Barbados Underground

111 comments

• ac

  January 30, 2016 10:20 PM

  

  David Thompson ….ole news in new shoes even more popular in the grave the BLP foot soldiers seems to have a morbid love affair with the dead man

  LikeLike
• Bush Tea

  January 30, 2016 10:35 PM

  

  Balance…
  Sometimes Bushie is tempted to think that you are related to Simple Simon you know..
  Who said that Barrow was poor and scrunting…?
  What the hell is wrong with being wealthy?
  …wuh boss – do you know how rich Bushie is..? 🙂
  Is it even POSSIBLE for such blessed and talented bushmen to be other than well-off?

  What was impressive was Barrow’s lack of interest in using political power to accumulate MORE wealth… as he could have ……as others of his contemporaries did …and as most of those who followed him continue to do.

  See if you can grasp that….

  Perhaps it is PRECISELY the fact that he was pretty well off …that insulated him from the greed we see in so many others. There is nothing more pathetic than seeing a broke, poor-ass joker prostrating and prostituting himself upon achieving political power – as they embarrass themselves, the country, and all black people – while looking top become ‘rich’.

  Recall a certain one who cried about how ‘broke’ he was before becoming powerful…?
  …and subsequently could not raise his eyes when presented with an cashed cheque…?
  …but could afford a massive cash donation to Cricket legends?

  LikeLike
• Colonel Buggy

  January 30, 2016 11:20 PM

  

  Hants January 30, 2016 at 5:58 PM #
  Guyanese gine leff Barbados an return to Guyana soon.
  ………………………………………………………………………………….
  And at the very bottom of one of those barrels, you may very well find Barbados .

  LikeLike
• balance

  January 31, 2016 4:11 AM

  

  Bushie point taken- I did expect you to take advantage of that slight gap I left between bat and pad but at least I got the opportunity to heap coals on that myth that Mr Barrow did not accumulate wealth -whether MOREOR MUCH MORE- while in office.
  On another note , remember one of his famous parliamentary quips was when he reminded fellow parliamentarians that out of them only he and Mr Bree St John had breeding because the two of them were from plantation stock.

  LikeLike
• Well Well & Consequences

  January 31, 2016 5:54 AM

  

  When 2 prime ministers could talk that shit, makes one understand why the present day lot are mere dummies. Being born on a former slave plantation does not give anyone special breeding, it merely means they were both bred on former slave plantations…..and these are the people who not only graduated from London universities but whom people follow and view as their leaders….steupss

  LikeLike
• Bush Tea

  January 31, 2016 7:31 AM

  

  @ balance
  You should have listened to Sir Gary and played ALONG the line…. 🙂
  Bushmen are always on the lookout for ‘gaps’ to explore….

  @ Well Well
  Don’t mind balance – he just setting up another trap for Bushie…. he knows full well that those fellows were just talking shiite like we do here on BU every day…
  Those were two REAL REAL bright Bajans – who appreciated some good old Bajan shiite-talk, but who unfortunately did not have BU back then.
  Just look at everything that they said in seriousness and you will see…

  LikeLike
• David

  January 31, 2016 11:03 AM

  

  It is a pity Pat Hoyos was not part of the Economic Forum discussion last week. He seems to have a grasp of the numbers better than most in local media.

  NOT ALL BLACK AND WHITE: The hunt for the fiscal deficit

  PAT HOYOS,

   

  

  MORE ARTICLES

   

  “The 2015/16 fiscal deficit target of four per cent of GDP is within reach, provided that Government completes the planned divestment of the Barbados National Terminal Company Ltd. Accrued revenue for the fiscal year is projected at $2,584 million, and expenditure at $2,950 million, for a deficit of $366 million.” – Central Bank of Barbados, Press Release for December 2015

  Related articles

  • THE HOYOS FILE: Economy stable,…
  • $174.6m still left
  • 1% growth expected

  ONE OF THE things I like to do on a rainy day when both the Internet and satellite TV are down, and nobody is home to talk to, is hunt for missing information in the Central Bank of Barbados’ Press releases.

  It is often like a real treasure hunt: You are provided with some clues, and then, at the risk of your own sanity, you begin to scrutinise and ponder how to get to the particular bit of data you are seeking.

  Now, this time, although none of the above conditions were in place, I had to spend a few minutes trying to figure out what our country’s fiscal deficit for 2015-16 was likely to be.

  That’s because what you see at the top of this article is as close as the bank came to telling us.

  But the clues are all there, so our fiscal deficit hunt is on.

  First we need to know what the estimated Gross Domestic Product will be for the year. So, let us take last year’s, which the bank says was BDS$8 817.00 (Table 2 in the December report) and add that estimated half a per cent growth which we have apparently achieved for the year. That would add about  $44 million, so let’s estimate the GDP for 2015-16 at, an even $8,850 million.

  Now, the current deficit is put at $366 million, but don’t forget we have to add how much we spent on capital expenditure too. Up to December, says the bank, it was $116 million. So it looks like our overall deficit at the end of December was around $484 million.

  And look, we seem to be going well so far, because just a couple of lines below, the bank gives us the fiscal balance as being $490.2 million.

  (As a “refresher”, since you know it already instinctively at least, read this, courtesy of Reuters glossary: “Fiscal balance. The balance of a government’s tax revenues, plus any proceeds from asset sales, minus government spending. If the balance is positive the government has a fiscal surplus, if negative a fiscal deficit.”)

  Now, last year, our fiscal balance was a deficit of almost $600 million, so as a percentage of our GDP of $8,817 million, the fiscal deficit was 6.8 per cent. (It is all there in Table 4.)

  So our deficit of $490.2 million on a slightly expanded estimated GDP of $8 850 million gives us a fiscal deficit (so far) for 2015-16 of 5.5 per cent.

  In other words, we are heading for the six per cent deficit put into the Estimates for the year.

  So what then of all of those Budget measures dreamed up by our Minister of Finance, and perhaps summarised best in his own words at Page 74 of last June’s budget speech, as follows:

  “On the basis of a projected net gain of $200 million in additional revenue this financial year, plus projected additional expenditure savings of 30 million dollars from reductions in (those measures announced), we now project an end of year fiscal deficit of between 3.5 – 4 per cent of GDP on an accrual basis. This would mean a shaving of two percentage points off the projected deficit in the 2015-2016 Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure of six per cent on an accrual basis. ”

  Somebody needs to get a razor blade with a sharper edge.

  Patrick Hoyos is a journalist and publisher specialising in business. Email pathoyos@gmail.com.

  LikeLike
• Vincent Haynes

  January 31, 2016 1:24 PM

  

  Bush Tea January 31, 2016 at 7:31 AM #

  Chuckle……and where pray tell did EWB get his weath from as he certainly did not inherit any?

  LikeLike
• Artaxerxes

  January 31, 2016 10:22 PM

  

  @ David

  Hoyos’ article is very interesting. Not only does “he have a grasp of the numbers,” he has the ability to present information in such a manner that anyone could understand.

  LikeLike
• Artaxerxes

  January 31, 2016 11:03 PM

  

  @ Walter

  Man, you like you looking fuh trouble, yuh. Hahahahaha

  Former PM Thompson’s reason for travelling to Trinidad in February 2008 on CLICO’s private jet was because LIAT’s service is usually unreliable and he would not have reached his destination on time. No one can blame him for mentioning that fact; LIAT’s service is definitely unreliable.

  Walter, do you want our cabinet ministers stranded for hours at the airport waiting for a LIAT service, for example, to St. Lucia, St. Vincent or even as far as St. Kitts? No way, Walter.

  But SERIOUSLY, Walter, I AGREE with your COMMENTS. I don’t believe businesses (CLICO) or individuals (Simpson) would loan private jets to government ministers just for the sake of doing so. There has to be some “return on these investments.”

  What we also need to know is who paid for the jet; were there any quantifiable expenses to tax payers if government paid for crew and all fees associated with using a private jet (i.e. maintenance, insurance, fuel, etc)?

  If CLICO paid, were the costs incurred tax deductible, under “donations to political parties?” (Hahahahahaha)

  In the absence of the relevant information as required by transparency and accountability, we are left to make assumptions of corruption. You know what I mean? I use your jet to travel to T&T and the USA; I will refuse to place CLICO under judicial management; I would invest $10M of tax revenue in the company; and I would make you chairman of CBC’s Board of Directors. Later, the others will facilitate a “commercial bank process” for you to deposit $5M on the Central Bank.

  However, since CLICO is no more, I guess the ministers have resorted to the use of LIAT.

  LikeLike
• Walter Blackman

  February 1, 2016 1:29 AM

  

  Artaxerxes January 31, 2016 at 11:03 PM #
  “@ Walter

  Man, you like you looking fuh trouble, yuh. Hahahahaha

  What we also need to know is who paid for the jet; were there any quantifiable expenses to tax payers if government paid for crew and all fees associated with using a private jet (i.e. maintenance, insurance, fuel, etc)?

  If CLICO paid, were the costs incurred tax deductible, under “donations to political parties?” (Hahahahahaha)”

  Artaxerxes,
  During the Middle Ages, the poet Geoffrey Chaucer, a reformer at heart, honed his satirical skills by humourously highlighting the frailties and absurdities of human nature.

  During the early renaissance period, Desiderius Erasmus effectively poked fun at the corrupt and immoral practices of the catholic church.
  Both of these writers remained in the good books of the powers that existed at the time.

  Your comments on the CLICO jet issue, laced with humour, sarcasm, and cynicism represent a blend of Chaucer and Erasmus. You got your points over well, whilst at the same time saving your head.

  On the other hand, like Donald Trump, I dispensed with finesse and shot my points and facts straight from the hip. In different times, such an approach would have convinced the “authorities” that I was “looking fuh trouble, yuh.”
  I can picture the leper, with anger and fire in his bulging chameleon-like eyes, issuing the orders: “Off with his head!”

  LikeLike