sexta-feira, 24 de junho de 2016


I think it's very bad, the UK was a very positive voice in the EU, against forced decisions, against the euro, fairly moderate (in opposition to the hardcore marxism of germany/sweden/etc). The UK is a great power, one that you want on your side. A great country.

The main problem in the EU is Merkel and her marxists, who say "if you don't share our values, get out".

But there is a lot of positive things in the EU. It could be a brotherhood of christian countries. It stopped the "beggar thy neighbor" fights between various countries when it comes to protecionism. It gave the right to live in another EU country if you want.

I was expecting that the EU could become more like the UK-EU relationship, move out of the forced on our throats Merkel decisions, it should allow countries to opt-out of more decisions like the UK has many opt-out powers...

Without the UK the European parliament is pretty much 90% leftist right now, the only other country left with many opt-outs is Denmark. It will be impossible to achieve majority with the current set of countries in the EU parliament, and the Merkel reaction might be to demand even more subservience from the remaining countries...

Just wanted to write down my oppinion on this very important topic.


quarta-feira, 22 de junho de 2016

OFE - No, the fees were not crazy high

Fees for OFE were 7% one time, initial fee + 0,045% every year.

Time to retirement is 40 years initially, going down to zero, so it averages 20 years for any given amount of money invested.

USA 401k retirement fees according to the "401k Averages Book" are small initially, but then every year you pay between 0,3% and 1,8%. The OFE fee is roughtly equivalent to a every year 0,5% fee over 20 years.

Value in 20 years = After Fee*((1+5% per year return - Yearly Fee)^Years)

Initial Initial Fee After Fee Yearly Fee Value in 20 years, at 5% per year Amount of fees
OFE 10000 700 9300 0,045% 24465 784
0,5% Fee 10000 0 10000 0,5% 24117 1049
Min 401k 10000 0 10000 0,3% 25057 617
Max 401k 10000 0 10000 1,8% 18775 4287

The actual OFE results should be a little worse than this table since you can imagine you will earn more in your second half of your live than in your first one, but I don't think it would be such a dramatic difference.

One time fees can be converted into repetitive fees.

sexta-feira, 17 de junho de 2016

War in Ukraine and Armenia - status update

I thought that the conflict was fully frozen, since in the last 12 months there were no changes in the areas controlled by the warring parties.

Compare the map today:

With the map from 6 months ago:

I concluded that it would be irrational to keep firing without changes in controlled area. But it looks like that both sides are simply happy to fire at each other continuously from a distance, including with weapons with very low precision such as mortars.

There are detailed OSCE monitoring group daily reports if anyone is interrested:
Conflict Deaths have fallen sharply from 2015, but at an estimated 273 for 2016 so far I personally think it is still a lot.

Also worrying when it comes to armed conflicts in Europe is the azeri-armenian conflict:

Azerbaijan attacked Armenia recently, and conquered 1 small village, and mostly likely they will do it again. Their army is stronger due to the oil money, they have high-tech suicide drones from Israel and staged ISIS-like decapitations of captured armenians.

Praying for peace in Ukraine & Armenia.

quarta-feira, 8 de junho de 2016

Why 500+ is better than expanding the same money elsewhere?

First we need to ask ourselves what is the greatest problem today in . What is the greatest problem in Poland? Is it:

a> Great risk of imminent Russian invasion to conquer the continent in a Blitzkrieg
b> The native population is dying out without any hope to fix the problem

I think that A is an imaginary problem without basis in reality, Russia has a military expenditure of like 3% of NATO total, it would be ridiculous to be defeated by an enemy over 20 times weaker, that's like Denmark invading alone Nazi Germany in 1939, besides the fact that there is no rational reason why Russia would attack at all, while B is the real problem. Please look at this chart:

Poland is headed to 22 million people by 2100. Germans in Germany are decreasing by 400.000 per year. Official German Government projects this will increase to a drop of 700.000 germans every year in a few decades. That's like losing a Stalingrad battle every year. The same in every other country in Europe.

Natality is also dropping in the USA and Brazil, by the way, today the only countries in the west left with 2-3 children per woman being in spanish-speaking americas.

And this is not the end. The trend shows no sign of abading and if it is not stopped fast the long term trend is continuing until it will become trivial for islamists to pull out a new "conquest of the americas". Except that now we will be the indians with inferior population dynamics. It might be the case that in 200 years no-one will remember that Europe was Christian just like in 1800 no-one remembered that the americas were not Christian 300 years before and today noone remembers that Turkey was once a Christian country before 1100. A lot of attention is given to the refugees, but what really makes islamization a possible future is not the refugees themselves, no amount of european refugees could make Africa non-black because africans are simply too many and too fertile. What trully makes islamic refugees an existential threat is the weak fertility of europeans. If europeans had an african fertility the refugees would be absorved by the dynamic majority.

About the costs: PLN 20 billion per year look like a lot, but only if you ignore that today 3 people work to pay the retirement of every emeryt. But in 2050 1.5 people will work for every emeryt. That's a budget hole of over 200 billions per year alone. So the costs of not fixing the population drop, are much, much higher than the costs of trying to do something about it. And I don't see how F-16's will fix this budget hole in retirement accounts.

What I don't like about the program is that it's too little of an incentive IMHO to convince people with 2 children to have a 3rd one. I think that incentive for the 3rd child should be massive, pretty much making it a no-brainer decision. I don't see how the program will move the fertility numbers by 0,6 that we need. Maybe it will add 0,1 or something, far too little to fix the problem. Also lacking is a campaign with outdoors, etc, explaining this simple table to people:

Nr of Children
per woman
Poland 2015Poland Target




30% of woman have zero children today and most likely will continue to have zero children regardless of what we do, so we need to move the vast majority of families (like 50% of all the woman) to 3 children in order to achieve the survival level of 2,1 children per woman.

The only good news lately on the topic is that we are importing hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians per year, which pretty much gives Poland "time to think", but not much. Ukraine is experiencing it's own populational collapse so the source of Ukranians will dry out, it is not a long term solution. But is positive for Poland.