_here_search_with_expressions_from_this_page ... (_text_below_will_NOT_disappear)
v. March 26, 2017
This expression belongs to the efforts of an economic theory of some financial crisis phenomena. This theory tries to state a new modern crisis type which is related to the specifics of computerized markets and a worldwide instant communication of market events, opinions, suspicions, fear and optimism. The psychology and sociology of the relationship between financial markets and governmental institutions are thought to be the possible major reason for crisis increase - some kind of a perpetuum mobile of crisis growth.
The word marfinettes is derived from the word for theatre marionettes. Let us consider the political life of democracy - like democracy based on political parties and a parliament - as a permanent theatre with frequently changing actors. If leading politicians of this theatre stage behave like marionettes of financial market pressure groups, this is meant by the artificial word marfinettes.
(This abstract view of democracy wants to make aware of the fact that very different forms of democratic constitutions would be possible, too. Since the arrival of Internet communication, democracy could easily be organized without political parties. A shift to this has perhaps already begun.)
REMARK: In German and French terminology, state-owned banks are called "public banks" = "banques publiques" = "öffentliche Banken". This should not be confounded with the English language expression of the incorporation status: "public company" (for public share offerings). A lot of confusion is often generated if translators are not aware of this pseudo-coverage of terms ("false friends" between languages).
» Financial crisis / MENU EN DE FR
Periods with significant generalized losses are a very normal event of the financial markets. They are just the return to reality after periods of unjustified general high optimism.
The term marfinettes typically concerns politicians and governmental institutions of low economic knowledge who / which do not know that this is quite normal. These can be convinced by the investment banking lobby that such periods are a danger for common interest and that the crisis losses of the investors have to be compensated with funds from the taxpayer.
This prevention of speculation losses causes that a true clearing of the situation does not take place. Therefore, the rescue and bailout schemes typically will cause a next far more extended supposed rescue need. Finally and possibly the taxpayers compensation capacity will be exceeded. The growth of public debt might end up in a huge system bankruptcy. General political disorder might be the result.
The first use was by the economist Pedro Rosso since September 2011. He coined this term for a new phenomenon which for the first time in history was suspected to occur during the years 2007 ... 2011. The new phenomenon is thought to be the result of a new constellation, occuring now for the first time in history: :
The computerisation of the financial markets in connection with instant worldwide Internet communication.
The first observed facts where the bailout schemes for banks (2008...2009), instead of just accompanying by governmental and legislative action a controlled way into bankruptcy.
The second major event group where the efforts of bailouts for Greek, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Ireland. Many economists, journalists and politicians in Germany considered these rescue concepts as illegal and / or as useless and / or as not necessary and / or as violations of the basic rules of politics of economics.
Critics considered the corresponding political rescue decisions as faults and as a result of the lobby influence and pressure by financial speculators - like some leading investment banks - on leading politicians.
The true sitation is far more complex: State-owned banks, pension funds and controlled insurance companies are among the major loosers. Their lobby has with good reason significant weight. But the question is if a lobby intervention is acceptable for this specific subject.
Critics considered such bailout schemes as an illegal form to exploit the low level of economic knowledge of leading politicians. During the discussion of nation bailout schemes - like for Greece - , the economic knoweledge level did not show a top level for Germany at that time (chancellor Merkel), France (president Sarkozy) and the representatives of the European Commission and other leading politicians. For example, the presence of studied economists in German government was at that point of time (2011) exactly zero.
As some studies have shown, most parlamentarians, journalists and citizens can not really interprete the difference between millions and billions or for example 300 billion euros (the total of the German Federal budget AND ALSO the planned German bailout contribution) For most people, millions and billions, this is just "much much money". There is perhaps only one profession with all members being able to interprete huge amounts properly: Studied professional economists.
Critis say: Parlamentarians - mostly lawyers, civil servants, lobby members - tend to follow voting recommendations like "marfinettes" because they simply lack the intellectual imagination capacity that they cause with a single such decision possibly the future bankruptcy of their own nation.
The general goal of financial speculators is to have volatile markets. In this case, the winners benefit from significant leverage effects. The loosers - typically the funds financed by the savings of individual small investors - pay these profits of the speculation experts. Volatile markets typically result in huge capital transfers from brave savings investors to speculation experts.
The specific case during a financial crisis is that typically all these groups are suffering from very generalized losses. So we have the exceptional state that close to all financial lobbies want the same from governmental politics: Please transfer taypayers money to us, visibly or in an indirect manner, to cover our losses.
Critics say: They normally want private capitalism in order to keep the profits of the fat years. But they ask for socialism during loss periods. This contradiction is criticized as not tolerable. It is suggested to let the participants of the financial markets absorb their losses, in order to maintain for the future only those actors on the financial markets who can survive, due to a more responsible form of past decision making.
Rosso wanted to coin a general term for these accusations: Marfinosi and their Marfinettes. He did not add any own statement if he believes that those accusations are true or false. This should be left to more detailed objective analysis tools, still to develop in the future.
But Rosso stated as generally recognized the fact of a growing influence of financial lobbies in the sense of some kind of "predatory abuse of free market capitalism" since fhe definit and final failure of the "communist" or "socialist" ideology (since 1990 in Russia and in China). This abuse had accumulated up to the necessary volume for the first financial system failure during the financial crisis of 2007...2009. In this period, governments had been convinced to finance with taxpayers money huge bank bailout schemes and stimulus packages.
This had been the first real world experience of governmental policy and behavior concepts in this context. Now the road was open to the next far bigger problem: Not any more threatening banks but threatening nations like Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal - and this way threatening democracy, peace, economy and wealth.
Rosso considered these risks as the final step of the phenomenon of "marfinettes". It is the final step because it undermines democracy. Whenever in history governments had become the marionettes of financial problems, this ended typically with political disorder, riots, sometimes wars. The special new phenomenon is that this manipulation of governments was not the result of force and facts but the result of public opinion and lobby influence.
The detailed analysis of coverage of the political reality with critical views was not the purpose when communicating for these new phenonema the suggestion of a specific name. Further analysis of this subject is left to the public as well as to the scientific discussion.
Image: Marionettes. Oil painting on different materials. Artist: 1988 by Margret Hofheinz-Döring (1910-1994).Commons Attrib.-Share Alike 3.0-de
"Rent-Seeking" : See wikipedia.org for the meaning, also for: "voracity effect".
The financial crisis 2007...2011 includes a specific new and different phenomenon. The governments are not any more the main decision makers on rent distribution ("rent" in the sens of not merited advantages). The governments are in the role of a manipulated group of persons who do not any more understand what really happens.
It is not any more corruption or lobbying where both groups cooperate to distribute taxpayers money among their group members - legally or illegaly.
The concept of marfinettes is that the players of the financial markets consider whole nations and governments as gambling subjects. Governments do not any more grant some reasonable "rents" to the financial market players as payment for lobbying and corruption. They are forced by their superior gambling partners - superior in the art of gambling - to transfer the essential value of nations to them.
So the situation of marfinettes is similar to Russian Roulette - with the difference that there is always the same result: The taypayers money will be killed by huge transfers to financial speculators. Financial speculators - like other forms of pathological gambling - will never stop gambling until having exhausted all gambling opportunities.
Example: German goverment and parliament decided on September 29, 2011 to transfer amounts (or underwrite possible financial obligations) corresponding to one annual national budget. The purpose is some kind of European fund, finally serving for the loss coverage of financial market players. This type of decisions is suitable to kill nations. Such decisions are illegal. No parliamant is authorized by the voters majority to spend in 1 year the budget amounts of 2 years.
This is the specific new aspect in the relationship of marfinosi and marfinettes: The marfinettes have totally lost the rational control about their action
If nations have become the subject of gambling - due to uncapable politicians - , then the players, the financial speculators, would only stop after haven obtained the final success of exhausting all gambling opportunities. The result might be the destruction of peaceful productive nations, to be replaced by national bankruptcies, currency bankruptcies, social disorder, possibly revolutions.
Example: German goverment and parliament decided on September 29, 2011, to transfer one annual national budget into some kind of fund, for the loss coverage of financial market players. This type of decisions, if continuing, kills nations.
This is a level of gambling which considers whole nations as the target of "I will kill you".
Now everybody is invited to spread on the Internet and in the printed press and in the scientific discussion the message and his / her opinion:
If current events should be classified as the constellation of "marfinosi" and their "marfinettes";
or if it is governmental business "as usual" to transfer up to a third of taxpayers money for transfers which finally increase the wealth of financial investors, from taxes paid by the majority of average citizens.
The EU taxation system with an average of 20 % sales tax is so far mainly financed by all citizens, including citizens living in poverty and without a decent income. Their number has grown over the years in many countries of the EU. Their number will now continue to grow, due to these huge capital transfers from these people and everybody like you and me to wealth possessors. We have to decide if this is a good trend.
The true (true!) average taxation level of the most wealty persons and entities in the European Union is probably between 3 and 15 %, due to the many disguised tax shelters which have grown over the years of friendly legislation.
We have to make our mind if public order can be maintained in the long run if those living in extreme poverty are obliged to subsidize with a multiple percentage of taxation sacrifice those who live in extreme wealth.
Is there any example in history that such a constellation ended without political disorder?
2011-09-07: Link to:
http://de.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Kapitalismus:_Eine_Liebesgeschichte
Concerns the film Capitalism: "A Love Story"; from the US filmmaker Michael Moore, USA. - About him:
- in 2011-09-07 copied the following from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moore
"On September 23, 2009, Moore released a new movie titled Capitalism: A Love Story, which looks at the late-2000s financial crisis and the U.S. economy during the transition between the incoming Obama Administration and the outgoing Bush Administration. Addressing a press conference at its release, Moore said, "Democracy is not a spectator sport, it's a participatory event. If we don't participate in it, it ceases to be a democracy."
A conspiracy is not involved
( "marfinettes, marfinosi")
The final result of too extended governmental bailout efforts would typically have the effect of some kind of financial or even physical suicide of many participants of the financial markets. Why do they choose this risk?
They do not choose this. This is because it is not a conspiracy. Nobody plans or coordinates the effects of marfinosi and marfinettes. The dangerous final effects are just the aggregate result of individual efforts to maximise the own earnings.
Annotation: The so-called "socialism "
The so-called "communism" or the so-called "socialism" or ... or ... , did they really fail in the real world?
There are more than 1000 definitions what these terms in fact mean or what they should mean. Current adherents of such ideologies typically declare that it was a failure of Russian and Chinese dictatorship, of "wrong" socialism. Their opinion is: "True" socialism would continue to be a valid goal.
Please do not say that this has not been said here. Members of ideologies and other political religions tend to believe in primitive answers. If somebody does not have the intelligence for complex answers, he replaces complex analysis with religious belief.
Such primitive forms of belief in revolution instead of evolution for better concepts of government resulted in killing 80 million people worldwirde, in the name of socialism, during the 20th century. A primitive slogan "socialism!" can not be the answer related to the problem of "marfinettes" and "marfinosi".
|-ana-pubcc-pha11465# D=17326 F=eyvv-marfin-en.htm|