Alternative for Sweden (AfS) is established


It seems that several members of the conservative anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats (SD) have splintered to form the Alternative for Sweden (AfS) (video here). The party was founded a few weeks ago by Gustav Kasselstrand, a former member of the SD which saw its support slip to 14.8% in November 2017, compared to 18.4% percent in June, according to the Swedish Statistics Office. Although in March 2018, Sentio poll has the SD at 23% (from 21.9%), a Demoskop poll at 18.6% (15.4% in Feb) and SiFo poll at 15.9%.

The government, comprised of the Social Democrats and Greens, had a 36.4% approval rating, compared with 35.6% in the June poll. The AfS thinks that the SD has become too compromising and see the fall in the polls as reason to break away and follow in the footsteps of the rise and rise of Germany’s AfD.

SD party leader Jimmie Åkesson said in Feb 2018 that the party is its own worst enemy…“Our biggest problem is that we have not been able to build real credibility...”
going on to say it was uncertain whether SD would benefit from “…moving further to the right on immigration issues because parties like the Social Democrats and Moderates have snatched our politics within the area [just like Rutte in The Netherlands adopting policies of Geert Wilder’s Freedom Party at the Dutch election last year]…The next term of office will be crucial for us to establish ourselves as a government alternative…We must compromise and be pragmatic

Even at its current level of support, the Sweden Democrats would still have enough seats to block either the centre-left or centre-right blocs from forming government after the upcoming September 2018 election.

The SD saw surging support several years ago on what they saw was politically correct limp-wristed responses to growing migrant crime. In Malmo, Deputy Police Commissioner Mats Karlsson said in response to multiple explosions that occur in the city on a regular basis, “Our dilemma is that we can never guarantee anything for sure. Evidently there are individuals who have hand grenades and they often resort to violence over things that may seem very banal to you or I – a conflict over an ex-girlfriend or a little brother wanting to outperform his big brother…It’s bad enough when they use guns, because they’ve got such poor aim, but grenades are really worrying. They have a 360-degree reach.”

As CM has made the point for years, whether one likes the direction of right wing politics or not, yet more nationalist parties are feeling the seeds of discontent within their own constituencies and offering a platform to parties that don’t seem to be listening. On Sept 9th, Swedes will get their democratic say. Austria, Germany, Holland, Italy, The Netherlands and France have all seen large shifts toward anti-immigrant/eurosceptic parties in recent elections. It isn’t a coincidence with the EU at the helm.



These are the Oscar stats. A 40% decline over 5 years. Is this a sign of a format that is no longer sustainable? Is the disintermediation/disruption caused by video on demand such that making a ‘date’ to go to the cinema is no longer a priority? Cinema attendance in the domestic US market is back at 1993 levels. In the 1990s Hollywood made 400-500 films annually. It now pumps out more than 700. The average revenue per film continues to head south. The strategy seems to throw more at audiences and hope it sticks. Are the movies the industry rates itself on actually reflected in the box office? Out of touch with the audience? It would seem so. See for yourself.


It should appear to Hollywood that movies about real life stories are the ones that seem to resonate most with audiences – Titanic, The King’s Speech, Argo and A Beautiful Mind. These 4 films grossed $1.04 billion at the box office. It has been 10 years since Hollywood has had a fictional film it chose for itself beat the worst of the 4 movies based off real stories in ticket sales. It has been 15 years since having a proper blockbuster like Lord of the Rings which is arguably pure fantasy and extends to child audiences.

Films are of course subjective. One film one person may enjoy, others may not share the same view. It is interesting though that $100m box offices were a cert for an Oscar Best Picture award til 2004 after which it has been hit and miss since. 9 films in the last 13 have failed to breach $75mn. So instead of Hollywood being so preoccupied with espousing politics, perhaps it should look to the audience it ‘preaches’ to and starts ‘reaching’ them instead.

The 90th Oscars – viewership down 16%


The Oscars. Who actually takes the time to watch it? The irony is that these supposed social justice warriors think they pack significant political clout. On the one hand actresses still dress as scantily as possible while protesting sexual harassment and women’s rights while on the other stick it to the NRA when so many action or suspense movies glorify gun fights and blood shed. Trump bashing is a regular feature these days and the jokes are plain boring and the audience, what’s left of it, have tuned out.

They can’t have it both ways. In any event viewers voted with their eyes sending ratings down 16%. Perhaps The Oscars could take a lessson from 90 years ago and stick to silent movies!

From a Nielsen:

The 8 p.m.-11 p.m. portion of ABC’s telecast averaged an 18.9 household rating and 32 share in Nielsen’s metered market overnight ratings, which cover about 70% of U.S. TV households. That’s down about 16% from the 22.5/37 rating generated by the 2017 Oscars.

Hypocrisy and Hollywood go hand in hand. One wonders whether Leo DiCaprio flew his eyebrow groomer half way around the world on a private jet when climate change is the biggest problem we face  today.

After decades of digital disruption Hollywood still pushes the idea that they are important enough for us to make an appointment for when Netflix and Fox allow us to watch whatever, whenever On demand in our own living rooms. Times have changed and Hollywood needs to get with them and keep their mouths shut when it comes to thinking they’re remotely living in the real world.

If the status quo is so good why would we vote out the incumbents?


Almost everywhere we look, we’re told by the political class how good our lot is. Our blessed Aussie PM told us, “It has never been a better time to be an Australian.” Boosted asset prices, low unemployment and tepid inflation gives the illusion of real wealth for everyone. As an electorate, if all of that were true, why wouldn’t we be going out of our way to make sure the status quo gets voted back in with similar if not greater majorities? As it stands, more and more incumbent parties are hanging on by their finger nails, being forced to create alliances to stay in power rather than stick to the principles their parties were founded on. The irony is that these grand coalitions are formed on the tenets of ignorant ‘un-populism.’

The latest election cycle shows us that a growing number of people aren’t buying mediocrity. They’re sick of incumbent politicians ignoring them. The current crop of leaders seem to think that being less worse than the opposition is a virtue to be proud of. Yet poverty levels continue to rise and wealth is not trickling down to the masses. Even rising state entitlements have a finite life and the electorate knows it. Being married to the government is not seen as a desirable strategy long term. Deficits keep rising and look increasingly hard to pay down.

Searching through the St Louis Fed database, civilian employment under Obama managed to grow 2.5% on pre-crash levels. So the US loaded up on $9 trillion in short term debt to create 4 million net new jobs. That works out at $2.25 million per worker. Hardly an achievement. Yet despite that economic growth has dithered at the lowest post recession rates ever. As much as we might want to celebrate record low unemployment these are not proud statistics. The quality of jobs keeps going down. $8.4 trillion of this federal debt load needs to be refinanced inside 4 years. $12.3 trillion inside 10 years. While politicians can call the average voter stupid, the daily struggles of the average punter shows how out of touch the law makers are. This was the grand mistake made by Clinton. While she hung out with her elite mates at $1,000 plate dinners in Democrat strongholds in LA, NY and Chicago expecting a coronation, Trump hit the little people and had crowds flocking to see him.

While Trump’s trade tariffs seem daft on the face of it, it was done for the forgotten people who voted for him. He is not concerned about the consequences. That’s the point. So much of his platform appears abhorrent but he is the only politician in danger of being raked over coals for keeping his promises. That’s why he was elected. The status quo had failed to deliver over decades. 80% of the population didn’t benefit from the asset bubble post GFC. The 1% took 42% of those gains. The average Joe and Joanne see this. While they might not fully comprehend it they know enough to see their situation is not much better.

Take a look at Trudeau’s India debacle. Apart from the embarrassing wardrobe saga, the bigger problems came when he blamed the Indians for letting a known terrorist attend a state dinner. The Indians, unsurprisingly, were most unhappy at the accusation. Many look to Trudeau as the posterchild of the left, pushing peoplekind. Telling Canadians that he will convert returning ISIS fighters with haiku poetry, podcasts and comparing them to Italian migrants at the end of WW2 is utterly preposterous to his constituents. Telling his veterans they’re asking for too much flies in the face of love of one’s country. No wonder his popularity continues to dive. His speech to the UN – where he rattled off how Canada was ticking all the UN diversity boxes – was only a quarter full. Not even his own liberal mates rallied to show unity in numbers. It was telling that virtue signalling is all about appearing to do good rather than doing it.  Yet the day before Trudeau presented, Trump spoke of America First and the audience was packed. They might have hated every word that dripped from his tongue but they didn’t miss it for the world. It is hard talk. Not carefully prepared politically correct nonsense.

Take the recent European elections. Germany gave Merkel the worst ever performance of the CDU post WW2. The SPD was even worse. The anti-immigrant AfD stormed to 16%. Is it any wonder that when Merkel’s misguided altruism  showed up on Election Day even she finally conceded we have a problem with “no go zones”. Some may wish to look at the Merkel miracle of growth and low unemployment but the public service in Germany has exploded from 9% pre 2008 crash to 16% today. Not private sector growth but public sector.

The Italian election showed over 60% of the vote went to eurosceptic parties. While volatility has always been a feature of Italian politics, this results showed the discontent underbelly of Italy which has seen poverty jump 50% to one third of the population since Lehman collapsed. While M5S said it wouldn’t form a coalition, all bets are off if it tied up with League. There are plenty of overlaps on the party platforms but the M5S would have to insist on the PM role. The EU would go into a tailspin on such news.

Austria voted in a wunderkind who put the right wing anti immigrant FPO in charge of immigration. Holland saw Wilders claw more seats. Nationalist Marine LePen in France doubled the number of seats ever attained by the Front National. Even Macron is changing his spots looking to introduce national service and take a harder line against migrant crime.

Whether the real statistics of migrant crime are wholly accurate or not is beside the point. It is increasingly seen as an election issue and more EU countries have had enough. They feel their lot is getting worse and view forking out billions in aid for people to settle here is pennies out of their pocket. If the stats are as the government sugar coats them to be in terms of the prevailing prosperity surely the citizens would overwhelmingly back them. Sadly the opposite is true meaning politicians aren’t selling their “compassion” effectively. Too many examples of gagging the police and muzzling the press have surfaced.

That is the thing. If the economy was rosy and bullish and more people felt secure there is a likelihood they would look at the immigration debate in a more positive light. All they see now is millions flocking to Europe as poverty is on the rise and the economy is on the back foot at ground zero. European EU-28 GDP hasn’t grown since Q4 2015. Despite a quadrupling of ECB assets net jobs created post GFC numbers 4 million, labour force participation remains below the peak. However we should not forget that Romania and Bulgaria joined in Jan 2007 and Croatia in 2013 which would add (at a 50% employment ratio) c.20mn meaning that employment in the EU on a like for like basis as a whole is down 16mn jobs ceteris paribus. Even if only Croatia was included then net jobs creation in EU-28 would be a paltry 2mn, or a smidgen above 1%. Anemic.

Yet the political class still doesn’t seem to be learning, especially the EU. Poland and Hungary have formed a pact to reject proposed quotas on migrants. The EU has failed to address the most important question. The wishes of the migrants themselves. It is one thing for the EU to appeal to voters as saving asylum seekers from war torn lands (when 80% are economic migrants by the EU’s own numbers), it is another to forcibly send them to countries that flat out don’t want them. Ask for a show of hands of asylum seekers looking to stay in Germany or head off to Hungary to settle and the likelihood is 100:0. Trying to make Hungarians or Poles feel guilty for being incompassionate is a price they’re clearly willing to pay with losing EU membership. Would we take kindly to a neighbor telling us how to arrange our furniture in the living room or sign a petition to prevent us building extensions even though it is not even in their way? Of course not. Still wagging fingers in disapproval is only likely to steel their resolve.

Flip to the Southern Hemisphere and Australian politics is also exposing the sordid state of the swamp. 5 PMs in 10 years. Now the Deputy PM has had to resign to the back bench and in a last ditched effort to claim some sort of moral high ground with the staffer he was having an affair with. He claimed he would still look after her even though a paternity test might show the kid wasn’t his. What a grub and a slap in the face for his partner to imply she may have been promiscuous. Once again the popularity of the incumbent parties in Australia continues to sink to all time lows. The Labor Party looks to have the next election in the bag but even then the popularity of the opposition leader is woefully tiny.

While the world seems to be in this state of blissful tranquility on the outside, we needn’t probe too deep before seeing how bad things continue to be on the inside. The little people may not have any financial fire power but at the ballot box they have an equal opportunity to stuff those that aren’t listening. Once again Italy shows us it wants change. Call it populism if you must but it is truly a reflection of just how bad things really are and how little ammunition to deal with any future crises remains. The little people are raising their voices. Best heed their words. It is the same reason why as zero chance as Trump looks in 2020, don’t bet against another 4 years in the White House. If the Dems hope that celebrities that talk of #METOO and gun control (all the while they attend Oscars semi-naked and collect their millions doing action films full of explosions and automatic weapons fire) will sway them to a return to the swamp they’re sorely mistaken.

Italy votes – will it mimic the referendum?


Remember the 2016 Italian referendum which was to decide on  whether to grant more power to the incumbent party to accelerate decision making? Well it ended up being a vote on ousting then PM Renzi who put his resignation on the ballot if it failed. The split between the yes/no was largely decided by economic condition. The poorer southern regions were distinctly red while a smattering of wealthy areas voted green (yes).

It is kind of telling that the furthest province in the north (Bolzano/Bozen) had the highest YES vote (63.69%) in the country while the Province of Catania (south-east Sicily) had the highest NO vote at 74.56%. Bolzano/Bozen was diligent with a 67.41% turnout vs 57.41% in Catania. It is a rich/poor divide by the looks of things. If you wish to dig into the details look no further than this site for who voted how.

The last poll showed Beppo Grillo’s eurosceptic M5S party leading with 28%. Berlusconi’s centre right Forza Italia alliance with the anti-immigrant The League is expected to get around 29%. The incumbent PD is looking at around 20%.

Since the collapse of Lehman in 2008, Italy has added 3mn to poverty (now 18mn or 29.7% of the population; EU average is 25%) with the unemployment rate above 11%. Since Merkel’s open door policy 600,000 illegal immigrants have flocked to Italy from Libya.

Italy is the 3rd largest economy in Europe and 30% of corporate debt is held by SMEs who can’t even make enough money to repay the interest. The banks have been slow to write off loans on the basis it will eat up the banks’ dwindling capital. It feels so zombie lending a la Japan in the early 1990s but on an even worse scale.

Monte Dei Paschi De Siena, a bank steeped in 540 years of history has 31% NPLs and its shares are 99.9% below the peak in 2007. Even Portugal and Spain have lower levels of NPLs. The IMF suggested that in southern parts of Italy NPLs for corporates is closer to 50%!

However one views the rising wave of nationalism in Europe, Italy will likely follow the pattern of Austria, the UK, Germany, Holland, Poland, Hungary and France. A growing number of European citizens want to be first in line rather than feel they have an EU directed obligation to bow down to political correctness. How else do we explain the AfD’s surge past the SPD?

If the eurosceptic/anti-immigrant patties get up  we shouldn’t be the least surprised. More Europeans want their own countries to be made great again. The house of cards is crumbling.

Teachers with guns – 44% of Americans support it. Texas already does it


A CBS Newspoll showed 44% of people (68% of Republicans, 47% of Independents & 20% of Democrats) were in favour of arming teachers at school. In some schools it already exists. This sign is from Argyle High School in Texas. The teachers pack heat. They are required to go through thorough background checks, training which simulates armed attackers and carry permits. Officials at Argyle and other districts in Texas say the policies deter shooters and provide peace of mind, and that other schools should follow their lead by allowing teachers to carry arms. In Texas, school boards must approve the arming of teachers. 170 districts allow employees and in some cases board members to carry firearms, according to the Texas Association of School Boards which equates to 22% of the state’s public school districts allow staff to carry guns, according to the Texas School Safety Center at Texas State University.

As foreign as the concept is to arm teachers , we must not forget that c.10% of schools in the US already have metal detectors to prevent weapons entering the classroom. Indeed a teacher being misidentified as a threat rather than a first responder by SWAT snipers because he or she was firing the weapon in a crisis is a real risk. Moreover many teachers just want to teach. If a student on a rampage knew certain teachers were locked and loaded perhaps they would make themselves initial targets. Surely teachers know this. Still we must assume any teacher bearing arms will do so willingly. Accepting an incentive bonus to do so is still an act of choice.

However it is worth considering that many schools (even schools in other countries) have armed guards at the gates. Schools are generally not fenced or walled in ways that allow singular access. Fire hazards would mean multiple entry/exit points are mandatory. So unless schools are prepared to put multiple guards at multiple access points, school safety will theoretically be compromised. So in order to protect school kids from the risk of future massacres, in the light of this strict adherence to the 2nd Amendment (despite the Democrats’ ability to amend it under Obama), solutions seem rather restricted to seemingly outlandish suggestions of arming teachers.

As written in earlier pieces, dealing with the cause of gun massacres is just as if not more important than outlawing guns themselves. The soaring incidence of broken homes, addiction to prescription drugs leading to narcotics abuse and antidepressants are elements of a decaying society. Merely banning weapons (as much as such programs have worked in Australia) won’t stop a growing problem of mentally unstable people who want to right their subjective view of injustices caused. The use of knives, bombs, cars or other means to perpetrate massacres will be found to replace guns. The other problem is that state laws are so different that navigating a common path is even more convoluted than calculus. Still, the idea that the media is pushing to say that arming teachers is widely rejected is patently untrue.

Gun makers or Drug makers? Who should we be more afraid of?


One by one, more of Corporate America is shunning the National Rifle Association (NRA). There is a touch of irony, perhaps hypocrisy about these moves. For a long time it has served rental car agencies, United Airlines and credit card companies to show their support for the NRA as its membership base was credibly large that it was ‘good for business.’ Despite dozens of massacres after the Columbine High School shooting in 1999 why did they not shun the NRA in the last 19 years? Why didn’t the 14 gun massacres under Obama where Democrats had a majority in the House and Senate cause them to ban guns or automatic rifles period? Now all of a sudden corporates have woken up from their wistful slumber to realize that supporting the NRA may no longer be appropriate “in moving with the times”, the very phrase which is used to silence debate. In the process these corporates pillory all members of an association that in the overwhelming majority of cases are law abiding citizens.

Let’s make it clear. CM is no fan of guns. CM is a fan of laws. A fan of democracy that lets people vote on issues such as this. Changing the constitution is in most countries a matter for the people to decide, not just the handful of politicians within the walls of law making. CM doesn’t need a gun. CM doesn’t want a gun. CM, like most reading this can’t understand why one would want to massacre innocent people with a gun. However we’ve stated clearly that banning guns won’t fix the problem in America. One could easily drive a car through a school campus and mow down dozens of kids during play time. Do we ban cars? The two students who carried out the Columbine massacre had handgrenades, pipe bombs and propane time bombs. While guns were the sole cause of the 15 deaths, these kids had intended to murder 100s in the commons area with the bombs (which were made from everyday off the shelf items).

Although when United Airlines starts taking the moral high ground with respect to the NRA after its own scandals of heavy handedly frog marching passengers off its aircraft it isn’t worth listening to. If these corporates could openly say that running NRA discounts was not worth it on economic grounds in terms of the administration in running such programs one could understand. If they made rational decisions that showed their business would fall of a cliff by supporting the NRA one could understand. It hasn’t happened in 20 years, so why now? If one chooses to fly United for whatever reason (convenience, price, family emergency) will they stop flying it in fear of association with the NRA might be bad for their image? Does the average American, where there are as many guns as people, think ill of the NRA? 32% of US households own guns. Are 32% of households unhinged lunatics? Granted the NRA does itself  little favors in the PR department after such tragedies.

As we’ve written in recent days, the growing incidence of broken homes and the surge in the dispensing of antidepressants to ‘tranquilize’ those who might be tempted into suicidal or homicidal tendencies is a worrying trend. Pharma companies are expected to mint $17bn in antidepressants by 2020.  Should we spurn Eli Lilly’s over-the-counter drugs because they are the evil corporates milking billions from Prozac?

To put it into perspective the total number of overdose deaths involving heroin from 2002 to 2015 jumped 6.2-fold in the US. Automobiles killed around 32,000 people last year or a little over 2x that of heroin overdoses. When adding non-methadone opioids (illicit fentanyl) overdose that number surged to 20,000, a 33% YoY jump on 2014 and 5.9x 2002. Why is it happening? The problem for many prescription painkiller users is that once their bottle ends, the addiction doesn’t stop meaning many switch to heroin to get the same ‘opioid’ hit.

Excessive use of pain relievers make up a large proportion of illicit drug use. Oxycodone is one of the more common type of opiate pain killer and it is highly addictive. In 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required the formulation of OxyContin be changed to make it harder to become addicted to. Talk about loading patients with too much ammunition.

As opioid overdoses rise, companies such as Adapt Pharma have seen sharp rises in the sales of products like Narcan (Naloxone) which basically revives victims from the dead. Narcan publicizes its price that is even insured meaning one can overdose and revive with a $10 co-payment.

94% of insured lives in the US have coverage for NARCAN® Nasal Spray*. According to IMS Health, nearly three quarters (74%) of prescriptions for NARCAN® Nasal Spray have a co-pay of $10 or less**. For those paying cash, ADAPT Pharma has partnered with retail pharmacies to reduce out of pocket costs (Retail is $62.50/dose)…To expand community access, NARCAN® Nasal Spray is available to all qualified group purchasers for $37.50 per 4mg dose ($75 per carton of 2 doses). This pricing is available for all Qualified Group Purchasers, such as first responders (EMS, Fire Department, Police), community organizations and Departments of Health, regardless of size. This pricing represents a 40% discount off the Wholesale Acquisition Cost (WAC) of $125 per carton.”

Price hikes have been a feature of naloxene. As of January 2015, Amphastar’s version of naloxone was up to $41 a dose, according to Fierce Pharma, a pharmaceutical industry news website. That follows a price increase from $17 to $33 a dose back in October 2014, according to data provided by Truven Health Analytics. So not only is volume spiking, so is price. Walgreens has expanded the availability of prescription-free naloxone to 33 states.

West Virginia health officials are responding to opioid overdoses by distributing more than 8,000 kits with Naloxone that can get people breathing again if administered in time. Money for the kits comes from a $1 million federal grant to West Virginia, which has had the nation’s highest rate of overdose deaths at 41.5/100,000 people.

Local emergency medical services agencies in West Virginia administered 4,186 doses of Naloxone in 2016, up from 3,351 the year before and 2,165 two years ago and that data doesn’t include uses by hospital emergency departments, urgent care centers, first responders and family members.

The gun industry in America is around $11 billion. 35,000 work in the manufacture of guns and ammo. There are 50,000 retailers in the US. 32% of American households possess a firearm. One-third. The federal government collects $132 million in taxes on guns. 17 million background checks for gun purchases are conducted annually.

By all means let’s have common sense debates on regulation surrounding guns. Sending memes of Republicans on the payroll of the NRA can be met with as many Democrats accepting fortunes from the pharmaceutical lobby so as to prevent price cuts being driven through Congress. While guns maybe noisy killers, pharmaceutical companies are  in a sense becoming (or already become) stealthy silent assassins. Their drugs causing patients to switch to harder substances. 13% of adolescents are on antidepressants. Thirteen percent. 68% of them have taken antidepressants for 2 years and a quarter for over a decade,

The tragedy of school shootings is awful in every conceivable way. How it tears families apart, destroys the lives of survivors who must cope with unspeakable trauma and creates a platform for such horrid knee jerk responses in all forms of media. How the loss of 17 lives takes a back seat to agendas which feed the very opposite of the intention they proclaim. Corporates joining the bandwagon only fuel mixed messaging. It is exactly the type of ‘shaming’ that was so prevalent at the time of the election.

Trying to get the NRA to come around to spreading the word amongst its members that banning bump stocks and certain weapons is feasible won’t occur when corporates and the media publicly kick them. It is never an easy discussion but it only makes members want to dig their trenches deeper. Do people honestly believe that all NRA members would reject common sense proposals about screening, age limits and certain weapons restrictions? Yet that is the picture that is painted. They’re lunatics to a man, woman and child. Let’s hope that United Airlines and others that have spurned the NRA now turn to the drugs list in the company health provider to ensure that those pharmaceutical companies behind so many of the deaths from the explosive concoctions they sell are dealt with in the same way. Here’s a prediction. That hasn’t crossed their minds. So much for pharma companies saving lives. They are cashing in as a growing number of patients check out.