform before it can adequately address the threats to the U.S. financial system and national security. To provide context to the analysis and recommendations in this report, GFI compares the regulatory developments in the U.S. with ongoing practices, challenges, and developments in the rest of the G7. Analyzing the problem in the U.S. through this prism helps the U.S. see the merits and demerits of possible regulatory approaches in other similarly placed economies and lends weight to GFI’s final recommendations. At the same time, this approach underscores the continued relevance of real estate money laundering as a systemic risk across the G7 and the need therefore for solutions that are more cooperative.

GFI’s key findings on the U.S. include:

*At a minimum, from cases reported in the last five years, more than US$2.3 billion has been laundered through U.S real estate, including millions more through other alternate assets like art, jewelry, and yachts;

*Gatekeepers including attorneys, real estate agents, investment advisers, and employees of financial institutions have repeatedly facilitated REML by high net-worth individuals through willful blindness or direct complicity, yet the U.S. remains the only G7 country that does not require real estate professionals to comply with anti-money laundering (AML) laws and regulations;

*60.71 percent of U.S. cases involved properties in one or more non-GTO counties, demonstrating the limitations of this location-specific regulatory tool;

*Well over 50 percent of the reported cases in the U.S. involved politically exposed persons, which is particularly problematic considering the lack of guidance from FinCEN on PEP identification;

*While commercial real estate featured in more than 30 percent of the cases and generally had significantly higher values than the residential real estate involved, the U.S. is yet to create any reporting obligations for risks in the sector;

*The use of anonymous shell companies and complex corporate structures continues to be the number one money laundering typology. Eighty-two percent of U.S. cases involved the use of a legal entity to mask ownership, highlighting the importance of implementing a robust beneficial ownership registry under the Corporate Transparency Act.

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

GFI proposes the following key recommendations for the U.S. real estate sector in line with international best practices and regulatory developments seen elsewhere in the G7:

*The GTOs, through a new rule-making, should be made permanent, expanded nationwide, and without any dollar threshold;

*Real estate agents should be required to identify the beneficial owner of a residential real estate purchase, when title agents are not involved in the transaction;

*FinCEN should issue guidance, red flag indicators, and create reporting requirements for real estate money laundering typologies related to commercial real estate transactions;

*Legal professionals should be made the lead reporting entity for identifying money laundering risks in commercial real estate transactions;

*The U.S. should create robust AML/CFT processes targeted at the real estate sector, including but not limited to a risk-based approach identifying and verifying the source of funds and beneficial owner of the client;

*FinCEN should issue guidance on the definition of PEPs and an advisory highlighting the risk of foreign PEPs to real estate money laundering schemes. Reporting entities should be required to report when a foreign PEP purchases property;

*Investment advisors should be required to carry out client due diligence, including enhanced client due diligence where required, on all prospective investors in private (real estate) funds;

*The U.S. should undertake comprehensive gatekeeper reform for the real estate sector, by lifting the exemption given to real estate professionals under the BSA and include real estate agents and legal professionals who are involved in real estate transactions under the definition of ‘financial institutions’;

*The EB-5 visa investor program needs critical reform on the methods used to identify the source of funds and verify investor identity, including processes to record investors that are PEPs.

https://secureservercdn.net/45.40.149.159/34n.8bd.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Acres-of-Money-Laundering-2021.pdf?time=1628772631

[senslev]

https://www.elliberal.com/entendiendo-a-afganistan-i/

P.D... Seguro que alguno de ustedes puede aclararme el tema de Afganistán; cuáles son los verdaderos intereses allí, y refrescarme un poco ya de paso los actuales bloques de poder y los distintos frentes abiertos (no sólo en Afganistán)
Y digo que seguro que pueden hacerlo porque ya lo han hecho en anteriores ocasiones.

[sudden and sharp]

Nuevo paradigma de inversión:

 

[Saturio]

[...] P.D... Seguro que alguno de ustedes puede aclararme el tema de Afganistán; cuáles son los verdaderos intereses allí, y refrescarme un poco ya de paso los actuales bloques de poder y los distintos frentes abiertos (no sólo en Afganistán)
Y digo que seguro que pueden hacerlo porque ya lo han hecho en anteriores ocasiones.

Muchas gracias !

No sé si podré aclararte tus dudas.

Pero sí que te puedo decir lo que no me cuadra a mí. Un grupo de (supuestos) zarapastrosos toma un país inmenso en una semana sin pegar un tiro, o casi. Ni hablar. Se han ido las fuerzas de ocupación --has leído bien--, y han salido a la calle desde el interior de sus casas.

Los llamados "talibanes", ojo llamados así por las fuerzas de ocupación, son esencialmente los afganos. Sin más. Y ahora recuperan su país. E impondrán sus leyes y costumbres. Que serán lo que tu (o yo) quieras (o queramos) pero que son las suyas.

Hasta las pelotas estarán de que les salven. Cuanto ha llovido desde la invasión soviética. Ojo, soviética.






¿Y que quieren los diversos ocupantes? Pues... todo lo que haya y además, controlar el cruce de caminos. (P.ej., la ruta de la seda desde el mismísimo imperio romano... )

¿Y que querían al irse? Pues posiblemente una guerra civil al estilo sirio.



Conclusión: solo una y personal e intransferible. Lo que nos cuentan no es verdad. (O no es toda la verdad.)




[ Salvo que pienses que fuimos allí a llevarles la democracia. ]

Lo mismo he pensado yo. Nos han estado contando un cuento todo este tiempo o algo. Se van las fuerzas de ocupación y al día siguiente ¿qué pasa?, pues que el país ya no está ocupado. Punto pelota.
De hecho, si no recuerdo mal, Trump negoció la salida de las tropas con los Talibanes, no con el gobierno Afgano.

Hay que tener en cuenta que por muy bestias que nos parezcan los Talibanes, hoy me he descojonado cuando en el telediario de A3 nos recordaban lo mal que trataban a las mujeres con una lista de cosas malas que les hacían y he dicho -¡Anda, cómo en Arabia Saudita!

Yo creo que todo el interés de Afganistán (igual que en el siglo XIX) es que es una puerta al Imperio Ruso y ahora mismo están cerradas las puertas de Irán y del Cáucaso.

Lo que no sé es por qué nos dan tanto la matraca con el asunto. Normalmente los medios pasan de puntillas sobre las derrotas del imperio ¿Alguien tiene noticia de lo bien que nos va en Siria-Iraq-Kurdistán?
A ver si va a resultar que hay algún tipo de pacto entre la metrópoli y su provincia principal para delegarnos el problema...