Turning back the clock

Let's imagine the year is 2008 again. Not too long ago so most of you should be able to cast your mind back. Here in Australia, life for most was (and still is) pretty good...no, life for most was (and still is) excellent. The full effects of the sub prime mortgage crisis in the United States was starting to be realised, but here in australia, it was still felt that we would be relatively ok.

In September 2008, America was facing a crisis. Some of their biggest banks were on the edge. The US economy was on the brink of collapse. The US government, with the federal reserve bank, went into overdrive. As the crisis unfolded it became clear that the problems were not confined to the US. Our fanatical belief in globalisation was really showing it's worth. Governments around the world took up the challenge..."save the banks" they cried. And so they did. With trillions of dollars of tax payer money.

Today it is understood what caused the GFC. It is a matter of historical fact. But whatever the details, whichever way you look at it, it is fair to say that there are those in the financial sector who acted criminally. The kindest description might be criminal negligence. A more accurate description is probably organised crime. These people racked up billions of dollars of bad debt. Not just bad debt...appalling, stinking, rotten debt. Debt that could never and would never be paid. And they knew it. Those fucking bankers knew it. Knowing the debt was rotten, what did they do? They packaged the debt up into nice little packaged deals and sold it...to investors. Family investors. People looking to set themselves up for the future. Their hope was nothing more than to live their retired lives in a modicum of comfort. To be able to look after themselves, without being a burden on their kids or the state. But here's the kicker, these bankers, knowing that the debt could never be paid, took out options on the debt defaulting. Or put simply, they bet against the debt. When the debt did default, they made money.

And default the debt did. Spectacularly. And the banks let it happen. They were entirely complicit in the whole affair. But its fair to say that not even the banks had much idea of how bad it would get. I'm sure their intention wasn't to put themselves out of business. But that's what nearly happened. So, here were the banks, on the verge of losing all of there ill gotten gains. So close to paying for the pain they'd caused. Closing down. Justice...

"Save the banks", they cried.

Today some of the largest economies in the world stand on the edge of collapse. Being crushed under the weight of their public debt. Debt that was created by saving the banks. And those investors, lost billions. Families, charities, local governments, pensioners...lost billions

There was a question that I asked a friend of mine back in 2008. It was a question that still troubles me. "Why do we have to save the banks?".

"Because that's who's got all the money" was my friend's response. "The world needs money to function". Of course it does, I think I understand that. But I want to imagine what would have happened if the banks had collapsed and governments had kept their money.

Take America. What if the banks closed, but instead of people defaulting, they kept their homes? Instead of bailing out the banks, the government bailed out people. People who still need bread and milk, clothes to wear, the internet to stay connected, petrol to put in their cars, and most importantly, jobs to go to. People would have been bailed out, they would have spent their money, the economy would have kept going. People spend money, companies survive. Companies and people pay taxes. The government builds roads, people have jobs, they spend money, companies grow, pay taxes, government spends, jobs, taxes, spending, jobs...that's how it works doesn't it?

In the last two years, America has doubled it's debt. 14 trillion dollars. For what? Low growth and high employment. Oh, and they saved the banks. In the UK, public debt is now 90% of the country's GDP. For what, low growth, high unemployment...and they saved the banks.

What if we saved people instead of the banks? People will tell me I don't understand the basics of economics. That we'd be a whole lot worse off if we hadn't saved the banks. Maybe I don't get the basics. But somewhere along the way, I think we've been had...

And now, the debt has to be paid. Not by all those bankers. But by tax payers, everyday tax payers. It has to be paid by nurses, teachers, police, cooks, people who had nothing to do with causing the debt. Occupations of which there are now less of. Companies downsize, people stop spending money, the economy suffers, governments cut spending, the economy suffers...what a self perpetuating mess.

"Save the banks", they cried. What for? Somewhere along the way, I think we've been had...

Published with Blogger-droid v1.7.4

Don't worry kochy, we'll be right

I find it amusing when self righteous white people express their indignation at the racism directed at those around them. A case in point is an article written by that most fair minded of liberal commentators David Koch (ahem), that appeared in the punch (http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/what-i-hate-about-australia-day/) on the 25th of january. In the article, kochy unleashes a hateful diatribe against "blond haired, blue eyed, yobbos" who bring shame to this country with their uneducated, racist views and who live in denial about australia's proud multi cultural history. The article was triggered by an incident between kochy and his son in law (who is of sri lankan heritage) and one of these so called yobbos in which the son in law was racially vilified. The article interested me for two reasons. One, kochy's indignation and remorse he felt for not standing up to the yobbo and two, his son in law's indifference.

It may seem quite noble to kochy to take up the fight on behalf of the oppressed, the wronged. But there is an inherent condescension in that attitude. The assumption that we of migrant stock need to be defended, but somehow are incapable of doing it ourselves smells of the exact superiority complex that kochy purports to despise. The over exuberant sunrise host should consider his son in law's reaction to the racist taunts before formulating his response.

In the article kochy writes that his son in law did not seem too bothered by the incident. Why would that be, when the comments themselves were so offensive? It is a reaction I fully understand. You see, I to am of sub-continental heritage and as such, have been subjected to various levels of racism through my life. And like kochy's son in law, it's never really bothered me too much, particularly the older I get. I've seen the contribution my parents have made and continue to make to this country. I am proud of the contribution I am making, and I'll do everything I can to ensure that my kids do their fair share as well. Because I understand that these contributions are in return for something very special...being australian.

Australia has made me who I am, and I'm proud of who I am. Most migrants understand that being australian is a privilege, not a right. That freedom is not to be taken lightly. But we also understand something else. Freedom is not elastic. Being australian is not elastic. You don't have to take it off someone to give it to someone else. People who've come here haven't undermined anyone else's ability or capacity to "be australian". So, when the so called yobbo says something to me that is less than complimentary, I understand that his or her comments have their origins in ignorance. That to react would be to show intolerance. And that I should be glad to have the perspective I have.

So kochy, thanks for your concern, but I don't need you to fight any battles for me. There are people far more deserving than me you can take up the cause on behalf of. I am australian, and no one can take that away from me...

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.7

2010 ashes roundup

As the rain came down on the 5th day of the sydney test, delaying the inevitable, it occurred to me that my most enduring memories of the 2010 ashes series would be these three images: one of doug bolinger bowling to a guy without a bat, shane watson teeing off against someone's grandma and mitchell johnson telling me how much sports drink he consumes. This to me sums up australia's campaign. That these ads would somehow give the players a heightened sense of invincibility in the eyes of the public just goes to show how misguided our cricketers and the people who run the game have become about what the public wants to see from those few that play our most revered sport at the elite level.

Sure, sport is business and the sponsors want their pound of flesh. I understand this. But can any of us really imagine AB agreeing to do an ad that demonstrated how far he could hit the ball against an old woman? I mean please. (For that matter, I wonder what AB would have said if a player walked into his dressing room wearing a wig!)

So what's my point here? We want our cricketers to be tough. That's what makes aussie cricket unique...and I think, in the past, successful. In india they want their cricketers to be stars. They are treated the way we treat rock'n'rollers. The west indians want their cricketers to be cool. The poms want their cricketers to be good guys. That's all fine...I'm not going to pass judgement, not on this post anyway. But we don't expect, nor want, any of these traits in our cricketers. We want our guys to be tough. Play tough.

So that's my point. I don't think the problem with the aussie team is talent...it's toughness. That's it...pure and simple. For me, the ads sum it up. If you're willing to let yourself be perceived like that for money, then I think that toughness on the cricket field can only be a secondary consideration. I know the players will argue otherwise. That one thing has nothing to do with the other. But the problem is that toughness is an all encompassing attitude. Now I'm not claiming to be tough. Far from it in fact...I'd go as far as to call myself soft! But people look at me and that's exactly what they think. But let's just look at the tough group for a second. AB, lillee, tugger, warne, gilly, hussey...our perception of them as tough cricketers is based on a combination of their persona off the field and their uncompromising attitude on it. Now let's look at the "not so tough" side. Pup, watto, bollinger, johnson...think about what you know about these guys and I don't think you'd summarise them as tough. Good cricketers, certainly. Even excellent...but not tough. Now these guys may think this is a good thing. They may not have any desire to present a tough image of themselves. But I don't think they have a choice. If they don't want to, then they have a monumental task ahead of them. Not only will they need to find a way of rebuilding aussie cricket, but they will need to reinvent it in the process..and that's not something I believe our current generation of cricketers have the toughness to do.

Now to the english team. Didn't they play well? It's all been said so I'm not going to repeat it here. But what I will say is this. Strauss, cook, collingwood, kp, bell, anderson...were all part of the english side beaten 5-0 on 06/07. Good players, well beaten, in whom faith was shown. They learnt, trained hard, got better, came back and conquered. A lesson in that for us perhaps...

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5

What khawaja's debut means to me

I love the aussie cricket team. I have travelled around the world, at great expense to watch them play. Wherever I am watching them, I am dressed to the hilt in my aussie gear. I generally have my canary yellow ODI shirt on for any first day of a test match. I have a number of other shirts for each other day of the match. Sometimes I wear my rooster rugby league shirt...particularly if the aussies are doing well. On all days, without fail, I drape my aussie flag around me like a cape. Just so that no one is under any illusions as to who I am supporting.

This overt display of nationalism is quite contrary to my character and natural world view. I cringe when I see southern cross tattoos. I can't stand unnecessary playing of the national anthem at football matches. I am pro immigration and hate the word mateship. So what possesses me to engage in such blatant jingoism at cricket matches?

The 2003/04 border-gavaskar trophy was steve waugh's last test series. I went to all 5 days of the melbourne and sydney tests to pay homage to the great man. The series was one all heading into sydney after our resounding victory in melbourne. We were pumped, confident that with our momentum we could win the final test and send off our man in style. But our hopes were pretty much shattered at the end of the first innings as the indians declared for 705. We all felt privileged to have witnessed one of the great test match knocks of our time when we saw tendulkar hit 240 not out, but we hated the fact that our steve was going to be denied the send off he deserved. Anyway, I was in the loo some time during india's first dig, when a bloke turned to me and asked "you must be happy. You blokes are doing well".

"no we're not", I replied and walked out. "What was that bloke on?", I thought, "didn't he know what the score was?". Then I realised. He hadn't noticed what I was wearing. All he'd seen was my face and of course, the colour of my skin. See, my parents migrated from india 3 years before I was born. I am, for all intents and purposes, australian. But, of course, looking at me you'd be forgiven for thinking I'm indian.

So, I understand people mistakenly thinking I go for the brown team, which is why I go to such great lengths to wear my colours on my sleeve...

Usman Khawaja was born in pakistan. This week he batted number 3 for australia. Maybe the next time I'm at the cricket, people won't presume to know which team I support because now, someone plays for australia who looks like me. Go well Usman.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5