Latest news with #HerculePoirot
Daily Mail
01-08-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Flat in iconic Poirot building up for sale for £190k - but it's not exactly spacious
A studio flat in Barbican, London, is going up for auction later this month with a guide price of £190,000 before fees. Located on Charterhouse Square, the building is instantly recognisable as Whitehaven Mansions, the fictional home of Agatha Christie's famous detective Hercule Poirot. As well as exterior filming, a number of interior shots of the Grade II-listed Art Deco building were used for the programme during its 24 years in production. In 2019, the building was used again for filming, after being selected as a home for one of the leading characters of the Batman spin-off, Pennyworth. Built in 1936 by by Guy Morgan and Partners, the London building features classic Art Deco design and rare amenities for its era, including a rooftop garden with city views, an indoor swimming pool, sauna, gym and communal lounge. The block, which spans nine floors and is home to 120 flats, also has a porter service, a secure entry system and two lifts. Flat 28 Florin Court will appeal to buyers with a love of classic TV, as well as architecture and design. A canny investor could also be drawn to the studio's location and potential. And its City location means it could also be an ideal pied a terre. However, anyone who lives there will have to be comfortable with a small space, as it measures just 209 sq ft, or less than 20 sq m. The current minimum space standard says newly-built homes for one person should be at least 37 sq m. The studio flat is located on the third floor of the curved building. It has a bedroom and living space, and separate kitchenette and bathroom areas. The property has an enviable location, providing easy access to the City of London and the Elizabeth Line. It is close to both Barbican and Farringdon underground stations. The property is held on a 999 year lease from 1 April 2017, with around 991 years unexpired. The studio flat has an EPC rating of C and has not been inspected by Auction House, which is selling the property via auction in August. Viewings for the property are taking place on 1 August between 2.15pm to 2.45pm and on 5 August from 2.15pm to 2.45pm. Potential: Flat 28 Florin Court is going under the hammer with a guide price of £190,000 How to buy at auction Auctions are one area where good deals still come up. Properties sold this way can, in some cases, be substantially cheaper than on the open market. According to Property Auction News, the average price properties sell at auction for is around £166,000. However, properties sold in this way often - though not always - come with added complexities for the buyer. It is therefore important to do as much research as possible before buying any property at auction. Where possible, always visit the property in person before the auction. Do not underestimate how much renovation work or reconfigurations could cost if you are taking on a project property. Read legal documents for the property carefully and, when possible, get advice from a solicitor before heading to the auction. Sometimes, the legal pack includes 'special conditions' that mean you might also be liable to pay an additional three per cent fee to a sales agent. Before submitting any bids, always check what sort of price similar properties in the area have sold for. This will, of course, be harder if it is a more unusual property that you are after. If you do bid, do not get carried away and bid more than you can afford. Most properties bought via auction have a 28-day competition date and home loans for auction properties can be harder to get. How to find a new mortgage Borrowers who need a mortgage because their current fixed rate deal is ending, or they are buying a home, should explore their options as soon as possible. Buy-to-let landlords should also act as soon as they can. Quick mortgage finder links with This is Money's partner L&C > Mortgage rates calculator > Find the right mortgage for you What if I need to remortgage? Borrowers should compare rates, speak to a mortgage broker and be prepared to act. Homeowners can lock in to a new deal six to nine months in advance, often with no obligation to take it. Most mortgage deals allow fees to be added to the loan and only be charged when it is taken out. This means borrowers can secure a rate without paying expensive arrangement fees. Keep in mind that by doing this and not clearing the fee on completion, interest will be paid on the fee amount over the entire term of the loan, so this may not be the best option for everyone. What if I am buying a home? Those with home purchases agreed should also aim to secure rates as soon as possible, so they know exactly what their monthly payments will be. Buyers should avoid overstretching and be aware that house prices may fall, as higher mortgage rates limit people's borrowing ability and buying power. What about buy-to-let landlords Buy-to-let landlords with interest-only mortgages will see a greater jump in monthly costs than homeowners on residential mortgages. This makes remortgaging in plenty of time essential and our partner L&C can help with buy-to-let mortgages too. How to compare mortgage costs The best way to compare mortgage costs and find the right deal for you is to speak to a broker. This is Money has a long-standing partnership with fee-free broker L&C, to provide you with fee-free expert mortgage advice. Interested in seeing today's best mortgage rates? Use This is Money and L&Cs best mortgage rates calculator to show deals matching your home value, mortgage size, term and fixed rate needs. If you're ready to find your next mortgage, why not use L&C's online Mortgage Finder. It will search 1,000's of deals from more than 90 different lenders to discover the best deal for you. Be aware that rates can change quickly, however, and so if you need a mortgage or want to compare rates, speak to L&C as soon as possible, so they can help you find the right mortgage for you.
Spectator
23-07-2025
- Spectator
The nostalgic joy of Frinton-on-Sea
For the recent heatwave, it was my mission to escape our little Wiltshire cottage, where it hit 35°C. It has one of those very poor structural designs unique to Britain that, like plastic conservatories or the Tube, is useless in hot weather. First, we went to stay with friends in Frinton-on-Sea with our English bulldog, who was born in nearby Clacton and is shamelessly happy to be back among his people. Some years ago I lived in Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia, a living museum of America's pre-revolutionary settler history. Frinton doesn't go quite that far – there are no ersatz yeomen milking doleful cows – but to visit is to enter a time warp back to the mid-1930s. It's the sort of place where Hercule Poirot might solve a crime while en vacances. The town's heyday was the first half of the 20th century, when society notables including Churchill and Edward VII came to enjoy the solemn whimsy of ornate villas (Dutch gables, gothic crenellations and French balconies to the owner's taste), the pristine golf course and the elegant lawn tennis club. Most famous of all are the beach huts, a long, neat row on stilts, which contain so many people's early memories. My grandmother lived near Colchester and every summer my mother courageously carted her six children (and, on two occasions, a cat in a basket) from Wales, across the London Underground and out to Essex for a week. Encounters with childhood nostalgia can be disappointing. The den from primary school has been tarmacked over. A favourite climbing tree has blown down. Caramac bars have been discontinued. Frinton, though, is just as I remember it. The sweet shop, the greensward, the wooden groynes covered in seaweed. The big sky and murky sea. Second homes and holiday lets are rare. Deep consideration is given to what innovations might lower the tone, and most things are rejected. There is now one pub, which opened 25 years ago, and one fish and chip shop that started in 1992. Huts have been painted cheerful pastel colours instead of the original dark brown. Other than that, Frinton is unchanged. Is the town an example of stout local pride or stick-in-the-mud nimbyism? With its mad but lovely housing stock and proximity to London, it might have become England's answer to East Hampton were the local council and residents not so resistant to change. As it is, you can't even sell ice creams on the seafront. I like it. Tucked into Nigel Farage's constituency, Frinton embodies the 'good old days' that so many Reform-minded people want to get back to, because those days simply never left them. Two days later, via London where I record the Telegraph's Daily T podcast with Tim Stanley, we head west to my parents' house in [redacted] Pembrokeshire. The small coastal town is another delight, the secret of which makes locals and lifelong holidaymakers cry when they see it featured in Sunday supplement 'best places to stay' lists in case it attracts the kind of hordes who block up Cornish lanes with their enormous Range Rovers. Costa del Cymru is a balmy 30°C and plays host to an unwelcome shoal of jellyfish who park up in the bay and a raucously fun farm wedding above the golf course. By day we swim, sandcastle, and siesta in front of the cricket and tennis. In the afternoons we loll in the garden and, in lieu of a children's paddling pool, have great results with a washing up bowl and the lovely sensation of sticking your finger up a gushing hosepipe. At night we are treated to lobster – proudly potted by Dad – white wine and the blissful sensation of snuggling down under a duvet against the slight chill. It's a deeper sleep than we've had in weeks. At the end of the stay, Mum and I try on some hats for my sister's impending wedding, then we play a tedious game of suitcase Tetris before travelling home in heavy rain. I drive and my husband works. It makes me think of how robust the constitutions of cabinet ministers must be, seeing as they do most of their box work from the back of a car and aren't sick. We arrive home to a dead lawn and the creepers of wisteria climbing into our bedroom windows like The Day of the Triffids. I check my weather apps – variable and unsettled; ho hum – and get back to work on my latest novel, which is about the shenanigans of randy young farmers in the countryside. That night I lie awake on top of the sheets in the humid darkness, sure I can ever so faintly hear the crash of waves and the cry of gulls. There is no refreshing waft of breeze, neither easterly nor westerly.
Los Angeles Times
25-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Los Angeles Times
As Laguna Playhouse puts on ‘Peril,' artistic director sees promise in its future
Laguna Playhouse has catered to a crowd that croons for a classic over the past couple of weeks, the latest production doing exactly that with the return of an iconic literary character. Hercule Poirot has taken center stage once more with this month's performances of 'Peril in the Alps.' Director and playwright Steven Dietz has delivered a sequel to 'Murder on the Links,' which was staged at the venue two years ago. It's the last week for fans of the eccentric mystery solver, played by Omri Schein, to catch him in action. The audience of 'Peril in the Alps,' which runs through Sunday, spends the bulk of the show trying to figure out how to catch a suspected guilty party who is always a few steps ahead. David Ellenstein, who joined Laguna Playhouse as interim artistic director in September 2022 and had the interim tag removed in May 2023, has acknowledged the importance of giving the people what they want and doing it well. That mandate then earns equity with the patrons to expose them to new things. Laguna Playhouse's upcoming season will take those chances, with two world premieres among its six-show slate. Those include a Paul Slade Smith comedy in 'Bedside Myself' (Oct. 29-Nov. 16) and more mystery in Matthew Salazar-Thompson's 'The Maltese Falcon' (April 15-May 3). 'It's always exciting to birth a play,' Ellenstein said. 'It's something where you're not just trying to do a play that exists the best you can, but you're actually creating something that's going to exist forever. The way that you do it for that first time is not only completely invented by the company, but then as the play gets published, that's the production that is used to create the printed script. It's been, basically, initially stamped by that first production, and being part of those is always very exciting.' The curtain goes up on the 2025-26 season with 'A Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder' (Sept. 17 to Oct. 5). 'Eisenhower: This Piece of Ground,' featuring Tony Award winner John Rubinstein, runs from Jan. 14 to Feb. 1. 'Laughter on the 23rd Floor' (March 4 to 22) and 'Red' (June 10 to 28) round out the coming season's lineup. Ellenstein, who also has a history with Laguna Playhouse as an actor, is excited about the recent audience response. He said season ticket sales for next season are already in line with this year's, and the venue has opened its mezzanine level to accommodate demand on several occasions. 'My vision is to make it a thriving, full theater again, where the performances are packed and there's buzz about everyone, and we are moving in that direction,' said Ellenstein, who has also served as the artistic director of North Coast Repertory Theatre in Solana Beach since 2003. 'Since I've been [at Laguna Playhouse], we have increased the attendance,' he continued. 'We are re-staffing up because there were some staffing positions that needed to get refilled, and it's starting to happen there. I'm actually encouraged and optimistic about the future there and it coming back to its full glory.' An indication of that interest were the dozens of attendees who stayed behind to participate in a talkback with the cast following a performance last Friday evening. Discussion included line memorization, the actors' union status, evolving set changes due to stage size, plus the number of behind-the-scenes staff contributing to the six-actor play that features 29 characters. Valerie Larsen, who plays Captain Hastings, was asked about being cast in a male role. 'One thing that [Dietz] said to me when we were figuring things out, his mentality around that kind of thing is most classic literature characters are male,' Larsen said. 'The way he said it was, 'I think that everyone should have an opportunity to play the great characters.'' Schein's credits include writing the lyrics for 'The Remarkable Mister Holmes,' which was put on by Laguna Playhouse in March. He also played Poirot in 'Murder on the Links,' and describes the experience as 'intimidating' because of the public's familiarity with the character. 'So many people know [Poirot] because of the books, because of the TV show,' Schein said. 'Obviously, both 'Murder on the Links' and 'Peril in the Alps' are written by the same playwright and were directed by the same person, Steven Dietz. ''Murder on the Links' was actually based on the Agatha Christie novel, and he enjoyed the character so much that he wanted to live with the character somewhat. That's why he decided to write the sequel, 'Peril in the Alps.' It's interesting. I think this one is more comedic. Both were comic takes on the Hercule Poirot stories, but this one, I think, is more comical than the last one. We're getting more laughs, in general.' Gabbie Adner, Brian Mackey, Amanda Sitton and Christopher M. Williams team up to tackle the balance of the characters. 'Honky Tonk Angels' (July 30 to Aug. 17) will conclude the current season. There will also be a holiday special musical, 'A Snow White Christmas,' from Dec. 6 to 28.
Boston Globe
16-06-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
How is Trump hurting the Massachusetts economy? Let me count the ways.
But 2025 has flipped this dynamic on its head. Since January, the state's unemployment rate has jumped above the US rate and is rising far faster. We are also among the states with the Indeed, there's a decent argument that Massachusetts has already fallen into a mild local recession, particularly judging from state tax collections. Sales tax receipts have flatlined in recent months, suggesting a worrisome pullback in consumer spending. Meanwhile, income from paychecks is decelerating fast, having fallen by half from its 2024 average. Advertisement It doesn't take a Hercule Poirot or Benoit Blanc to figure out why the Massachusetts economy is fading faster than the rest of the country: Blame the unfriendly regime in Washington, D.C. National economic policy is increasingly organized as a kind of anti-Massachusetts economic policy, including a battery of targeted assaults at the ramparts of our economic strength. And I'm not even talking about the needless tariffs and the nettlesome trade war, since those are hitting states far more exposed to disruptions in international trade than Massachusetts. Advertisement Rather, let's start with the economic fallout from the Trump administration's direct attack on Harvard. Harvard is a huge job creator and sustaining force in the local economy. It sends paychecks to professors in Brookline, lab technicians from Somerville, and valued staff members from Beverly to Quincy. It sustains local businesses in the Longwood neighborhood and Harvard Square. And it pursues long-term regional planning and large capital projects (in Allston and elsewhere) with a scale and consistency matched only by local governments. The federal government has hampered all of this economic activity by freezing government grants, introducing a new endowment tax, and blunting Harvard's ability to attract foreign students. Hiring will slow. Construction plans will be put on hold. And even people who continue to collect their Harvard paychecks are likely to spend less of them, since their financial futures are now less secure. Combined, these direct and indirect effects will likely sap several billion dollars from the local economy every year. And that's just one institution. Dozens of other colleges and universities in Massachusetts face similar, though more muted threats. About 4 percent of all the income earned in the state Advertisement Add the imperiled research grants that normally go to our nation-leading medical centers, and Massachusetts may be more vulnerable than any other state in the country. No one gets more federal health and science funding, amounting to a good deal more than That makes another turn of the economic screw, because health care has traditionally been a great economic stabilizer for Massachusetts. Now massive threatened cuts to federal grants are bringing austerity to research hospitals, just as they've done at universities. The list goes on, from the foundering of offshore wind to the risk of looming Medicaid cuts. And while the state can draw on some of its strengths — its ample rainy day fund, its lack of divided government, and the stability of property taxes — it will be hard to prevent the state economy from further cracking in the heat of this hostile climate. Ultimately, the broadest and most far-reaching problem may be the Trump administration's general distaste for our state's progressive values: its belief that we are tainted by 'wokeness,' by unchecked immigration, and by our enduring commitment to things like vaccines, transgender rights, and abortion access. We are not the only such target. California is a major scapegoat — see the current immigration standoff or reports of a And this is why an economic slowdown seems so unavoidable for Massachusetts. Not only are we being dragged down by the war against Harvard, against university culture, and against the kind of research that has made us a hub of innovation. But businesses and families rightly feel that they cannot take risks, cannot make big new investments, cannot pursue promising new ventures or leave their jobs for new careers. If things don't work out, there may be a Massachusetts-sized hole in the safety net. Advertisement
Daily Maverick
22-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
Murder in Middle America — designed in the US, made in China
Part 4 in a five-part series. Read Part 1 here, Part 2 here and Part 3 here. In the denouement of Agatha Christie's classic crime novel Murder on the Orient Express, Detective Hercule Poirot concludes that ALL the suspects were guilty. It was similarly the case in the demise of the US manufacturing industry. Whodunnit? Almost everyone! In alphabetical order: consumers, mainstream economics, US Congress, US Federal Reserve, US Inc, US management consultants, US tax accountants, US retail sector, US Treasury, Wall Street… all these culprits played their part in the 'murder' of US manufacturing. And this is before one points a finger at the foreign accomplices… Prospects for the investment future of US Inc With two exceptions, I do not intend to call out these culprits. The first exception is US Inc as currently constituted. I do this more to highlight the headwinds that will now face foreign investors whose default allocation to equities globally has long – and rightly – favoured US Inc. As noted previously, in December 2024, US Inc's weight in MSCI's All Country World (equity) Index was 66%, twice the rest of the world combined. In 2000, that weight was a much lower 52%. In 2009, Rolling Stone Magazine did a cover story on Goldman Sachs. In it was a colourful quote. They likened the US investment bank to 'a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money'. The uncomfortable truth is that this would not be a wholly unfair description as to what US Inc became over the past two decades, especially as it has spread its tentacles worldwide. US Inc's profit margins: Hard to see them rising from here Profits for the US's S&P 500 companies as a share of US GDP averaged about 6% from 1960 to 2000, with a dip down to 3% in the 1980s. Since China's 2001 entry into the WTO, US Inc's profits as a share of US GDP have nearly doubled to 11%. Between 2000 and 2023, US Inc's share of the global profit pool also more than doubled, from 17% to 38%. Globalisation has been a boon for US corporations since they were able to grow profits much faster abroad than they could at home. Frequently they did this at the cost of foreign competitors by cashing in on the soft power appeal of American brands like Levi's Jeans and by outsourcing production of these 'American' goods to nations with low wage costs, as Levi's did with its products to textile manufacturers in China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. Or, as Apple has said of its iPhones: 'Designed in America, Made in China.' Finished products were imported back into the US at much higher profit margins than were previously available when these products were truly 'Made in the USA'. Indeed, sometimes even these profits made from selling foreign-made products back to US consumers were still retained in intermediate holding companies located in tax havens like Eire! Products made in low-cost foreign locations were also sold – with profits accruing in tax haven-located holding companies – mainly into foreign markets able to sustain higher prices like Europe, Japan and increasingly even China. In the period since 2000, when China's WTO entry constituted a positive(!) game-changer for US Inc, the overall average earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) margin for US firms increased from 10% to 11%. All this margin increase was driven from abroad as foreign margins rose from 10% to 14% while domestic margins stayed broadly flat over the same period. S&P 500 firms did especially well in this era: their foreign EBIT margins increased from 11% to 16% over 2000 to 2020 while less-agile non-S&P 500 firms rather saw their foreign margins decline from 9% to 7%. Domestic EBIT margins stayed flat for both S&P 500 and non-S&P 500 firms. Overall, the biggest gainers were – no surprise here! – US 'manufacturing' firms outsourcing production abroad, typically paying their foreign workers in owned subsidiaries 60% less than their US workers. Those US firms that used foreign contract manufacturing companies – like Apple used Foxconn – likely compressed the wage component in their final product sales price even more. A more hostile global tax environment Note that these foreign margin increases were all achieved before tax. Add to the above, US Inc followed the judicious use of offshore holding companies to shield profits from tax: practising transfer pricing, pursuing royalty 'farming', carrying out tax planning (of which the most infamous example was dubbed the ' Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich '), plus benefiting from the feature of the US Tax Code that allowed US corporations not to repatriate profits earned abroad and not pay tax on them until they did. Thus, one can see why the foreign profits earned abroad by US Inc rose so markedly after 2000. Also note that, for the global operations of Big Tech companies, accruing profits for the latter where it was most tax efficient to do so was often done by the press of a button. Were this foreign operating 'digital environment' to become less friendly – and the EU, via its Digital Markets Act, is on a campaign to achieve precisely this end – US Big Tech would be negatively impacted. Meanwhile, in 2020, seven countries (Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Singapore and Switzerland) hosting but 6% of the foreign employees of US Inc, earned nearly half US Inc's foreign profits. At what point did profit morph into greed? Dylan's chorus again: Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the USA Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way Granted, the American Bard (who also earned the nickname of 'The Voice of Protest') most likely used the word ' greed' for ' profit '. In US Inc's defence, in today's hypercompetitive world, it is hard to imagine that they would not pursue every opportunity to capture profit where they could, at home or abroad. However, Dylan implicitly raised the question – to echo a line used by General Motors in its heyday – ' whether what is good for US Inc is good for the USA?' Trump and his team are unequivocally answering 'no'. A rockier road that lies ahead for US Inc in its operations Looking forwards and from the perspective of equity investors worldwide in US stocks, how much of this post-2000 Golden Age for US Inc is sustainable in Trump's World? What might be the consequences of the seismic changes now taking place across today's investment landscape? How might global investors change their long-established behaviour? What do we know with some degree of certainty? The US dollar will, over time, likely continue to fall in value, especially against its Western DXY Index crosses: the euro, yen, pound, Canadian dollar, Swedish krona and Swiss franc. How the US dollar might fare against Asian and other emerging market currencies is less clear… though the recent strength of both the Taiwanese and Singaporean dollars may be portents of what lies ahead; Adding to this negative currency effect, inputs imported into the US now face tariffs and so will cost more. Not all of these duties will be passed on to US consumers so profit margins for many US companies will shrink. In addition, higher end prices will almost certainly curb consumption volumes, creating a negative volume gearing effect. This will weigh on profits; A product bearing an 'American brand' wherever made has heretofore usually attracted a premium price. This advantage is vanishing and may soon be a liability: think Tesla where, in February 2025, sales in Germany plunged by 76%, in Australia by 66% and in China by 49%; If inflation leaks into the US system and interest rates are forced to rise, the cost of capital to US Inc will rise too; Foreign consumers are becoming less welcoming of US products. For example, Canadians are boycotting US products; the Chinese are cooling towards Apple, Tesla, Boeing and Starbucks. EU nations meanwhile are tightening the 'freedom to operate as previously' on US Big Tech companies; and Globally, most countries are looking to rein in 'clever' corporate tax structures that have reduced their capacity to collect taxes from foreign companies using tax havens like the Cayman Islands. US companies would especially be hit were this campaign to succeed. Only eight nations remain opposed to a UN tax convention aimed at tightening up on these practices: the five 'Anglo Saxons' – the US, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand – plus Japan, South Korea and Israel. Forty-three percent of 2023's estimated tax losses were attributed to companies operating out of these eight countries. Looking forward, it is hard to see the trend by which US S&P 500 companies grew their foreign EBIT margins from 11% to 16% over 2000 to 2020 continuing in Trump's World. Given that foreign margin growth contributed ALL of the overall corporate margin growth in this period, even if this trend merely stalled and did not reverse, it would put a huge dampener on the prospects for future profit growth and so future share price performance for many of the S&P 500's leading companies. Rocky road ahead for US Bonds too The above addresses the investment prospects for the asset class that draws the lion's share of market commentary: US equities. US Bonds – which attract twice as much foreign capital as do US equities – face even cloudier prospects. After a four-decade-long bull market, from 1981 to 2020, when bond yields fell from just under 16% to just over 2%, the US bond market has since hit a four-year 'bad patch'. Non-Western central banks have been diversifying away from US Bonds into, among other assets, gold. If US inflation were to rise, prompting the Fed to raise rates, and if the US dollar were to continue to see its value erode, foreign investors in the US Bond market might yet conclude it was losing its historic attractiveness. Were the US dollar's 'store of value' attributes to be compromised (and if the idea of Stephen Miran, chairperson of the Council of Economic Advisers, that foreign holdings of US financial assets should be taxed would do just that), this would further weaken its reserve currency status. Threatening to confiscate US dollar assets, as the US did to Colombia, will not help either. Any weaponising of the US dollar will detract from its 'store of value' attractiveness. Mea culpa: 'I' did it too! The other actor I must call out who played a part in the Murder of Manufacturing in America is… 'myself'… or at last the profession of which I am a part: economics and the mainstream thinking that it has proselytised after World War 2. This thinking has especially dominated Anglo Saxon practice and, as it is now becoming clearer, it has a lot to answer for. In a word, modern macroeconomic thinking has been shot through by what is called 'Keynesianism'… except that the current manifestation of the latter doctrine is not true to its academic origins. John Maynard Keynes would not have recognised the incontinence of the fiscal spending that is now the 'go to' solution for nearly all Western economic challenges. (Even previously more prudent Germany is now joining this club.) Yes, Keynes recommended unfunded fiscal spending, but only when times were bad: echoing David Hume, the matching bookend to his thinking was that once the economy improved, the prior borrowing that was needed to jumpstart the economy should be repaid. Keynes believed running the economic engine with the fiscal choke permanently pulled out would eventually flood that engine and make new economic growth much harder to achieve. Sound familiar in 2025? In 1962, Joan Robinson was the first to call out the twisted application of JMK's thinking, especially as it was manifesting itself in the universities of the US. She noted that 'the bastard Keynesian doctrine (that) evolved in the United States… (was) floating on the wings of the almighty dollar'. Her withering comment was made even before Valery Giscard d'Estaing's 1965 'exorbitant privilege' charge that the US was – by printing US dollars to cover its deficit spending, both current account and budget – living beyond its means, but still getting by courtesy of the kindness of foreign strangers/savers. In the 1960s, Britain – which mistakenly thought sterling still had reserve currency status – tried following this American example. Result? Periodic hiccoughs. The 1967 Sterling Crisis was followed by the pound's slide from 1972 to 1976 (which ended with Britain calling in the IMF) and then the sorry experience of UK currency going into (1987) and being ejected from (1992) Europe's Exchange Rate Mechanism. Together, these traumas underlined just how weak Britain's exorbitant privilege had become compared with that of the US. Still, by the 1990s, with free capital flows accepted as mainstream behaviour in much of the world, funding deficits in part by borrowing from abroad, became easier… even, by the mid-1990s, for Britain. Keynesianism as it had become was now one-sided demand management on steroids: never mind fiscal overspending if foreigners would help finance it. The demand side was all that mattered; little attention was paid to the supply side… which in any case, if regarded as industrial manufacturing, had from the 1980s rapidly migrated abroad anyway. Many Western governments paid no heed to that which was no longer there! Manufacturing was now treated as was agriculture: yesterday's focus. As Vaclav Smil was to bemoan, for the Anglo Saxons and especially the US, from now on it was to be all about services. And these services were often underpinned by government spending. In 2024, the US government provided more 'credit' (often interest free and non-repayable) than banks. Also in 2024, two-thirds of the US's 2.2 million jobs created were in healthcare and government; furthermore 80% of all post-Covid US jobs have been created directly by the US government or with its financial support. And despite claims to the contrary, those in services nearly always import far more than they can earn by selling their services abroad (even when tourism services are added in). Especially among the Anglo Saxons, as manufacturing declined and their service-oriented economies expanded, this meant they ended up running larger and larger current account deficits. DM
