Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Civil War in South Africa?

  1. #31
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    I don't have to think of any thing.I simply happen to know one or two things about SA.More than some,less than others.And if it's anything right now is about class warfare.Which is also race warfare(or tribal,if the term race sounds too demonetized).Forget about the black middle class or their nouveau riche.Most got there thanks to favoritism by the state(read ANC) and they'll need to appease the masses.So,kill the farmer,kill the Boer.UHURU all the way.
    Actual evidence besides vague anecdotes?

    Of course, because the black upper and middle classes would simply burn down the economy in the name of same vague idea of racial solidarity instead of hiring more security to quash labor/class unrest.

  2. #32
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
    Actual evidence besides vague anecdotes?
    there's nothing vague.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
    Of course, because the black upper and middle classes would simply burn down the economy in the name of same vague idea of racial solidarity instead of hiring more security to quash labor/class unrest.
    Too bad it's actually happening.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  3. #33
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    there's nothing vague.



    Too bad it's actually happening.
    Would you care to provide evidence for either assertion?

    Remember, the rules of academic debate state that if you make the claim, you must be prepared to back it up with evidence.

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    19 Feb 06
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    1,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
    *sigh*

    Farmers don't have the money to hire PMCs, and it would be cheaper for South Africa just to buy (loan for minerals, anyone?) food than spend money dealing with unrest.
    The problem with your academic debate is that you simply say rubbish that never happened and ask for proof which you will promptly ignore and say it is irrelevant.

    Farmers will simply arm themselves and barricade shipping of goods out of their area and dump it instead of pay tarriffs and fees. Remember milk dumping by farmers in the great depression due to price gouging. What about farmers in Argentina that simply blocked roads and traffic and said skrew you government we are not paying tarriffs and fees and we simply won't produce. Very recent.... mind you.
    UPDATE 4-Argentine farmers block roads, call strike over tax | Reuters
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/wo...ina.html?_r=1&

    In 2005 Ukraine almost divided in half. Do you know what the plan was to seperate? they would simply block regional routes rail/highways, and enforce the oblast(provincial) borders. It didn't happen because there was an agreement to stop re-privatization of already privatized things on the top level and a few other things.

    In South Africa you have redistribution on a grande scale it works for as long as it is possible to force some to share part of their production. Once that production goes down, and it has for every major industry from mining to farming due to tax, wage, BEE, and other pressures people simply removed working capital and dropped re-investment for the sake of getting their money out. Tipping point is there government trying to spend 20% then it takes in even as the productivity of the economy is imploding is not just unsustainable it puts pressure on the constituency that the gov't gets its support from. You have to outcomes either they eat through all capital and production collapses further and country becomes destitute or there is a reckoning and the government collapses and you go semi-warlord route with some power devolving to regions. I am thinking the second precisely because gov't there does not expect regionalization to get in the way of redistribution. Time will tell if I am wrong.
    Originally from Sochi, Russia.

  5. #35
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by cyppok View Post
    The problem with your academic debate is that you simply say rubbish that never happened and ask for proof which you will promptly ignore and say it is irrelevant.

    Farmers will simply arm themselves and barricade shipping of goods out of their area and dump it instead of pay tarriffs and fees. Remember milk dumping by farmers in the great depression due to price gouging. What about farmers in Argentina that simply blocked roads and traffic and said skrew you government we are not paying tarriffs and fees and we simply won't produce. Very recent.... mind you.
    UPDATE 4-Argentine farmers block roads, call strike over tax | Reuters
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/wo...ina.html?_r=1&

    In 2005 Ukraine almost divided in half. Do you know what the plan was to seperate? they would simply block regional routes rail/highways, and enforce the oblast(provincial) borders. It didn't happen because there was an agreement to stop re-privatization of already privatized things on the top level and a few other things.

    In South Africa you have redistribution on a grande scale it works for as long as it is possible to force some to share part of their production. Once that production goes down, and it has for every major industry from mining to farming due to tax, wage, BEE, and other pressures people simply removed working capital and dropped re-investment for the sake of getting their money out. Tipping point is there government trying to spend 20% then it takes in even as the productivity of the economy is imploding is not just unsustainable it puts pressure on the constituency that the gov't gets its support from. You have to outcomes either they eat through all capital and production collapses further and country becomes destitute or there is a reckoning and the government collapses and you go semi-warlord route with some power devolving to regions. I am thinking the second precisely because gov't there does not expect regionalization to get in the way of redistribution. Time will tell if I am wrong.
    So what happens in Argentina applies to South Africa (you're obviously ignorant enough to think that "tax, wage, BEE and other pressures" will decrease production by crowding out all forms of investment (like say from China or Saudi Arabia) without providing any evidence for why it's at that point on the Laffer curve)*

    Can you provide data to show that is happening to South Africa? If not, then I accept your concession that you have no evidential or logical support to your ranting, and hence your claims are intellectually baseless.

    *There's a reason why it's a curve and not some sophomoric if-then zero sum proposition.
    Last edited by Skywatcher; 17 Feb 13, at 16:38.

  6. #36
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    19 Feb 06
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    1,527
    Laffer Curve pertains to internal dynamics of income taxes and wages. BEE necessitates you giving up up to 25% equity for free to South Africans determined suitable for you to be allowed to more or less operate.

    Mining production has been in decline if you look at the graphs and stats.
    Agriculture same more or less. Value added has been on decline (ergo machine tools etc...).

    Autos have been spared because they are exempt from a lot of stuff like BEE (for now at least).

    You have to consider the dynamics of foreign investment sometimes. If China invests 10 billion to be exempt from every regulation you have for a period of a decade or more it crowds out other investors, you get less tax base on your mineral deposits than you would have had and if you change rules mid-game there are ramifications. The reason I bring this up is because there is an investment in South Africa from Russia it is essentially structured as a partnership with the government where the Russian company sets the exit price of the mineral and South African gov't gets partial profit on its' share in return for more or less skirting the other regulations.

    http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article9095.html
    Btw production fell from 2007 to 2012, yes prices doubled and made up the shortfall in volume via revenue, but they continue dropping and in 2012 you had strikes if you remember where a lot of production was shut down. If you had simply used wiki as a reference they went from 2nd place and 270tons to 190tons and 5th place from 06 to 11. Production continues to drop because the miners simply are trying to recoup as much capital as possible and aren't spending under current conditions to expand much (yes there are projects on paper and in process) but new ones are well not happening.
    South Africa's Incredibly Shrinking Gold Production | iStockAnalyst.com
    Notice since the 70s the % of Africa in the production stack continued to decline.
    South Africa Considers Ultra-Deep Mining as Gold Production Reaches 100-Year Low, an Industrial Info News Alert | Reuters100 year production low in 2011.

    There is data on food production decline in South Africa by fas its an old chart the new one where they had things up through 2011 can't find again. But this shows you at least decline in acreage (yes yields climbed but simply not enough to offset acreage).
    South Africa Corn Area at Low Levels
    FYI the area has remained around 3 million hectares planted if you search recent news. Yields did go to around 11 mil tons but population increased and other grain area shrunk. So on net less food, also droughts around 07-09 weren't good.

    The projection by the gov't is 12 mil tons with 2.5 or so exported. The reality of last season is around 10.5 mil Tons.
    SA maize deficit looms on Mexico exports | Fin24
    What changed since 2004 to 2013, nothing much population just grew by 10%...

    South Africa to Plant Smallest Area of Wheat on Record - Businessweek
    That would be the smallest area since at least 1931, when the committee’s records began, she said. The figure compares with a median estimate of 600,000 hectares by eight analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News.

    “This is because of low prices and grading regulations,” she said. “It’s more difficult to get good-quality wheat at silos.”

    Wheat prices have declined 14 percent over the past year on the Johannesburg-based South African Futures Exchange. Wheat for May delivery increased 0.5 percent to 2,697 rand ($346) a metric ton by the noon close. The nation produced 1.43 million tons of wheat in the 12 months through September, the smallest crop since 1992, according to Grain South Africa.
    http://mg.co.za/article/2012-08-17-m...is-looms-in-sa
    The food price monitor showed that the poorest segment of the population spent almost 39% of its income on food, which was up from 34% in April last year. The five most popular food items consumed by this group had risen by 20%.
    If you consider minimum wage hikes by the gov't as a desperate measure to keep people fed and not rioting as happened during the mining strikes you get the picture a little bit. But you also have to consider that every marginal producer small business farmer or food producer that becomes unviable due to those hikes fires people to not go completely broke price pressures increase further.
    Last edited by cyppok; 17 Feb 13, at 19:39.
    Originally from Sochi, Russia.

  7. #37
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by cyppok View Post
    Laffer Curve pertains to internal dynamics of income taxes and wages. BEE necessitates you giving up up to 25% equity for free to South Africans determined suitable for you to be allowed to more or less operate.

    Mining production has been in decline if you look at the graphs and stats.
    Agriculture same more or less. Value added has been on decline (ergo machine tools etc...).

    Autos have been spared because they are exempt from a lot of stuff like BEE (for now at least).
    And how does this have to do with BEE, higher wages and such? South African industry, like the Warsaw Pact after the Cold War, suffered from globalization. I have addressed the mining sector below (apparently you are conflating regulatory issues with wider commodity production trends).

    You have to consider the dynamics of foreign investment sometimes. If China invests 10 billion to be exempt from every regulation you have for a period of a decade or more it crowds out other investors, you get less tax base on your mineral deposits than you would have had and if you change rules mid-game there are ramifications. The reason I bring this up is because there is an investment in South Africa from Russia it is essentially structured as a partnership with the government where the Russian company sets the exit price of the mineral and South African gov't gets partial profit on its' share in return for more or less skirting the other regulations.
    These sorts of regulations and general corruption have not hurt commodities expansion in Angola, Indonesia or Russia. And even if the Chinese are crowding out other investments somehow, they can easily afford to make sure South Africa receives food imports in exchange for minerals.

    http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article9095.html
    Btw production fell from 2007 to 2012, yes prices doubled and made up the shortfall in volume via revenue, but they continue dropping and in 2012 you had strikes if you remember where a lot of production was shut down. If you had simply used wiki as a reference they went from 2nd place and 270tons to 190tons and 5th place from 06 to 11. Production continues to drop because the miners simply are trying to recoup as much capital as possible and aren't spending under current conditions to expand much (yes there are projects on paper and in process) but new ones are well not happening.
    South Africa's Incredibly Shrinking Gold Production | iStockAnalyst.com
    Notice since the 70s the % of Africa in the production stack continued to decline.
    South Africa Considers Ultra-Deep Mining as Gold Production Reaches 100-Year Low, an Industrial Info News Alert | Reuters100 year production low in 2011.
    Obviously, you haven't proved the link between "taxes, BEE" and declining production at all (which on the other hand you have actually admitted as being primarily driven by capital consideration concerns amidst the commodity boom).

    Just so far this year alone, BHP Billiton is expanding in South Africa.
    BHP Billiton South Africa chairperson Dr Xolani Mkhwanazi, who addressed the Investing in African Mining Indaba in Cape Town, reports that the company is undertaking a geophysical survey to assess the hydrocarbon potential of two areas offshore of South Africa’s West Coast and, in a totally separate project, is also building one of the biggest furnaces in the world at the Metalloys operation in Meyerton to increase the company’s manganese beneficiating capacity.

    “It’s often alleged that we want to leave South Africa but nothing is further from the truth,” says Mkhwanazi.

    The company is the holder of petroleum exploration rights on South Africa’s West Coast, north-west of Cape Town, which will be the port of mobilisation, demobilisation and resupply for support vessels.

    Metalloys is one of the largest alloy plants in the world and is backed by 80% of the world’s high-grade manganese reserves in South Africa’s Kalahari basin.

    The new furnace has been built with such energy efficiency that it will not be consuming more electricity than before the project.

    Execution is expected in the next six to nine months.
    BHP Billiton in two project South African investment

    There is data on food production decline in South Africa by fas its an old chart the new one where they had things up through 2011 can't find again. But this shows you at least decline in acreage (yes yields climbed but simply not enough to offset acreage).
    South Africa Corn Area at Low Levels
    FYI the area has remained around 3 million hectares planted if you search recent news. Yields did go to around 11 mil tons but population increased and other grain area shrunk. So on net less food, also droughts around 07-09 weren't good.

    The projection by the gov't is 12 mil tons with 2.5 or so exported. The reality of last season is around 10.5 mil Tons.
    SA maize deficit looms on Mexico exports | Fin24
    What changed since 2004 to 2013, nothing much population just grew by 10%...

    South Africa to Plant Smallest Area of Wheat on Record - Businessweek


    Maize crisis looms in SA | Business | Mail & Guardian


    If you consider minimum wage hikes by the gov't as a desperate measure to keep people fed and not rioting as happened during the mining strikes you get the picture a little bit. But you also have to consider that every marginal producer small business farmer or food producer that becomes unviable due to those hikes fires people to not go completely broke price pressures increase further.
    Umm, it clearly states that agricultural production declined because of low prices, not because farm workers are being paid more. As prices increase, basic economics teaches us that supply will increase (you have admitted that agricultural productivity per acre has been increasing).

    The government is coping by increasing non agricultural wages, not by price controls. Wage hikes for miners do not somehow make farmers unviable (hint, mine workers are not in the same sector as farm workers).

  8. #38
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    19 Feb 06
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    1,527
    discussion is over I am going to ignore you from now on.

    Its' impossible to prove a negative and you are essentially saying everything I say is rubbish and request more proof. In the end no amount of proof is enough and I seem like an idiot for arguing essentially with myself.

    You seem to think that regulation issues have no impact on production trends if they legislate a 50% increase in wages every three months. BEE necessitates FDI and internal investment to be instantly asset taxed on entry prior and post investment (essentially). This skews return requirements and those that have stuff inside under strain to ratchet up payback ergo underinvestment into mines, factories, etc to get their capital out.

    Russia and other countries you mention have a different structure. Ergo I am taxed on the flow not the asset. Even Brazil where you are asset taxed on entry lets you get back that tax if its' a long term investment. Even if I pick a partner in those countries I am not asset taxed. Ergo if I invest 3 billion dollars as Pepsi to buy a juice company in Russia I am taxed on the 100 million profit, I am not told that every year I have to be in compliance with the Russian Shared Equity act and have to give Russian investors 25% of my business to be in compliance which they get to sell on the exchange thus reducing Russian participation and require me to give more of the business away to them for free in a never ending cycle. This is what happened in South Africa they are arguing over weather the prior BEE equity schemes are one time or have to be in consistent compliance because the equity awards given before were sold and the % owned by BEE is lower than it should be for these companies so new awards might have to be given. This is beyond insane... {I am simplifying this a lot}

    Consolidation of mines is my guess what BHP is doing and rolling up assets that are already producing and are under expansion is different from greenfield investments(from scratch) those are far and far between. You picking one aspect iron ore which expanded and ten others that contracted going from coal, through soft commodities, and precious metals does not make me less right.

    BEE and Taxes imply very very very high hurdle rates for investors to get capital back, Ergo imagine 10% asset tax which is what BEE started as (now they moved the goal to 25% but haven't enforced it yet). And taxes around 40% and think in addition to this you have mineral taxes on top of it.

    I did provide a link between bee and taxes the problem you have is accepting that what happens today goes out into years in the future and simply reduces production capability. This happened in the mining sector in a very simple way. All the miners diversified geographically to reduce political risk in SA and did not re-invest to keep production up. They could have but chose to start from scratch elsewhere.
    Originally from Sochi, Russia.

  9. #39
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by cyppok View Post
    discussion is over I am going to ignore you from now on.

    Its' impossible to prove a negative and you are essentially saying everything I say is rubbish and request more proof. In the end no amount of proof is enough and I seem like an idiot for arguing essentially with myself.

    You seem to think that regulation issues have no impact on production trends if they legislate a 50% increase in wages every three months. BEE necessitates FDI and internal investment to be instantly asset taxed on entry prior and post investment (essentially). This skews return requirements and those that have stuff inside under strain to ratchet up payback ergo underinvestment into mines, factories, etc to get their capital out.

    Russia and other countries you mention have a different structure. Ergo I am taxed on the flow not the asset. Even Brazil where you are asset taxed on entry lets you get back that tax if its' a long term investment. Even if I pick a partner in those countries I am not asset taxed. Ergo if I invest 3 billion dollars as Pepsi to buy a juice company in Russia I am taxed on the 100 million profit, I am not told that every year I have to be in compliance with the Russian Shared Equity act and have to give Russian investors 25% of my business to be in compliance which they get to sell on the exchange thus reducing Russian participation and require me to give more of the business away to them for free in a never ending cycle. This is what happened in South Africa they are arguing over weather the prior BEE equity schemes are one time or have to be in consistent compliance because the equity awards given before were sold and the % owned by BEE is lower than it should be for these companies so new awards might have to be given. This is beyond insane... {I am simplifying this a lot}

    Consolidation of mines is my guess what BHP is doing and rolling up assets that are already producing and are under expansion is different from greenfield investments(from scratch) those are far and far between. You picking one aspect iron ore which expanded and ten others that contracted going from coal, through soft commodities, and precious metals does not make me less right.

    BEE and Taxes imply very very very high hurdle rates for investors to get capital back, Ergo imagine 10% asset tax which is what BEE started as (now they moved the goal to 25% but haven't enforced it yet). And taxes around 40% and think in addition to this you have mineral taxes on top of it.

    I did provide a link between bee and taxes the problem you have is accepting that what happens today goes out into years in the future and simply reduces production capability. This happened in the mining sector in a very simple way. All the miners diversified geographically to reduce political risk in SA and did not re-invest to keep production up. They could have but chose to start from scratch elsewhere.
    Legislate a 50% wage increase every 3 months! Please don't, stop, pretty please! And this hilarity that ignores Russian corruption and pseudo-legal confiscations, denial of new FDI in South Africa amidst a global commodities boom....

    But all good things have to come to an end.

    Given your demonstrated inability to provide non-contradictory evidence, solid facts and incomprehensibility of international trade behavior on topics such as the motivations for Japanese American war heroes, Chinese fixed investments,

    I accept your concession.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. South Africa Election
    By Merlin in forum International Politics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03 May 09,, 10:38
  2. Congratulations South Africa
    By Bigfella in forum Sports Bar
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02 Jan 09,, 16:23
  3. South Africa: is it starting?
    By lwarmonger in forum International Economy
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 08 Feb 06,, 10:43
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28 May 04,, 04:39

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •