The Dubai and Greek crises have forced investors to pay attention to something long ignored – rising sovereign risk. According to this week’s reports, Dubai is trying to settle debts for 60 cents on the dollar. Meanwhile, there has been no real progress in the unfolding Greek debt crisis.

Given the scale of fiscal deterioration in much of the developed world, the trouble is unlikely to end with Greece. For now, however, this looks like a mainly EU-specific problem.

Germany is, for the moment, unwilling to talk about bailouts, and demands austerity measures from the Greek government. EU finance ministers stated Athens must comply with austerity demands within 30 days or risk losing control over its own tax and spend policies. But the truth is, the EU has no real enforcement mechanism, and Greece knows it.

The Greek government promised to reduce its fiscal deficit to 2.8% of GDP by 2012, and to under 9% by the end of this year. However, the EU authorities are fooling themselves into believing this to be possible – current Greek deficit is 12.7% (and that is only the official figure; Greece has forged data before). Due to both political and economic reasons chances of Greece meeting such targets are near zero. The Greek population is largely against austerity (and keen to express it via crippling strikes and riots), making it highly unlikely that the socialist Papandreou government will be able to enforce any meaningful measures.

Some 95% of Greek debt is held by a number of large European banks, so a Greek default would most likely spark a massive bank crisis in Europe. The contagion would inevitably spread to Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland and possibly other countries. But even if Greece is bailed out, it will unlikely meet the conditions that will come attached to a bailout, hence just kicking the problem down the road for another while.

And of course the problem is much larger than just Greece. Fundamentals are very poor across much of the eurozone, meaning that a number of countries could easily follow Greece down.

The root of the problem is the one-size-fits-all monetary policy of the euro. The monetary policy set for the centre (Germany, France) was always going to be inappropriate for the economies of the periphery. Instead of adopting stricter fiscal discipline (since monetary and exchange rate policy was no longer in their control), Greece, Spain, Portugal etc used the extremely low interest rates and high credit rating they gained access to thanks to the EMU to go on a long, wild spending spree. The cheap credit fueled housing bubbles as well as ever growing public sectors and generous welfare systems. It was inevitable that the day of reckoning would come.

Southern Europe’s competitiveness has also declined sharply as these countries joined the eurozone with an exchange rate that overvalued their currencies, raising the cost of labour.

The fiscally precarious states benefited from low rates because, in the eyes of investors, their bonds enjoyed an implicit guarantee of the stronger eurozone members. Once investors finally started paying attention to their fiscal situation, and to the risk of Greece being let to fail, the spreads between German Bunds and Greek bonds have widened considerably, increasing the country’s debt servicing costs.

In a staggering display of self-delusion the Greek prime minister said yesterday that Greece wants to be able to borrow on the same terms as other eurozone countries. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised at such misguided sense of entitlement; entitlement, after all, is the theme of our times. Papandreou also stated “it is a fallacy to say the Greeks are reckless”. Yes, Greeks indeed are the model of prudence and their current fiscal mess and the fact they have been in default for 105 years out of the last 200 should just be ignored by the markets (or ‘socially useless’ speculators in modern day political speech).

Although distrusting Greece’s willingness and ability to reduce deficit, the markets, for the moment, continue to believe in an eventual bailout. Should it start looking like there will be no such thing after all, the spreads on Greek debt would dramatically expand and most likely push Greece into default.

Yet the fiscally responsible Germans have little appetite for bailing out Greece. A bailout, in their view, would destroy EU’s monetary (and any remaining fiscal) discipline and undermine the credibility of the euro. Not to mention that it would not solve the structural problems facing the eurozone. Since German taxpayers are hardly going to be willing to open their wallets to the profligate states every time there is a crisis, a bailout of Greece may only bring closer an eventual break-up of the EMU.

Having said that, German banks have massive exposure to Spanish, Irish, Italian and, to a lesser extent, Greek and Portuguese debt – to the tune of some 523 billion euros. Germany will undoubtedly take that into consideration when deciding on bailing Greece out or letting it fail.

So what are the options for Greece? The traditional remedy would be currency devaluation, but eurozone members don’t have such luxury. Control over their monetary policy is in the hands of the European Central Bank (ECB).

The most prudent thing for Greece would be to undertake the severe budget cuts necessary to get its fiscal deficit down to 3% of GDP over the next few years. Such extraordinary fiscal tightening would result in a few years of declining GDP and high unemployment. There is not much indication that Greek voters are even remotely considering taking a few years of pain (austerity & recession) for a future gain.

Another option is default, which would reduce the debt burden but also result in a severe and long recession/depression. Government spending would be cut drastically and immediately since Greece wouldn’t be able to borrow for quite some time. Finally, Greece could also decide to leave the eurozone, go back to drachma and, in effect, devalue its debt. It would make the country more competitive. Of course their borrowing costs would also soar. However, this appears to be the least likely path for Greece to take.

Essentially, Greece and the Greek voters should be given two choices: take the pain and make the necessary cuts or leave the EU. This would leave the decision in the hands of the Greek people, avoiding further cries of them being stripped of their sovereignty, and it would ultimately be better for EU’s monetary and fiscal discipline than a bailout and the moral hazards that come with it.

After all, Greece is not eurozone’s only problem. Budget deficits have reached unprecedented proportions in many EU countries. Concerns about the weak fundamentals and the state of public finances in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland, the UK are evident in the financial markets, with rising sovereign bond yields and sliding euro.

Portugal’s and Spain’s external debt position is worse than that of Greece; their household debt is also considerably higher. Spain, apart from a nearly 10% deficit, has unemployment close to 20% and a banking system weighted down by a massive amount of overvalued real estate. Oh, and the socialist Zapatero government is not any more likely to be able and willing to cut spending than the Greeks. Italy’s and Ireland’s external debt obligations as well as GDP and unemployment rates are also worse than those of Greece. So while the markets’ focus is primarily on Greece, contagion is a very real threat. And not even Germany has the finances to bail out the likes of Spain. Given its size, a full blown fiscal crisis (or default) in Spain would most likely be the death of the euro.

The eurozone governments have to borrow approx 2.2 trillion euros from the capital markets this year to finance their budget deficits (Greece needs some 60 billion just to make it through the year); it won’t be an easy task. A wider fiscal crisis in Europe appears increasingly likely.

Yet ballooning national debts, out of control deficits and rising sovereign risks are not just a European issue. Most advanced economies have huge fiscal problems. The IMF projects the G20 government debt/GDP ratio to reach 118% by 2014. This will severely constrain economic growth.

A recent study by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff (‘Growth in a Time of Debt’) found that “the relationship between government debt and real GDP growth is weak for debt/GDP ratios below a threshold of 90 percent of GDP. Above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more.”

The following chart shows the public debt to GDP ratios across the world.

(And let’s not forget the true public debt/GDP levels are several times higher then the explicit figures that exclude massive unfunded liabilities for public pensions, healthcare, social security.)

Consider also the high government spending as a percentage of GDP in many advanced economies today, which causes a further drag on growth, and you get a future of slow economic growth and high unemployment. (In Greece, as well as the US, UK and other countries government spending now makes for approx 50% of GDP.)

The fiscal deterioration will become worse still due to the massive demographic challenges in the developed world. The IMF estimates that increased health spending and other costs related to aging population will drive debt to GDP levels of advanced economies up by a further 50% over the next 20 years.

We will therefore see a significantly higher economic growth in low debt, and most likely sluggish growth in high debt economies such as the UK, US, much of the eurozone and Japan. (A strong rise in government bond yields of much of the developed world is also inevitable.)

But it’s not just government debt. There’s too much debt everywhere, including in the private sector (although the private sector has started deleveraging, while the public sector increased leverage). Total debt is highest in Japan at 459% of GDP and the UK at 469% of GDP (or 380% if adjusted to reflect UK’s position as a financial hub). Spain follows in the third place at 342% (in Greece total private-public debt stands at around 225% of GDP).  

Over the next decade sovereign debt crises and defaults seem inevitable. Those countries that can resort to the printing presses will take the path of a massive monetization of debt, hence reducing their debts through severe inflation. That is the most likely outcome in the US and UK. (Clearly, paying our debts back in devalued currency is simply default by another name.)

Of course the most desirable way to address the budget problems would be by radical spending cuts. The scale of fiscal tightening necessary to return to healthier debt levels would cause a medium-term drag on growth. But not reducing debt will ultimately have much greater consequences.

However, chances we will witness drastic spending cuts in the UK, US and across the eurozone in the next few years are rather slim. The culture of entitlement has made it near impossible to talk about the hard facts. Our political elites will continue to ignore the fact that the bloated welfare states have become unsustainable and we can no longer afford them. The reason is simple – it’s not what the voters want to hear. Instead of acknowledging painful reality and the need to make sacrifices, we prefer to keep kicking the problems into the future. Until the inevitable day of reckoning comes.

Indeed the developments in the US and UK are not at all encouraging.

The Obama administration is determined not to waste a good crisis and continues to focus on a massive expansion of government. Instead of letting the free markets work and acknowledging that it’s the private sector that creates wealth and will be the engine of growth, the political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic show an enormous zeal to meddle in the free markets and reinvent and fix what wasn’t broken.

Redistribution of wealth via tax hikes (as well as introduction of entirely new taxes), a ruinous healthcare reform, expensive energy and climate change legislation, pro-union policies, excessive and ill thought-out regulation… Obama has shown a deep lack of understanding (and indeed contempt) of private business and a determination to socialize the US economy.

And while the productive part of the economy is being hammered, the public sector has been enjoying an unprecedented boom. In 1902 total US government spending was approx 7% of GDP. In 1928 it came to just over 10%; two thirds of that was state and local and just 3% was federal spending (about the same as 150 years earlier, excluding increases during war periods). Government spending has since exploded, making for more than 40% of GDP – two thirds of that being federal expenditure. Public spending increases in 2009 alone came to well over $1 trillion, a rise of more than 20% from 2008.

The UK has fared even worse, with government spending increasing from about 36% of GDP to almost 55%, putting increasing pressure on the dwindling productive segment of the economy.

The following chart from the Wall Street Journal shows the shocking and unsustainable spending explosion. US government spending has grown seven times as much in real terms as median household income over the last 40 years!

And, just as in the UK, employment and compensation in the public sector have continued to increase while the private sector has taken the pain. (Public workers not only enjoy far higher wages than their private sector counterparts but also benefit from extremely generous pensions. These largely unfunded public sector pension liabilities will naturally just serve as further drag on economic growth for many decades to come.)

As the following chart from the Business Insider shows, the US has gone from producing jobs in wealth creating private industries to jobs in the wealth destroying government sector. By the end of 2007 the total number of government jobs exceeded the total number of goods producing jobs.

Indeed, whether we look at the public sector gorging itself at the expense of the private sector, or the widespread culture of entitlement and welfare state (at the expense of the dwindling numbers of hard working taxpayers), this is what has come to characterize our time: enabling the unproductive and lazy to steal from the productive and enterprising. Otherwise called socialism.

So what is being done? Do we see any plans for serious fiscal tightening and debt reduction? Quite the opposite, our leaders seem to be enjoying a rather long vacation from reality.

Obama (and Gordon Brown) have apparently not been listening to Reinhart and Rogoff, or they wouldn’t be attempting to solve our problems by issuing yet more debt.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be too surprised that debt reduction doesn’t seem to be our policy makers’ priority. Indeed, one might think our extreme indebtedness is nothing more than a minor nuisance. Neither our political elites nor the central bankers and leading economists appear to grasp the obvious: that years of cheap, excessive credit and high debt were precisely what got us into trouble. And yet we’re still happily continuing on the same path.

In only three years the Obama administration will have increased the national debt by some $4.35 trillion. (And that excludes the huge deficits of off-budget programs like Medicare, Medicaid, social security.) The budget freeze proposed by the administration for 2011 is projected to save some $15 billion (or about 0.4% of the total budget, a drop in the ocean). Note that it’s merely a budget freeze, not a cut in nominal terms. Worse still, the the vast majority of federal programs (incl. Medicare, Medicaid, social security, military, homeland security etc) are to be exempt from the freeze.

It should be obvious that the US won’t get its debt under control unless it sharply reduces government spending, including on health and pensions that have simply become unaffordable. The US is not much behind Britain and the eurozone when it comes to the horrific shape of public finances. The only advantage, for now, is the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency (and of course the country’s control over its own monetary policy).

But that doesn’t change the basic fact – you cannot spend your way out of a fiscal crisis. The current path is unsustainable. The Obama prescription of more debt, more spending and more taxes is a triple ticket to ruin, plain and simple.

But, it would be unfair to focus solely on the US, for here in Britain we are in an even greater mess.

The UK has not only the world’s highest total debt/GDP (along with Japan) but also one of the worst budget deficits at 12.6% of GDP. (According to OECD, only Iceland and Greece have higher deficits, at 15.7% and 12.7%, respectively. The UK is expected to post a 12.8-13% deficit this year, overtaking Greece.)

The speed of the debt run-up has been nothing short of alarming. Unsurprisingly, Britain is already paying higher interest rates to borrow than Spain or Italy. While the yields on gilts have recently risen significantly, they are heading far higher – as soon as the markets start taking a look at other basket-case economies aside of Greece. The pound has fallen by some 25% vs the dollar, and has much further to go unless the markets start seeing some credible solutions from Britain.

Yet there is no political will to face the excessive debt, no meaningful plans for deficit reduction. Gordon Brown’s government has rejected any idea of implementing spending cuts in 2010/2011. And the opposition? David Cameron said spending cuts during the early part of a Conservative government wouldn’t be ‘particularly extensive’.

Government spending has exploded over the 13 years of Labour governments and is now completely out of control. But one would look in vain for austerity measures and severe fiscal tightening, not just from Labour, but also from the (so-called) Conservatives.

The micro-cuts that both the government and the Tories are proposing will not even make a dent in the monstrous amount of public spending. The pledges to ring-fence all main areas of spending, including the wasteful, bureaucratic and inefficient NHS, instantly expose any deficit reduction plans as lacking of credibility.

What remains are tax raises. As if Gordon Brown’s hike of higher earner income tax from 40% to 50% (or 62% once national insurance contributions are added on) wasn’t bad enough, further tax increases are likely on the way. All that (along with the insanity of the additional 50% bonus tax) will only achieve one thing – further damage to the dwindling private sector already suffocated by a gargantuan web of high taxes, red tape, hostile regulation and uncertain political environment.

From Labour’s point of view, there is no harm in further undermining the only economically productive part of the economy. Expansion of government and redistribution of wealth are the objectives. What Brown and Obama have in common is their disdain for and antagonism toward anyone earning (or striving to earn) a decent income, and the desire to redistribute from the hard working and productive to the idle and unproductive.

It matters little which party wins the upcoming general elections; all three of the country’s main political parties have fully embraced ‘progressive’ (read socialist) ideas. A Tory victory may be slightly less disastrous than another Labour term, but nothing that the party is offering will set Britain onto the right path.

And the people have only themselves to blame. Thanks to the vast expansion of government too many millions are now enjoying an idle life of welfare-dependency. Add the millions more in public sector jobs with their high wages and appallingly generous pensions, and it is little wonder that politicians are unwilling to do anything that would anger the majority of the voters.

We have become a society with an overwhelming sense of entitlement – at the expense of those who still believe in self-reliance and hard work, only to see their wealth stolen by the parasites. This unsustainable situation will inevitably blow up, and deservedly so. Only then will a new cycle be able to start. And perhaps, just perhaps, we will even witness a return to common sense one day – as in smaller government, less interference in the free markets and the productive sector, less dependency and more self-reliance.

But in the meantime, as public debt is becoming a crushing burden on most developed economies, the only thing that appears certain is a widespread sovereign debt crisis (and defaults) a few years from now.

Just when it seemed the small government ideal was dead and buried and Americans have fully embraced Euro-style socialism, Scott  Brown’s win of the Senate seat for Massachusetts has sparked a new hope.

The Republican’s victory has dealt a shocking blow to Obama on the first anniversary of his inauguration. It was the third defeat for the Obama administration after Virginia and New Jersey elected Republican governors in November.

It is even more significant considering the largely unknown Brown won the seat held by Ted Kennedy for nearly five decades. And, Massachusetts is the bluest state in America – registered Democrats outnumber Republicans three to one. The last time a Republican won a Senate seat representing Massachusetts was in 1972. Both houses of the state’s legislature have been under Democratic control since the 1950s.

The voters have made it clear where they stand on the trillion dollar health care reform, growth dragging climate change and energy policies, exploding public spending and tax increases. They don’t identify with Obama’s tax & spend crusade that is leading the country to certain ruin.

Scott Brown’s was a message of lower government spending and across the board tax cuts to spur economic growth. A contrast to Obama’s trillions of dollars spending explosion and massive growth of government and government employment.

A recent Washington Post poll showed that, by 58 to 38%, Americans want smaller government and fewer government services.

People are dismayed at the scale of the debt and money printing. Most understand severe belt tightening is the only viable option for the country. It is now quite obvious that the discussed second stimulus bill will not become a reality. The people have said ‘enough’.

Brown’s victory resulted in a loss of the 60 vote super-majority Senate Democrats needed in order to prevent  Republican filibusters. That could kill the health care bill as well as cap-and-trade, card check, tax hike plans and, most importantly, Obama’s aims to impose big-government rules on the free markets.

Still, it’s too early to say health care reform is dead. Obama may attempt to drive through the legislation regardless. The President is clearly unable to listen – to voters or any voice of reason, much less change direction from a defective strategy. Instead he opted to silence the noise about a dying health care bill by promptly announcing yet more ill thought out bank regulation.

However, one thing is clear. If Americans are once again lending their support to limited government, tax and spending cuts and free enterprise (as opposed to government) employment, the country’s future is bound to be brighter than the current situation might suggest.

UK heading into fiscal crisis

Meanwhile, no such good news from Gordon Brown’s Britain.

A new report by McKinsey shows that the combined UK public and private debt is now at 449% of GDP. Britain has seen the largest rise in debt to GDP of any western nation over the last 10 years. Even excluding the liabilities of UK based foreign banks the ratio is still at 380% – far higher than any country except Japan. See international debt chart here.

Given that the UK seems to have no clear plan or ability to reduce its monstrous deficit, a full blown fiscal and currency crisis is a near certainty.

The public sector deficit as percentage of GDP is now more than twice what it was in 1976 when Britain was bailed out by the IMF. Apart from being at a record level, much of the deficit is structural, as the financial and housing sectors will account for a significantly smaller portion of the economy compared to recent years. OECD believes about ¾ of UK’s deficit is structural, and as such unlikely to prove responsive to any cyclical recovery.

To make matters worse, spending on health care and pensions will also increase significantly in the coming years and decades, due to massive demographic challenges.

As the budget deficit has swollen to nearly 13%, the UK has had to keep issuing gilts at a breathtaking pace to finance the gap. The markets are unlikely to be patient with our policy makers for too long. Overseas holders of gilts (accounting for nearly a third of outstanding government debt) are increasingly reluctant to put up with the risks of UK’s disastrous public finances.

The world’s largest bond investor Pimco, as well as BlackRock, have recently started to sell off their gilt holdings. Pimco stated an 80% probability of a UK ratings downgrade this year. Thanks to a (still ongoing) massive quantitative easing program the Bank of England now holds almost 30% of outstanding gilts (compared to just over 5% in March 2009).

As the IMF expects UK’s net debt to GDP to rise to over 100% by 2014, things are bound to continue deteriorating. Investors will undoubtedly demand higher risk premiums on UK debt, further worsening the fiscal situation. A full blown debt crisis, and resulting currency crisis, are increasingly likely.

The Bank of England is unlikely to exit extremely loose policies and hike rates or withdraw liquidity soon. The markets will of course force it to act eventually. The pound has already fallen some 25% from its highs and the gilt/Bund spread is now wider than 70bp.

And it’s not just Gordon Brown’s government’s fiscal consolidation strategy that lacks any credibility; the Conservative plans aren’t faring much better at the moment.

Instead of much needed expenditure cuts the December Pre-budget report offered more spending (or ‘investment’ as Labour prefers to label it) and commitments to ring-fence many areas from any cuts.

Public spending makes up 47% of UK GDP, more than in 1976. Yet instead of coherent and detailed plans on expenditure control and public pension system reform we’ve got soak-the-rich class war policies, tax raids on banks and political posturing.

It’s clear that if the UK is to get the situation under any sort of control, sacred cows need to be sacrificed. And yet all main parties are competing to ring-fence the bloated and inefficient NHS with its £120 billion annual budget (up from £29 bil in 1990 and £49.5 bil in 2000) as well as areas like overseas aid, and commit to unaffordable and unnecessary climate change spending.

Preventing a bigger crisis will require considerable political leadership and courage, and we aren’t seeing much of those at the moment. Any significant action would also prove near impossible should the UK get a minority/coalition government, which is a possibility after the (May or June) general election.

McKinsey sees three possible directions for the UK – outright default, high inflation or severe belt-tightening. While voluntary austerity would clearly be the best solution for the long term health of the economy, the short term pain – and voter resentment – it would bring make it a rather unlikely choice.

Sacrificing short term growth and employment in order to generate a more sustainable growth for the future doesn’t appeal to a population that has, for too long, been used to times of prosperity and welfare largesse. The bill will, I’m afraid, come in a few years time. And the pain is likely to be far more severe and prolonged than anything we’ve seen in the last couple of years.

Two stories have dominated the news over the last few days. The attempt to blow flight 253 out of the sky has caused headlines around the world. The other news, creating as much – if not more – uproar here in the UK was the execution of drug trafficker Akmal Shaikh, a British citizen caught with 4kg of heroin in China. (4kg are apparently enough to kill 27,000 people.)

After an overdose of incessant outrage by all the bleeding heart liberals I simply had to share my thoughts on the matter.

Shockingly, Mr. Shaikh had found fervid defenders in Gordon Brown and other members of the UK government and our liberal elites. According to official sources the government raised the case on 27 occasions, including Gordon Brown’s direct interventions with Chinese president Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao.  Their repeated calls for clemency were (thankfully) unsuccessful. As a result, our Prime Minister attacked and strongly condemned China this week, while the entire official campaign grew increasingly hysterical.

At a time when the UK is on the verge of bankruptcy thanks to a record deficit and general mismanagement of public finances and the economy, when British soldiers are killed in Afghanistan thanks to a lack of equipment and missing support from the government, Gordon Brown had seemingly nothing better to do than try to save the neck of a rightly convicted criminal.

As has been only too common with British criminals, Mr. Shaikh claimed to be suffering from a mental disease and hence not being responsible for his crimes. The illness he saw as a convenient coup-out was bipolar disorder.

To be fair, I have no way to know if Mr. Shaikh was bipolar or not. (It is interesting, however, that there have reportedly been no medical records of his ‘illness’.) The point is, he was clearly fit enough to conduct his criminal business, travel the world and traffic drugs. He absolutely knew he was committing a crime for which death penalty is the punishment in China and much of the Far East. As far as I know, nobody has forced him to go to China and break their laws.

Anyone who is (mentally, physically) fit to commit a crime is fit to stand trial and be punished. There are millions of people suffering from bipolar disorder, and they would happily attest that it doesn’t make them go out killing, robbing, or selling drugs. Blaming bipolar for a criminal career is an insult to all the law-abiding people who suffer from a mental illness.

I am glad China has not allowed itself to be bullied into reversing the sentence handed out by its courts. I cannot think of any country that has less of a right to criticize China when it comes to criminal justice than the UK.

We all know that our liberal elites view drugs as a fashionable habit and matter of personal choice rather than a serious criminal offence. Drug dealers are free to ply their trade in this country, celebrities openly hooked on drugs are revered as role models, even prisoners have easy access to drugs any time they wish to.

Worse still, drug users are rewarded by our welfare system. An estimated 267,000 drug addicts live off state benefits – addiction is seen as ‘disability’, entitling them to generous welfare payments. As usual, the (shrinking numbers of) hard working taxpayers are condemned to support the useless and destructive lives of criminals and drug users.

The Chinese Government should be applauded, not condemned, for acting to defend its people and society from the drug trade. I have little hope we will ever see our own government do the right thing and act vigorously against crime.

Meanwhile, we witness the workings of UK justice (laughable to even call it such) on a daily basis. The vast majority of criminals – including burglars, robbers, violent attackers, serial criminals with dozens of offences, and at times even rapists and pedophiles -continually escape custody. In fact, hundreds of thousands of crimes that carry a lengthy jail sentence in other countries don’t even make it to UK courts anymore – criminals are instead given on the spot fines and cautions.

Murderers are unlikely to spend more than a handful of years behind bars either. Only yesterday we saw a man who killed his wife – stabbing her 96 times (while their children where playing nearby) – released after just 5 years. (That means serving less than three weeks for each mortal wound.) As unbelievable as it seems, his was still one of the longer prison stays compared to many other murderers.

Offenders, no matter how shocking their crimes, are seen as victims. Victims of their upbringing, social class, environment, society, alcohol or drug use… anything is good enough an excuse. As such, they don’t deserve to be punished, for it would be ‘inhuman’. They must be supported and protected instead. A pity that the true victims seem to warrant no such humanity.

Our rotten justice system, inept government and the liberal intelligentsia with their destructive, ‘progressive’ ideas should learn from China, instead of lecturing and condemning it.

If they did, we might still have a chance of reversing the rampant drug and crime problem and complete social and moral breakdown we have been witnessing here. The reason why we have seen violent crime rates soar is the lack of any punishment, derisory sentencing and shockingly relaxed prison regime.

A society that rewards criminals and punishes the victims (whenever they try to protect themselves amidst a lack of protection from the police or law), while law-abiding citizens are increasingly afraid to walk the streets, is inevitably heading for self-destruction.

If anyone needs a proof that the Chinese justice system works, I can only encourage you to spend some time in Chinese cities. They are safe, with low crime, no anti-social behaviour, no vandalism. Then compare to the mayhem back home. Unlike the UK, China seems to understand that the state has a responsibility to protect the lives of vulnerable and innocent citizens. In failing to do so our government endangers all our lives and is co-responsible for millions of future victims.

Needless to say, I don’t support political imprisonment. However, when it comes to actual crime, China is right.

And for those who have cried out in support of the convicted drug trafficker: Save your sympathy for the victims instead.

And yet more appeasement…

The second story of the week has also much to do with appeasement. For Labour is well versed in that – whether it comes to criminals or, as in this case, radical Islam.

As we now know, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who attempted to blow up Northwest Airlines flight 253 on Christmas day as it approached Detroit, was educated in Britain. It is here he was reportedly radicalized and turned to terrorism, before leaving to train with Al-Qaida in Yemen.

That should have come as no surprise. Although the majority of British Muslims oppose violence, there are many thousands who support the use of terror in the name of the Islamic cause. A number of them travel to places like Yemen to be trained and prepared for suicide missions, just as Nigerian born Abdulmutallab did after ending his studies at the University College London in 2008.

It’s not just British born extremists either. The UK has been a magnet for foreign radicals thanks to the generous welfare state, easy-entry immigration policies and extreme tolerance to expressions of radical Islamist views. The vast number of British connections of known terrorists and dozens of terror plots hatched and uncovered here are evidence the UK has become one of world’s main hubs of radical Islam and terrorism.

British intelligence has long known that many universities across the country have been infiltrated by militant jihadists. It is also no secret that extremists preach hate at many mosques and madrassas and use them as recruitment centres.

The sheer size of the problem is shocking. A 2008 poll by the Centre for Social Cohesion showed that nearly 30% of Muslim students in the UK thought killing in the name of Islam to be justified.

You’d think something was being done about this. Well, you’d be wrong.

British universities, including the University College London where Abdulmutallab was president of the Islamic Society, have been inviting radical preachers to give lectures. These are known extremists who spread anti-Western propaganda, incite killing of gays and violence against infidels. It is astonishing and criminal that this radicalization of students is allowed to go on in this country. No surprise then that a large number of known terrorists have studied at British universities.

And it’s not just universities. Radicals are allowed to openly preach hate and murder in UK mosques and at times even in mainstream media, and extremist Islamic networks can operate freely.

The government, although well aware of the threat, prefers to do nothing. All in the name of diversity, multiculturalism, human rights and other ‘progressive’ ideals.

While most countries arrest, jail, extradite or deport those who are linked to terrorism and incite murder, the UK seems to welcome them with open arms.

What is no less disturbing is that while radical Islamists are allowed to express their criminal views openly, those who come out in criticism of anything that has to do with Islam are rarely treated with such courtesy. For in the best case they are accused of islamophobia and racism and, in the worst, charged with some spectacularly misapplied criminal offence.

Our leaders insist that extremism and terrorism are simply matters of violence and have nothing to do with Islam. They have chosen a path of appeasement, frightened of offending Muslims or making them feel targeted in any way.

Even the concepts of patriotism and national identity have become an inconvenience and increasingly provoke embarrassment or outright derision. Apparently they are unfit for a modern, multicultural society. I have lived in many countries over the last fifteen years. Britain is the only one where patriotism is a dirty word.

But it gets worse still. Not only does our government not fight this widespread radicalization, it often indirectly supports it. Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money are poured into promoting the ‘real’ (peaceful) Islam, much of it diverted straight to radical groups. Some of the organizations the government supports are known to harbour extremist views. A number of extremists are even on the government payroll as advisors on radical Islam.

Am I the only one who thinks all this is insanity?

It’s important not to demonize those Muslims who oppose violence and extremism. They are just as entitled to live here in peace as any other religious minorities. But isn’t it time to take steps against those who preach hate and violence and openly admit to want to destroy the British society and Western way of life?

That includes prosecuting and jailing those who incite murder, deporting and extraditing the many who are wanted abroad for terror-related crimes, outlawing the extremist networks and tightening up immigration controls. I’d like to think it will happen at some point. Time is running out though, and our ruling class is not exactly known for common sense policies…

Chances are, we’ll get an extra large dose of diversity, multiculturalism and other politically correct ideas instead. And more hassling of old ladies at airports, so that certain groups don’t feel offended for being singled out. After all, profiling those who are most likely to present a threat is terribly un-PC today, and making life more onerous for everyone is so much more ‘fair’.

As if we haven’t had enough of the insane ‘bash the banker’ game already… Today a senior Bank of England official – director for Financial Stability Andy Haldane – said the departure of financial institutions and bankers from the UK to avoid the super-tax on bonuses is a ‘price worth paying’ to achieve reform of the sector.

Given that BoE is supposed to be independent and non-political, this is a staggering comment in support of the government-led hostility against the City of London.

A new obsession sweeping the country

Banker bashing has, in the last 12 months, become the new national pastime, sweeping the country like the Spanish Flu. Depressingly, this rush to populism isn’t just confined to the government. Politicians of all parties are in fierce competition to show who is the toughest, the most vengeful on bankers, the modern day witches to be sacrificed and burnt at stake to satisfy the populist thirst for blood.

It’s a no brainer – attacking (‘rich & evil’) bankers is certain to prove popular with voters, who appear to take immense pleasure in castigating the generators of their recent prosperity.

The source of all evil?

Of course, bankers are a convenient scapegoat to divert attention from the government’s own role in the financial and economic meltdown. It wasn’t bankers’ greed and bonuses – as our ministers like to claim – that caused Britain to be on the verge of bankruptcy and having the largest budget deficit in history. For the past 12 years the government has been only too keen to get hands on the massive tax revenues from the finance industry, blowing them on pointless social engineering and ever growing state bureaucracy.

Not surprising then that Gordon Brown is only too happy to divert attention from his own ineptitude and recklessness by painting bankers as greedy little bastards responsible for UK’s economic collapse. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying they have nothing to answer for, just that they are no more to blame than the government, regulators, or, indeed, you and me.

Bonus envy? Let’s see…

And – at the risk of being lynched – I’d argue bankers may deserve to be paid more than many other professionals. You see, of all the people I have known, the bankers are some of the hardest working. 15+ hour days (often 7 days a week) in an extremely competitive, high stress environment, constant pressure to perform, barely any holidays, not to mention no time to spend with their families, not seeing the kids grow up…

So before we succumb to envy of bankers’ compensation, why not consider the sacrifices that go with it. How many of us would really want to trade in? And, who is more deserving of their large salaries and bonuses – the bankers, working 15 hour days in an onerous environment, or the politicians and bureaucrats in their cushy non-jobs with 90 days of holiday a year? And what about the country’s union barons, earning several hundreds of thousands a year for disrupting the economy with constant strikes?

Where do you think the money has come from?

Just a couple of days ago yet another case came alight of a £2.6 million, eight room mansion rented by a London council – at a rent of over £90,000 a year – to house a benefit claimant single mother of eight.  Thanks to our pathetically generous welfare state, not only does she live in a home beyond the wildest dreams of most hard working tax payers, she also receives over £15,000 a year in other benefits, tax free. And there are thousands like her who have not done a day’s work in their lives – and never will – yet live in luxury, courtesy of the tax payer.

Across the country there are over five million of such welfare-addicts, most of whom, having long realized work wouldn’t pay, have dedicated their lives to such favourite activities as drinking and watching TV. (The percentage of UK households where no one works is now a staggering 17%, according to the Office for National Statistics.)

If it wasn’t for the huge tax collected from the City (and its hundreds of thousands of highly paid bankers, traders and other staff) over the last two decades, how would the state have ever gotten its dirty hands on enough money to squander on all the undeserving?

Let’s not forget it’s the financial sector that can be credited for much of the unprecedented wealth that has been created in Britain in the last few decades. The UK – government and public – were profiting from the banking industry without complaint for nearly 20 years, yet didn’t hesitate to turn into a lynch mob overnight. Short memory, or just plain ingratitude?

And what about the role of the debt-addicted public? Most of us were eager to take on loans and credit card debt, remortgage our homes to fund a lifestyle we craved yet knew was beyond our means. Little wonder we’re casting blame while avoiding a look in the mirror – we are as guilty as anyone.

Drive them away and you’ll be sorry…

Like it or not, we need a profitable banking sector, and its billions in taxes – now more than ever. (Public borrowing hit an all-time record high of £20.3 billion in November alone, and yet our political elites act like we don’t need our biggest tax generator.)

Attempting to drive away its biggest cash cow is an act shockingly stupid even for this self-righteous, semi-socialist government. And it’s not just bankers either… Entrepreneurs and other wealth and job creators are equally being made to feel rather unwelcome and unappreciated in the UK these days (punitive taxation, class war & moronic labeling of the ‘bad rich’ aren’t exactly an incentive for anyone to invest their money and talent here).

Given that the 1% of top earners pay 24% of UK income tax and the top 10% pay 54%, and the City contributes 25% of UK corporation taxes, the stupidity of the current policies is mind blowing. And it’s not just about tax – the financial services industry accounts for 21.4% of total employment in the UK, over 6 million out of a total of 29 million workers (according to government statistics).

And yet the government propaganda and most of the masses are happily shouting we don’t need or want bankers in this country. The bad news for us is, there are plenty of countries that welcome enterprising people with open arms, appreciate their skills, and reward hard work with low taxes. Fact is, the UK needs such people far more than they need the UK.

In recent days New York, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Singapore, Zurich have reportedly  been making an aggressive pitch to financial institutions to move their business from London. Labour’s populism is offering them an unprecedented opportunity to destroy the competitive advantage London has built over the last two decades.

With the country on the verge of bankruptcy and public borrowing out of control, who else is going to pay for the bloated, dysfunctional, inefficient public sector and the millions of welfare addicts? What is supposed to replace the City? Sheep farming, perhaps? Maybe the people now so keen to engage in banker-hatred will start to use their brain (that’s assuming there is any) once their welfare cheques stop coming.

The only thing certain is that the punitive tax raid (bonus tax, 50% income tax, etc) is a purely populist political measure that makes no economic sense (in fact, it comes as close to economic suicide as I’ve ever seen). Not only will it not provide any additional revenue for the taxman, it will cost Britain billions in investment – and taxes – diverted away from London, for many years to come.

I can only hope that at some point sanity will prevail, anger &  hypocrisy will fade, and we will acknowledge banks and bankers for what they are – a vital part of the economy. We should applaud them (and any other businesses) for making money, not demonize them or make them apologize for it.

I’m sure my opinion won’t be very popular… but I’d love to hear your comments! There’s nothing better than a good debate, as long as it’s kept civilized. And, if you enjoyed this post, please share it.