Imagine Barack Obama becoming President of the U.S. and announcing he will use the Democrat-dominated Congress to pass a bill partially outlawing white men from getting jobs.

You can’t really, can you? It’s unthinkable. It would be political — and possibly physical — suicide.

Yet that is precisely what the British nasty party, Newish Labour, is considering doing. Its latest wheeze is to ban the indigenous population — minus women, of course — from getting jobs just when the icy winds of economic recession, and possibly worse, are blowing in from America.

Let’s just remind ourselves of what it’s like now out there in the real world :

The Bank of England is right now being deluged with demands by British banks to borrow £23.6 billion ($50bn) as lenders scramble to prop up their capital amid plunging global stock markets and asset values.

The Bank had offered just £5 billion ($10.4bn) to banks over a three-day period in an attempt to increase the flow of money between lenders.

Banks are running scared after the overnight news that the U.S. Federal Reserve has cut the discount rate by 0.25 percent and facilitated the fire sale of Bear Stearns to J.P. Morgan Chase at a fraction of its value.

Meanwhile, our government socially engineers while the City burns.

As subprime politicians in a subprime government, they should be sliced and diced and bundled into political instruments for sale to any institution that wants them.

Don’t hold your breath.

Postscript Our apologies for yet another political and economic article in this studiously non-political site. The news is getting so alarming now that it’s proving impossible to ignore the elephant in the broom cupboard — which is what the global financial situation now is.

It’s Boxing Day here in England, a day traditionally reserved for giving presents (Christmas boxes) to the extended family and friends. I was going to take a rest from posting on Syntagma and other sites until January 2, but something is jangling away at me : the upcoming downturn/recession/depression/crash, depending on which view you take. The nasty end of that spectrum is now a real and menacing possibility.

The optimistic view says that Sovereign Wealth Funds — vast reserves of cash held by Gulf oil sheiks and “new economy” developing countries like China — will save world stock markets from collapse. Indeed such funds are buying up wagonloads of equity in some of the biggest Western corporations, Citicorp and Merrill Lynch, for example, and great chunks of Britain’s FTSE 100 companies.

Quite how allowing our biggest companies to be owned and run by a small group of Oriental potentates will look in 10 years time is anyone’s guess. I doubt we will think it such a smart move.

The pessimistic view — which I confess I’m now leaning strongly toward, despite my normally sunny nature — comes from the banks. Never mind the stock markets, look at how the bankers are reacting on the ground.

All banks are now hoarding cash like Ebeneezer Scrooge and virtually ceasing to lend. With house price indices slithering down a slope like novice ice skaters, and inter-bank rates running at around 8 percent, this has become a total banking crisis worldwide, and that has the potential for real evil in our economies.

Japan’s decade-long woes in the 1990s were caused by crises in its overprotected banking system, as were the Far-Eastern “Tiger” economies that collapsed at around the same time.

So how are we all reacting to this worldwide financial mess, now a “perfect storm” according to another banking pundit? Are we hoarding cash like the banks, or are we spend, spend, spending in the post-Christmas sales?

The real crunch comes if we all stop spending, as the Japanese did in 1990. Our economies will then spiral out of control as the High Street suffers and all kinds of businesses lay off staff in droves. Do we protect ourselves first by reining in, or do we support the wider economy? Since there will be little money to spend, the economy will suffer whatever anyone does. It’s a no-win situation from whatever angle you view it.

In retrospect it’s now clear that Alan Greenspan left rates too low for too long and spawned the mad rush to lend to the sub-prime market (Ninja mortgages : no income, no job, no assets). But on top of that, it is also now normal to be permanently in debt and to service it by moving it continuously between lenders engaged in a bitter battle for market share and a bigger slice of the easy action. These lenders are no longer willing to cough up, even if they were in a position to do so.

In Britain, the situation is getting dire. From the UK’s Telegraph : “Tim Congdon, a banking historian at the London School of Economics, said the rot had seeped through the foundations of British lending. … ‘How on earth did the Financial Services Authority let this happen?’ he asks. Worse, changes pushed through by Gordon Brown in 1998 have caused the de facto cash and liquid assets ratio to collapse from post-war levels above 30 per cent to near zero. ‘Brown hadn’t got a clue what he was doing,’ he says.”

And European treaties, like Maastricht, will make matters worse not better, says Ambrose Evans-Pritchard : “Maastricht rules may force the Government to raise taxes or slash spending into a recession. This way lies crucifixion. … Brown has disarmed us on every front.”

Crucifixion is a powerful word, especially at this time of year. “Brown has disarmed us on every front” is a damning indictment of the UK’s new Prime Minister, more particularly because he has just signed us up to another Euro treaty.

I wish Syntagma could bring you a better box on Boxing Day, but I fear it may be much worse than even the news we’re now getting suggests.

Maybe I should have continued with my holiday. See you on January 2.

Before you switch off, I don’t mean climate change. That’s a doddle since we have little control over it, despite what the doomsters think. Nor am I writing about nuclear war, surely a distant memory now.

I mean the alarming slide into a 1930s style worldwide Depression.

I’ve written a few times in Syntagma about the constraints of running a business in England, where the pound sterling is the currency, while our income is designated and paid in US dollars. Now one of the world’s major companies, Airbus — which is partly owned by the French state — has announced that its business model is shot through and broken.

Their problem is that the dollar has fallen even more against the euro than the pound. A euro is now worth $1.50. A few years ago there was jubilation when the euro achieved parity with the dollar. Eat your hearts out Eurocrats!

Airbus sells more airliners around the world than Boeing, but since aircraft prices are designated in dollars, they get paid one third less than Boeing compared with the period of parity. In a tight-margin international business that’s fatal. Many other European companies are feeling the pinch too — business confidence has all but collapsed in Germany, and the French are going through one of their periodic episodes of industrial unrest, with workers marching in the streets against Government diktat.

The driving mechanism behind all this is the massive US trade deficit. The Treasury is content to see a steady drop in the dollar as a correction to this deficit. Other countries see it as “beggar my neighbor”.

But more ominous forces are gathering now which will really put pressure on the world’s financial system. The new economies of China, Brazil and India are starting to move their large trade surpluses out of dollar assets into euro assets. The same is happening with the petrodollar states in the Gulf. Apart from setting up a future Wall Street crash, it’s also putting great strains on the eurozone, which is a ragbag club of nations speaking different languages and with very different economies.

The strain is such that Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France, is talking about limiting capital flows into the eurozone. The EU Commission has said this is possible because of a little known clause in an annexe to a policy document dating back to 2003. Europe always reverts to political will over the rule of law.

Since this decision could be taken by majority voting of finance ministers, Britain could be outvoted here. The result of a cap on capital inflows would be devastating to London, which is the world’s leading financial centre. In such circumstances Britain would have no choice but to withdraw from the European Union.

Stateside, the sub-prime mortgage fiasco is feeding into the wider situation and genuine fears of a 1929 crash and 1930s type depression are rife among those who know about these things.

Will it happen? Luckily for Americans, “cometh the hour, cometh the man”. Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, has spent his life studying the causes of the 1930s Depression, so is unlikely to allow the same mistakes to be made. He can also call on the advice of wily old Alan Greenspan, now retired, whose new book, The Age of Turbulence should be required reading for anyone interested in the global economy in the 21st century.

Syntagma’s guess is that Western economies are resilient and flexible enough to withstand the shocks that are coming without withering on the vine. The joker in the pack, though, is the eurozone, which lacks the strength of the Common Law countries in dealing with the rest of the world. There’s even wild talk in Brussels about a Fortress Europe, with the euro countries only trading with themselves behind massive tariff walls. Sound familiar? It’s Politburo time again in the Chancelleries of Europe.

I believe the euro currency will collapse within five years. Britain will withdraw from the EU to preserve its international trading position, and America will take a severe knock but will recover strongly to regain its former position.

As for the emerging “superpowers”, they face a collapse in their export trade from which they will struggle to recover — think Japan in the 1990s and the meltdown of the Tiger economies of the Far East.

There’s a lot of water to flow under this bridge yet. It’s a greater immediate threat than climate change, so let’s ease back on all the noise about carbon footprints, offsets and trading.

There’s Armageddon to deal with first.