IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: JP Morgan to pay $410m in penalties for manipulating electricity prices
Topic Summary:
Created On: 30 July 2013 07:21 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 30 July 2013 07:21 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jarathoon

Posts: 1041
Joined: 05 September 2004

"US energy regulators have hit JP Morgan with $410m in penalties after accusing it of manipulating electricity prices in California and the mid-west."

"The [JP Morgan] energy unit used five "manipulative bidding strategies" in California between September 2010 and June 2011, and three in the mid-west from October 2010 to May 2011, FERC said. The agency that runs the mid-western power grid, now called the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, covers all or parts of 15 states and the Canadian province of Manitoba."

http://www.theguardian.com/bus...penalty-energy-prices

In opposition Blair developed the nobel concept of the "ethical foreign policy" which as we all know led to the Iraq War and the opening up of the question of whether and how people from the various traditions of the muslim faith can live freely together in Iraq and Syria with mutual trust, and with justice, tolerance and respect building out of that mutual trust.

"Labour conference: Ethical foreign policy and wars"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19784597

[I think tthe question of trust has already been answered in other countries and if men can't find a way out of war in the current circumstances, then it is up to women from all sides to meet, and imagine how the future for them and their families might be better in peace. Both women and men can then talk and argue until they they find a way of getting to that peace. I think with sufficent motivation and imagination mothers can collectively overule generals when it comes to controlling armies.]

Now JP Morgan is fined for developing what might analogously and contemptuously be called an "ethical trading policy".

Now Blair runs a "Faith Foundation" rather than an "Ethical Foundation" so I am sure he wasn't involved in the building of a new system of ethics at JP Morgan. Blair honestly believes history will vindicate him as a "peacemaker" because to steal and paraphrase a line from Churchill "History will vindicate me; I know this, because I will write the history." He has shown us how not to use military force and as a result put the Middle East on a path where blood can be spilled in vain rage without justice and without end. In his world a history will indeed be written, a history that cannot ever be read, because there will be no one left to read it.

James Arathoon

-------------------------
James Arathoon
 01 August 2013 03:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jarathoon

Posts: 1041
Joined: 05 September 2004

While I am on Tony Blair I have point another area where I feel he brings dishonour to this country.

http://www.thejc.com/news/worl...-solution-best-israel

"Tony Blair: A two-state solution is best for Israel"

"Middle East Quartet envoy Tony Blair has told Aipac that he believes a two-state solution with the Palestinians is the only way to gurantee Israel's future security."

I categorically disagree with Blair. Blair's two state solution leaves large numbers of people without a voice including Arab Israeli's who want the freedom to marry across borders and Jewish Israeli's and Palestinians who want to live a more culturally free open cross border life.

Why don't politicians try to imagine how a one state solution might work, where Jews of various traditions including secular Jews, Christians, Arab Israeli's, Palestinian Muslims, Palestinian Christians, the Bedouin and so on live together in peace; and where all peoples are democratically represented in a way that promotes trust and dialogue and reduces discrimination and conflict arising as a result. In particular Women of all ethnic origins and faith backgrounds do not have anywhere near the voice their numbers demand.

In my view you can't impose solutions from above which deny large numbers of people a voice and expect them to work.

When I ask if British Charities (like OneVoice) provide places where young peoples both male and female of all backgrounds and creeds can go along to safely discuss and imagine their futures I am told they haven't ever done this because of security problems and there is no need because the two state solution they want to impose will solve everything.

All I can say when I visited Northern Ireland in my early twenties (in the late 1980's and I saw how valuble it was for young people from the two communities in conflict to meet in a safe non-partisan environment to discuss thow they saw the past, the present and how they imagined their the future live to be in peace.

James Arathoon

-------------------------
James Arathoon
 01 August 2013 05:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



ectophile

Posts: 545
Joined: 17 September 2001

Originally posted by: jarathoon
Why don't politicians try to imagine how a one state solution might work, where Jews of various traditions including secular Jews, Christians, Arab Israeli's, Palestinian Muslims, Palestinian Christians, the Bedouin and so on live together in peace; and where all peoples are democratically represented in a way that promotes trust and dialogue and reduces discrimination and conflict arising as a result. In particular Women of all ethnic origins and faith backgrounds do not have anywhere near the voice their numbers demand.


You can imagine all you like, but it's very difficult to build a stable democracy when people fundamentally disagree with each other, not just on economics but on religion, morality and the like.

Just look at Egypt for an example.

Whoever gets into power will try to impose their code of behaviour on everybody else, leading to protests, peaceful or violent.

-------------------------
S P Barker BSc PhD MIET
 04 August 2013 03:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jarathoon

Posts: 1041
Joined: 05 September 2004

"You can imagine all you like, but it's very difficult to build a stable democracy when people fundamentally disagree with each other, not just on economics but on religion, morality and the like."


Systems of governance where civil rights and participation depend on discriminating according to gender, colour, birth place, ethnic origin, religious beliefs etc are no longer acceptable in the modern democratic world.

It was the imperial and colonial attitudes of the past that gave rise to states proffering social systems based on different grades of citizenship or status within a single country; no matter how the geographical bounds of the country (including associated reservations or homelands) are described, disguised, occupied, separated or constituted.

In John Kerry's new 9 month abortive dash for a non-identical twin or triplet state solution, what we are now witnessing is really the last gasp for an old colonial mindset and now lost colonial past.

The simple question many people are now asking is:

Is it not better to campaign for equal civil rights and equal citizenship in a single state, like Martin Luthur King did in America or Mandela did in South Africa?

It seems to me that the Palestinians and other voiceless and discriminated minorities in Israel would be much better off turning their backs on Kerry (and Blair) and campaign peacefully, yet vigorously and loudly, for equal citizenship in a reconstituted Israel, so they may become Arab-Israelis, Palestinian-Israelis, Christian-Israelis, Muslim-Israelis, Secular-Israelis etc. etc. with pride (or whatever else they wish to call themselves).

The current governing elite of Israel say this cannot happen because then there will be more non-Jews, than Jews (including secular Jews), and so Israel will no longer then be a Jewish majority state as its founders built.

Most states are not the same as their founders built. There are plenty of democratic nation states including USA and the UK where the rights of Jewish (secular and orthodox) and other minorities are fully protected in law and much more securely than in the past. If American ideologies were still the same as on its foundation, then there would still be black slaves working the land and there would not now be a black President in the White House.

What is it possible to imagine about a future Israeli state:

One could imagine for example that there could be Prime minister and Deputy Prime minister, like in Northern Ireland, that would in the first few years be selected by convention from the two biggest minorities to cement trust.

One could imagine for example that the Israeli army could be a professional army of choice drawn from the wider population, thus putting to an end to compulsory conscription; I am sure that would be popular amongst Jews and Arabs not already exempted, and who like me, don't like being told what to do and how to think in regimented fashion.

etc. etc.

All I am really suggesting is that young people from all backgrounds should be given the opportunity in short residential non-partisan retreat (for a few days at a time, sharing meals, conversation and music) to imagine the future possibilities for peace and the dividends it could potentially bring them. How they build a future for themselves is really up to them.

James Arathoon


-------------------------
James Arathoon
 04 August 2013 11:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



ectophile

Posts: 545
Joined: 17 September 2001

Originally posted by: jarathoon
Systems of governance where civil rights and participation depend on discriminating according to gender, colour, birth place, ethnic origin, religious beliefs etc are no longer acceptable in the modern democratic world.

James Arathoon


The problem is that what you consider acceptable is pretty much irrelevant, since you do not control the government of other countries.

In Egypt, a majority voted in an Islamist government. That was democratic. A substantial minority violently disagreed with the policies of the new government, and the army stepped in and took over.

This will always happen where there are fundamental differences as to how a country should be governed. A downside of democracy is that the majority can impose their codes of conduct on the minority.

-------------------------
S P Barker BSc PhD MIET
 05 August 2013 10:24 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jarathoon

Posts: 1041
Joined: 05 September 2004

Many countries are signatories to the UN charter of human rights. It's not as if I am the only one who would take this view, many other liberals would as well.

http://www.un.org/en/rights/

"A downside of democracy is that the majority can impose their codes of conduct on the minority."

A downside of colonialism is that a minority can impose their codes of conduct on the majority

It strike me that modern Britain is still heavily influenced by the settlements following the Roman and Norman occupations. I am not saying we should deny our history or that it still plays out in the modern world. What I am saying

I think the major problem with our UK democracy is that as we become more educated and diverse in our views as an electorate, the political parties struggle to represent the diversity of opinion properly.

Another problem with our democracy is that we have too few women involved. Women only started to vote en-mass in the UK after the Second World War. We still have the House of Lords!

Even though we have one of the oldest parliamentary systems, we still don't have a mature democracy. These things take time.

I don't think we should write off Egypt because they are more impatient for change than us right now. Whatever happens to Egypt now, former President Morsi will always be remembered as the first democratically elected leader of Egypt. (I personally think there will be many more) Given that Egypt has one of the longest recorded histories of any country, he arguably has greater place in history as we look back than almost anyone else alive today, no wonder it went to his head. We are all human after all.

James Arathoon



-------------------------
James Arathoon
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.