Ganley, Gurdgiev, McWilliams and a Swiss fund

Scofflaw

Slightly odd one. Business and Finance magazine and The Journal both carried a story about a new venture by serial entrepreneur and international man of mystery Declan Ganley. This time the venture is essentially an Irish-based affiliate for a Swiss fund - called St Columbanus AG - allowing high net worth individuals in Ireland to channel their funds into 'secure' Swiss havens.

Business and Finance reported that the bank will be a "conservative safe haven for European depositors in the midst of the ongoing financial crisis" which will deposit money in Triple A rated banks around Europe, making a commission for doing so.

The interesting suggestion is that "according to documents seen by Business and Finance" the board members for this proposed wealth management vehicle include David McWilliams and Constantin Gurdgiev.

McWilliams has denied by Twitter that he's "on the board of any bank, Swiss or Irish", there has been no comment from Gurdgiev, and Ganley has moved swiftly to have the stories taken down. Cached copy of the B&F story is here.

Interesting in the light of Ganley's earlier "advice" that the Irish State should default - equally so in the case of the others. Disaster capitalism, anyone?

amused,
Scofflaw

later12

Both news items on this appear to be missing.

The investment fund vehicle itself appears like a rather sober and uninteresting, if not downright sensible entitiy. I don't think there is anything controversial about this apart from aligning Ireland's conservative bad boy with Ireland's favourite celebrity economist.

If it is remotely true, I'm sure Breakfast Roll Man will be heartbroken.

ei.sdraob

Ganley behind new bank
05 April 2011 15:10
The entrepreneur Declan Ganley is in the process of setting up a Swiss-based bank, which will be aimed at Irish people looking to move their deposits out of Ireland and into European financial institutions.

The bank, which will be called St Columbanus AG, has been registered in Switzerland. According to documents seen by Business & Finance, board members include David McWilliams and Constantin Gurdgiev.

Ganley is travelling this week and is unavailable for comment.

A source close to the situation says that the project is still in development and no contracts have been signed.

According to a press release on the website: “St. Columbanus AG focuses attention on the need for safety…The main purpose of the firm is to provide a conservative safe haven for European depositors in the midst of the ongoing financial crisis.

“Declan Ganley, chairman and co-founder of St. Columbanus AG, said the company is focused on the safety of client assets, which is especially important in the current European context of economic and political uncertainty and low commercial growth.

“Until the economic crisis is resolved, which require several years, we are advising our clients to be prudent, secure their assets, place their savings with sound institutions, and address the safety of their pensions by considering Switzerland as the best safe haven for declared assets in Europe.”

It is believed that St Columbanus will act as an affiliate bank, which means that it will place Irish deposits in secure Triple A rated European financial institutions and take a commission in return for its services.

Other directors involved with the bank according to the website include Kevin O’Connell, Andrew Jamieson, who is a former board member of Ganley’s telecoms company Rivada; Charles Guthrie (Baron Guthrie of Craigiebank); and Gregory Tutton, who is a Swiss-based private equity player.

Its fairly easy to DMCA google and get cached copy removed...
Boards on the other hand has DeVore :P

ei.sdraob

agh messed up post



@OP whats wrong or illegal with people who think Ireland will go down the drain to be moving money out of country (if thats whats happening)?
Is it the duty of the citizens of the state to repay debts raked up by the banks?

Scofflaw

ei.sdraob wrote: »

agh messed up post



@OP whats wrong or illegal with people who think Ireland will go down the drain to be moving money out of country (if thats whats happening)?
Is it the duty of the citizens of the state to repay debts raked up by the banks?

Goodness, there's no suggestion of wrongdoing of any kind here. It's just interesting that three people with quite a bit of media profile, and thus influence over whether people do think Ireland is going down the drain, should engage in such a venture.

You could call it putting one's money where one's mouth is, although it leads inexorably to the view that one may be putting one's mouth where one's money is.

cordially,
Scofflaw

fred252

what sort of interest and fees do ye reckon they'll offer?

whatever happened that property consortium eddie hobbs set up?

ei.sdraob

Scofflaw wrote: »

You could call it putting one's money where one's mouth is, although it leads inexorably to the view that one may be putting one's mouth where one's money is.

I dont like Ganley (creeps me out),
or McWilliams (good showman tho)
or Gurdiev (he is being a hypocrite with his rescue negative equity mortgage arguments while getting himself in same hole)

Tho the 3 do make people think from different angle and sometimes have good points.


There seems to be some sort of a campaign against "doom-mongers" as shown recently with the scandalous article from Garret Fitzgerald (who has plenty of bones in his own closet).
That is quite dangerous, last time we seen that was the likes of Bertie with his "go commit suicide" remarks.
People might not like what these people say, but they do have a right to speech, and this country does need reflect on what went wrong and continues to go wrong.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ei.sdraob

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Did he clear that matter up somewhere?

One thing about Gurdiev is that he lived thru' a collapse in Russia thruout 90s so he has personal experience behind his thesis.

And it seems we are not far behind now and will enter the economics books somewhere near the top of this table for both duration and severity of collapse.

P. Breathnach

ei.sdraob wrote: »

...
There seems to be some sort of a campaign against "doom-mongers" as shown recently with the scandalous article from Garret Fitzgerald (who has plenty of bones in his own closet).
That is quite dangerous, last time we seen that was the likes of Bertie with his "go commit suicide" remarks.
People might not like what these people say, but they do have a right to speech, and this country does need reflect on what went wrong and continues to go wrong.

But Garrett Fitzgerald should not use his right to free speech?

oflahero

If - if - there is any truth to all this, it would appear to be a political move by Ganley rather than any spotting of a new business opportunity. The EU/IMF policy towards us at the moment appears to be just doing the minimum required to let us limp along towards default in a couple of years' time (but not til then) - just until they can ringfence us from causing contagion in the rest of the Eurozone's banking system, at which point we'll be dropped like a hot snot. This wheeze of Ganley's would put a spanner in the works by hugely accelerating the ongoing outflow of deposits from Irish banks, thus precipitating a default much earlier than that, as through our own (the Lenny bank guarantee's) fault the Irish banking debt is now indistinguishable from the sovereign.

But yes, if there's any truth to it. Whendjoo last hear of a bank being set up with a twitter account?!

later12

oflahero wrote: »

If - if - there is any truth to all this, it would appear to be a political move by Ganley rather than any spotting of a new business opportunity.... would put a spanner in the works by hugely accelerating the ongoing outflow of deposits from Irish banks, thus precipitating a default

Nonsense. Fund managers all over Dublin can do this for you today, and they are doing it. This is a well established process for those with funds they wish to shelter from various financial hazards. If anything Ganley is just jumping on that bandwagon, and why shouldn't he? If you can offer competitive commissions and fees, now is a great time to go up against financial houses in offering these sorts of services.

Ganley is being an entrepreneur here, not a politician, this business venture is not going to cause an Irish default.

ei.sdraob

P. Breathnach wrote: »

But Garrett Fitzgerald should not use his right to free speech?

Did I say that? :rolleyes:


To attack McWilliams (however unlikable the guy is) in the media in the matter it was done was a "below the waist" punch and surprising coming from someone so respected. If he thinks so little of him then why did he lower himself to same level?

Does Garret really think that someone who might invest millions or billions in Irish bonds not hire someone to do research and why would they even pay attention to likes of McWilliams.

The whole thing is a sideshow distraction while the real economy continues to slide.

oflahero

P. Breathnach wrote: »

But Garrett Fitzgerald should not use his right to free speech?

No-one's claiming that Garrett should ought to shut up for the good of the country, it's just being commented that what he's saying is cack. On the other hand, what HE'S saying is that the doom-mongers ought to 'patriotically' shut their cakeholes.

fred252

later10 wrote: »

Nonsense. Fund managers all over Dublin can do this for you today, and they are doing it. This is a well established process for those with funds they wish to shelter from various financial hazards. If anything Ganley is just jumping on that bandwagon, and why shouldn't he? If you can offer competitive commissions and fees, now is a great time to go up against financial houses in offering these sorts of services.

Ganley is being an entrepreneur here, not a politician, this business venture is not going to cause an Irish default.

i agree that this is Ganley being an entrepreneur.

what level of deposit flight could lead to a default? for every deposit euro that leaves an Irish bank the ECB has to put one in, right? (albeit via an IOU from the Irish central bank)

oflahero

later10 wrote: »

Nonsense. Fund managers all over Dublin can do this for you today, and they are doing it. This is a well established process for those with funds they wish to shelter from various financial hazards. If anything Ganley is just jumping on that bandwagon, and why shouldn't he? If you can offer competitive commissions and fees, now is a great time to go up against financial houses in offering these sorts of services.

Ganley is being an entrepreneur here, not a politician, this business venture is not going to cause an Irish default.

OK. 'Precipitating a default' was a bit strong, it's rather unrealistic in itself. 'Sabre-rattling' might be better. Either way, given his ability to get into the headlines, both the Department of Finance and the ECB are going to hate him (even more) for this.

Interesting what you say about getting into funds as a way of protecting the wedge. Your average thicko (like me) would instinctively consider anything involving investment (even a tracker fund) riskier than any vanilla deposit account, however true that might be in practice.

jank

Scofflaw wrote: »

Goodness, there's no suggestion of wrongdoing of any kind here. It's just interesting that three people with quite a bit of media profile, and thus influence over whether people do think Ireland is going down the drain, should engage in such a venture.

You could call it putting one's money where one's mouth is, although it leads inexorably to the view that one may be putting one's mouth where one's money is.

cordially,
Scofflaw

NO suggestion of a little bit of preaching here Scofflaw? Are you Pat Cox?

later12

oflahero wrote: »

anything involving investment (even a tracker fund) riskier than any vanilla deposit account, however true that might be in practice.

Most high net worth individuals would consider leaving their wealth in a deposit account about the same as you or I leaving our life savings in a current account. The potential returns from hedged or safe investments far outstrips anything one could ever hope to earn from a deposit account (which is itself invested as a fund and which itself makes a far bigger profit for banks than for the individual depositors)

The fund affiliate which Ganley has established, or is in the process of establishing, would diversify its investments into a series of highly dependable triple-A rated ventures, not unlike our old friend the pension reserve fund which did the same thing.

ei.sdraob

oflahero wrote: »

Either way, given his ability to get into the headlines, both the Department of Finance and the ECB are going to hate him (even more) for this.

It says alot about an economy

when "allegedly" more attention is paid to a "celebrity economist" than the country's central bank or dept. of finance

:P


fairplay to David for making a few bucks out of this mess, god knows the country would need people like him to pay taxes for the mess not created by him (thats if hes not getting artist exemption from taxes or god knows what else)

Cookie_Monster

ei.sdraob wrote: »

It says alot about an economy

when "allegedly" more attention is paid to a "celebrity economist" than the country's central bank or dept. of finance

:P

maybe that's cos the central bank / dept of finance / finance minister have been consistently wrong over the last number of years

later12

fred252 wrote: »

what level of deposit flight could lead to a default? for every deposit euro that leaves an Irish bank the ECB has to put one in, right? (albeit via an IOU from the Irish central bank)

How long is a piece of string? I actually don't think it will be capital flight in itself triggering a default, since as you say the ECB can keep gushing in the funds, which costs them precisely nothing as they are the ECB.

The trigger for a partial default, or a debt restructuring will be the opening of the 2013 euro crisis mechanism and the unsustainable level of peripheral debt in the eurozone. Right now we are just in a limbo.

oflahero

later10 wrote: »

Most high net worth individuals would consider leaving their wealth in a deposit account about the same as you or I leaving our life savings in a current account.

True, and that's why I'd imagine HNW individuals in Ireland are out of this particular equation, having moved to protect themselves long ago. All that's left is the (still relatively large) cohort of non-indebted small-time savers fearful of an Argentina-style grab on their deposit accounts, the type of saver who'd give a serious bit of credence to the involvement of the likes of McWilliams and Gurdgiev... hence all the attention this story has been getting yesterday and today.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

oflahero wrote: »

No-one's claiming that Garrett should ought to shut up for the good of the country, it's just being commented that what he's saying is cack. On the other hand, what HE'S saying is that the doom-mongers ought to 'patriotically' shut their cakeholes.

To be fair, I don't know about Gurdgiev, but the other two have certainly posed as patriots.

cordially,
Scofflaw

fred252

Scofflaw wrote: »

To be fair, I don't know about Gurdgiev, but the other two have certainly posed as patriots.

cordially,
Scofflaw

there's nothing wrong with being patriotic. there is something wrong with someone being told to shutup in the interest of patriotism.

the bush admin and the folks at foxnews were fond of this.

Scofflaw

fred252 wrote: »

there's nothing wrong with being patriotic. there is something wrong with someone being told to shutup in the interest of patriotism.

the bush admin and the folks at foxnews were fond of this.

Undeniably so, but I'm not interested particularly in Garret's request for them to shut up. I wouldn't, on the other hand, consider the pursuit of private gain at the expense of the country by people in a position of public influence as particularly patriotic. After all, I'm not a libertarian.

cordially,
Scofflaw

oflahero

Scofflaw wrote: »

To be fair, I don't know about Gurdgiev, but the other two have certainly posed as patriots.

cordially,
Scofflaw

That's not the point though. Fitzgerald just trotted out the old line about doomsayers 'talking down the economy', as if that were one of the root causes of the effluent we find ourselves in, suggesting that the only patriotic course of action if you see trouble down the line is to keep schtum.

Scofflaw

oflahero wrote: »

That's not the point though. Fitzgerald just trotted out the old line about doomsayers 'talking down the economy', as if that were one of the root causes of the effluent we find ourselves in, suggesting that the only patriotic course of action if you see trouble down the line is to keep schtum.

See answer to fred252. I'm not proposing to defend Garret Fitzgerald, so he's being offered here as a straw man, which is a tactic with a very limited lifespan.

cordially,
Scofflaw

fred252

Scofflaw wrote: »

See answer to fred252. I'm not proposing to defend Garret Fitzgerald, so he's being offered here as a straw man, which is a tactic with a very limited lifespan.

cordially,
Scofflaw

nobody's offering him as "a straw man".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

fred252

Scofflaw wrote: »

Undeniably so, but I'm not interested particularly in Garret's request for them to shut up. I wouldn't, on the other hand, consider the pursuit of private gain at the expense of the country by people in a position of public influence as particularly patriotic. After all, I'm not a libertarian.

cordially,
Scofflaw

i don't think this is a patriotic endeavor.

nonetheless how exactly would it be at the expense of the country? are you suggesting we cherish those ridiculous banks as our own now that they've been nationalised? i want them un-nationalised a.s.a.p.

Scofflaw

fred252 wrote: »

i don't think this is a patriotic endeavor.

nonetheless how exactly would it be at the expense of the country? are you suggesting we cherish those ridiculous banks as our own now that they've been nationalised? i want them un-nationalised a.s.a.p.

Oh, I'm keen to see them sold back into private hands (with a note of caution in respect to their regulation), but at the moment, with the government still dedicated to propping them up, we're in a position where the taxpayer gets to pay for deposit flight, because a major part of the programme for the banks is a reduction in their loan to deposit ratio.

That's how encouraging deposit flight by high net worth individuals from the Irish banks is 'profiting at the expense of the country' - the funding vehicle makes the profit on the assets shifted by the HNWs, and the taxpayers subsidise the banks to make up the shortfall. If you combine that with the fact that all three are public commentators who have been quite negative about Ireland's prospects, you get something a little less palatable than the simple libertarian opt-out from collective responsibility.

cordially,
Scofflaw

fred252

Scofflaw wrote: »

Oh, I'm keen to see them sold back into private hands (with a note of caution in respect to their regulation), but at the moment, with the government still dedicated to propping them up, we're in a position where the taxpayer gets to pay for deposit flight, because a major part of the programme for the banks is a reduction in their loan to deposit ratio.

That's how encouraging deposit flight by high net worth individuals from the Irish banks is 'profiting at the expense of the country' - the funding vehicle makes the profit on the assets shifted by the HNWs, and the taxpayers subsidise the banks to make up the shortfall. If you combine that with the fact that all three are public commentators who have been quite negative about Ireland's prospects, you get something a little less palatable than the simple libertarian opt-out from collective responsibility.

cordially,
Scofflaw

i don't have much faith in the our banks at the moment. when my parents asked me for advice on where to keep their hard earned savings i advised not in an irish bank for a start. would you consider that unpatriotic?

anyone who is positive about Ireland's prospects is delusional. can you name an economist who isn't "quite negative about Ireland's prospects"?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

fred252 wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Ireland's prospects are undeniably not great, but the idea that there is an absolute catastrophe looming is what's being sold rather relentlessly.

Permabear wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Rather than trying to bridge the unbridgeable gap between the individualistic and the communal mindsets, it's sufficient to say that you don't publicly wrap yourself in the flag, which is the difference here.

cordially,
Scofflaw

fred252

Scofflaw wrote: »

Ireland's prospects are undeniably not great, but the idea that there is an absolute catastrophe looming is what's being sold rather relentlessly.



Rather than trying to bridge the unbridgeable gap between the individualistic and the communal mindsets, it's sufficient to say that you don't publicly wrap yourself in the flag, which is the difference here.

cordially,
Scofflaw

we are in the middle of an absolute catastrophe right now. what's really being sold is Ireland's poor prospects as you put it. i think everyone's looking for the silver lining (like you pointed out with the bond yields yesterday) but up to now things have been relentlessly gloomy and there's nothing wrong with reporting that.

waiting until 2013 for any significant change is very depressing.

Tora Bora

McGanley, McGurdiev, and McWilliams, should be sent to the Gualags, for a twelve month sabatical. Or maybe Iceland would do. If you believed Goldiocks McWilliams, the economy there is recovering:rolleyes:

fred252

Tora Bora wrote: »

McGanley, McGurdiev, and McWilliams, should be sent to the Gualags, for a twelve month sabatical. Or maybe Iceland would do. If you believed Goldiocks McWilliams, the economy there is recovering:rolleyes:

going to iceland on holidays in june. it looks like their prices have recovered

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

later12

fred252 wrote: »

we are in the middle of an absolute catastrophe right now. what's really being sold is Ireland's poor prospects as you put it.

What's being sold is not Ireland's poor prospects - it is absolute doom. Newspaper editors have long cottoned on to the fact that some outrageously apocalyptic article will bring in far more revenue than publishing balanced, yet boring, articles on ''poor prospects''. For example

However, once Irish banks pass under direct ECB control next year, they will be forced to stop lending in order to shrink their balance sheets back to a level that can be funded from customer deposits. With no new mortgage lending, the housing market will be driven by cash transactions, and prices will collapse accordingly.

-Morgan Kelly, Irish Times, November 2010

Or on his own website, David McWilliams

When we get real, we will see that Anglo’s debts are likely to be in the region of €36bn — or roughly 50pc of its loan book of €72bn... no one thinks the €25bn bailout of Anglo is “manageable”. ...This is exactly how the Greek crisis started and we know how that ended.

In fact, Anglo never went near the 36 billion that McWilliams proposed, and their bailout cost has remained in line with government figures. Nobody ever points this sort of stuff out to McWilliams or any other doom sayer. Go through McWilliams's articles and you will find many many more examples.

But hey, lets all jump on the doom wagon, it's much more suitable to replace balanced, objective analysis (be that good or bad) with an inherent tendency to publicly slash our own wrists and wallow in the favourite national past-time - torpid misery.

fred252

later10 wrote: »

What's being sold is not Ireland's poor prospects - it is absolute doom. Newspaper editors have long cottoned on to the fact that some outrageously apocalyptic article will bring in far more revenue than publishing balanced, yet boring, articles on ''poor prospects''. For example

-Morgan Kelly, Irish Times, November 2010

Or on his own website, David McWilliams
In fact, Anglo never went near the 36 billion that McWilliams proposed, and their bailout cost has remained in line with government figures. Nobody ever points this sort of stuff out to McWilliams or any other doom sayer. Go through McWilliams's articles and you will find many many more examples.

But hey, lets all jump on the doom wagon, it's much more suitable to replace balanced, objective analysis (be that good or bad) with an inherent tendency to publicly slash our own wrists and wallow in the favourite national past-time - torpid misery.

of course this all depends on your personal definition of "absolute doom"

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

later12

fred252 wrote: »

of course this all depends on your personal definition of "absolute doom"

would you agree that, for example, a banking sector that did not issue mortgage loans and a property sector which dealt only in cash transactions could fairly be described as a financial doom?

I'm particularly looking forward to that one coming to pass. As well as the imminent replacement of FF and FG with a hard right anti - foreigner party.

Or maybe it will all never happen and the people who believed in it will be unconcerned about the inaccuracies, having already got their jollies on the transitory negativities.

By the way, I'm not advancing the argument that this negativity is doing any inherent damage to the Irish economy as it is perceived abroad. I don't really believe that for a second and I think Garrett Fitz is wrong there. I just think it's a bit pathetic.

sargito

Columbanus? The Knights will be horrified! Ganleys a smart guy that name must be a dig at his former buddies at FF.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

later12

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Given that this is an economic and financial forum, I would have presumed that was obvious. If it wasn't, I'm glad the subsequent post cleared that up.

You are engaging in logical fallacies here. Just because some of Morgan Kelly's predictions are unlikely to come true does not automatically discredit all of his forecasts.

I'm not discrediting all of his forecasts. The most amateur of marketing enthusiasts know that you always pepper your gross exaggerations with truths and half truths. I'm simply pointing out one half truth and one blatant, extremely unlikely exaggeration which Kelly, supposedly, saw as a sure thing.

So, who should we listen to?

Personally I always wondered what happened to analysing facts and making up one's own mind, maybe I'm just crazy.

Godge

later10 wrote: »

What's being sold is not Ireland's poor prospects - it is absolute doom. Newspaper editors have long cottoned on to the fact that some outrageously apocalyptic article will bring in far more revenue than publishing balanced, yet boring, articles on ''poor prospects''. For example

However, once Irish banks pass under direct ECB control next year, they will be forced to stop lending in order to shrink their balance sheets back to a level that can be funded from customer deposits. With no new mortgage lending, the housing market will be driven by cash transactions, and prices will collapse accordingly

.

-Morgan Kelly, Irish Times, November 2010


But hey, lets all jump on the doom wagon, it's much more suitable to replace balanced, objective analysis (be that good or bad) with an inherent tendency to publicly slash our own wrists and wallow in the favourite national past-time - torpid misery.

Which bit of Morgan Kelly's quote is untrue? Sure the banks are not under direct ECB control but who is making the decisions in respect of the banks? Is it the Irish Government or the ECB/IMF? I would bet on the latter so while Kelly is not fully correct, he is not a mile out.

You know, he doesn't always get it right. Have a look at this piece, he certainly underestimates the cost of the bailout in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=11CCxv2ueiQ


As for a further collapse in the housing market, it is coming. The effects of higher interest rates, the end of the moratorium on repossession, continued emigration of Eastern Europeans home, cuts in social welfare rent allowance and the downsizing of the banks have yet to be fully reflected in the housing market. If the ECB increases rates in May and June, what will prices be in September?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

danbohan

Godge wrote: »

Which bit of Morgan Kelly's quote is untrue? Sure the banks are not under direct ECB control but who is making the decisions in respect of the banks? Is it the Irish Government or the ECB/IMF? I would bet on the latter so while Kelly is not fully correct, he is not a mile out.

You know, he doesn't always get it right. Have a look at this piece, he certainly underestimates the cost of the bailout in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=11CCxv2ueiQ


As for a further collapse in the housing market, it is coming. The effects of higher interest rates, the end of the moratorium on repossession, continued emigration of Eastern Europeans home, cuts in social welfare rent allowance and the downsizing of the banks have yet to be fully reflected in the housing market. If the ECB increases rates in May and June, what will prices be in September?

it seems strange that a bankrupt country has been allowed by the imf/emu put a moratorium on mortgage re possessions for 2 years which in itself is not allowing property values to reach their true levels , i cant see that continuing,if its just east Europeans that are the main bulk of emigrants at the moment that will change dramatically inside 1-2 years .

later12

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Eh, Permabear, what do you think is the corollary of this statement, hmm?

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

Only a small percentage of the Irish population have the ability to analyze complex financial and economic data. Therefore, they are dependent on others to interpret that data for them.

Here we go. The old 'this is for economists' rubbish. There is nothing inherently complex about liquidity and insolvency, there is nothing complex about revenue raising, austerity and hot money. There is nothing too Daedalean about the current crisis for the common man to understand.

If there is one thing I admire about David McWilliams and his celebrity economist ilk, however much I dislike admitting it, is that they do empower a spirit of cutting through all of the priggishness of finance and economics.

Unfortunately, these celebrity economists don't always do so in a way that is academic nor balanced, but removing economics from its pedestal and making it more pervious for people who didn't study economics is certainly welcome.
That doesn't always suit the egos of those of us who work in an economic or financial position, who like to think of economics as some wonderful, complex, transcendent discipline, a mysterious specialty which only we can master. It certainly is the former, it certainly is not the latter.