text:
Budget Cuts and Burning Buildings in Flint, Michigan
This post was originally featured on Medium and has been reblogged with the permission of the author.
by Gordon Young, author of Teardown: Memoir of a Vanishing City
"Three years after being named arson capital of the nation, Flint's Arson Squad is being cut in half after the decision was made to pull Flint police from the team."
— Molly Young, MLive, December 4, 2015
The fires started in late March of 2010, around the time Flint residents typically start fantasizing about the spring thaw. Like any city with widespread blight, Flint had an ongoing arson problem, but this was different.
The sight of smoke plumes was commonplace, along with an acrid, charred smell that wafted through the city. It seemed like everyone had a fire story, and a friend of mine named Guy was no different.
Guy was born and raised in Flint. Though his grandfather had been a prominent local doctor, Guy's dad landed on the line at Chevy in the Hole, took to drinking, and ended up living in an apartment above Vechell's Lounge, a well-known bar near the factory.
Guy learned to play the piano growing up. He landed gigs at various union halls around Flint, found work in a band down in Houston, and eventually made his way to Las Vegas, where he joined the house band at The Dunes. The pay wasn't bad, and he had a room with two king-size beds at the casino hotel, but he saw no future in it.
He returned to Flint and got a degree in psychology from the University of Michigan with nearly perfect grades. He took a creative writing class, and the professor was so impressed that he urged him to apply to the Iowa Writers' Workshop. But before long Guy was drinking heavily, just like his dad, and his marriage was on the rocks. He bounced around, living in Lansing for a while before returning to Flint in 1993 with his new wife, Maggie. He got sober, and they bought a 750-square-foot house on Arlington Street on the East Side, now one of Flint's toughest neighborhoods.
Guy was a salesman at a mattress warehouse making seven dollars an hour, plus a little money on the side designing websites, a skill he picked up on his own. He didn't have enough money to move. "I'm trapped on the East Side," he said during one of the long conversations we had when things were slow at the mattress store.
Flint had a way of intruding on our talks. One day a woman showed up at the warehouse. Guy thought he had a customer, but she was selling frozen meat out of a cooler in the backseat of her car, most likely stolen. "You wanna buy some steaks?" she asked.
"Do you accept plasma as payment?" Guy replied.
She didn't get the joke and left quickly.
"Man, that encounter pretty much sums up Flint," he told me.
Guy thought of himself as someone who didn't scare easily. After all, he'd seen some weird shit in the neighborhood: high-speed car crashes, a little boy drowning in a backyard pool, neighbors drinking and fighting, child abuse in plain sight, random gunshots, and even a sword fight in the middle of the street.
"When we first moved here, there were some GM retirees and a few other people on the block who kept their homes immaculate," Guy said. "But all those 'normal' people — for lack of a better term — either died or moved away. There's almost a complete absence of middle-class homeowners now. Almost everyone's renting, and it's like they're feral people. On warm summer days the street is a cacophony of profanity. I'm amazed how quickly my street declined," he told me.
There's no doubt Guy would have liked better neighbors — or the money to move — but he still maintained a large measure of sympathy for his fellow East Siders, even if they were making his life miserable and all but eliminating any value left in his house. "There's a prevalence of hopelessness coupled with contempt for authority in the neighborhood," he said. "There's just a lot of disillusionment. They never got a real piece of the American dream. And the piece they got is getting increasingly smaller."
Guy had a highly personal take on the arson spree. He and Maggie had been asleep one morning when they were awakened by pounding on their front door. Groggy, disoriented, and naked — Guy volunteered that he's not fond of pajamas — he jumped out of bed, thinking it was a break-in. "I'm not a gun nut, but I live on the East Side, so of course I have a shotgun and a couple handguns," he said. "I was wondering if I was going to have to defend myself."
He threw on a pair of boxers and headed for the door. He could hear someone screaming for everyone to get out of the house. Guy opened the door, walked onto his front porch, and discovered that the two-story house next door, just fifteen feet away across the driveway, was engulfed in flames. Burning debris was floating down onto his house. He could feel the fire.
It was so hot he smelled his hair starting to singe.
A drunk man in his fifties had banged on the door. He was riding a child's bike home from a party and saw the fire. He had probably saved Guy and Maggie's lives.
"Armageddon's happening on the other side of the driveway, and I'm in there sawing logs," Guy said. "Our bedroom window was open, smoke was billowing in, and we didn't even notice."
Maggie quickly joined him on the porch. As Guy stood there in his underwear, a wave of anxiety washed over him. He and his wife had three Chihuahuas, two cats, a blind Cocker Spaniel, and a German Shepherd named Buddy they had found on the street and nursed back to health. They were all in the house. He needed to get them out. And what about his computers? If they went up in flames, so did half his income. And there was the fact that he'd just paid off the house four months earlier and canceled the homeowners' insurance because it was too expensive.
"I just had this overwhelming feeling that I was doomed," he said. "Everybody and their brother had just been laid off from the fire department, and I had no insurance. We were going to lose everything, and it was my fault. I was going to hate myself for the rest of my life, if I had one when this was all over."
But just maybe all that time in Vegas had earned Guy a little luck, because the drunken bike rider had managed to call 911 on his cell phone. Guy could hear sirens in the distance. They were getting louder. The city's beleaguered fire department, decimated by budget cuts, was on the way. When the trucks rolled up, the neighbor's place was long past saving. The goal was to contain the blaze. Firefighters set up big sprinklers to soak Guy's house. He pulled himself together and jumped in his beat up Dodge Dakota — baking in the driveway — and saved it from the fire. Maggie herded all the animals safely outside.
As dawn broke, their little house was still standing.
But this relatively happy ending didn't give guy a new outlook on life in Flint. "The fact that they saved our house and no one died is just amazing," he said. "But when people start burning down every empty building, it's still shocking. I live in fear all the time, because there doesn't appear to be any end to this. I don't see this getting better. Ever."
Gordon Young grew up in Flint, Michigan. His work has appeared in the New York Times, Slate, Utne Reader, and numerous other publications. Young has published Flint Expatriates, a blog for the long-lost residents of the Vehicle City, since 2007. He is a senior lecturer in the Communication Department at Santa Clara University and lives in San Francisco. Learn more about Teardown on his website and listen to his UC Press Podcast on the book.
TAGS: 9780520270527, arson, economics, Flint, Gordon Young, Michigan, Teardown, Urban Studies
CATEGORIES: American Studies, From Our Authors, Sociology
Appealing to Justice wins the 2016 Sutherland Book Award
UC Press Online Summer Sale Starts Today
Going Home Again UC Press Podcast: Teardown In Honor of C. Wright Mills' 100th Birthday High School Students Challenge the Gun Control Paradox


The unemployment rate may have dropped to its lowest in 17 years over October, but a sharp drop in the labor force participation rate suggests everything isn't as rosy as Trump supporters may want to believe.
A whopping 5.2 million employees dropped out of the labor market in October, according to Bloomberg. This is the largest decline since the rate started getting recorded in 1990, although it is unclear as to why the major drop occurred in the first place. Because of the recent series of hurricanes that have been bashing the Gulf Coast, the rate could have experienced an anomalous decline that will ultimately correct itself. Then again, it could also be the result of Baby Boomers starting to retire in droves, which if so means it could portend a more lasting trend.
Either way, the share of employed Americans leaving the labor force compared to the total civilian population was at its highest level since 2001.
The decline in the labor force participation rate wasn't the only number marring what would have otherwise been a sunny economic report for Trump. Wages only grew by 2.4 percent compared with one year earlier, a decline from the figure in September. Although the economy added 261,000 jobs, the Wall Street projection had been for 310,000 jobs to be added, making the jobs growth number a bit disappointing. Finally, the fact that the economy has been adding jobs for 85 straight months — the longest streak on record — means that the overall positive economic trend can still be traced back to the economic recovery that began under President Barack Obama.


Today, the German speaking first graders at the Delta School Windhoek tackled their first school day with a Zuckertüte in their arms and a schoolbag on their backs, just like their parents and grandparents many years before them. Not only at this government school but at all schools in the country where German speaking children start their first year, the "Zuckertüte" plays an essential role. Some parents from other ethnic groups have joined this German tradition and made the day easier for their little ones by giving them a "Zuckertüte" too.
You´ll find big "Zuckertüten" and small ones, colourful ones and some decorated with lots of details, but all of them have something sweet inside as well as toys and goodies, which are important for the school lessons. Where does this tradition originate from? Apparently it started way back in 1810 in Germany in the regions of Saxony and Thuringia, where the first "Schultüten" were given to the youngsters to sweeten up their first day at school. Some say the tradition was started by the Jewish community by giving the school beginners sweet cookies shaped like letters of the alphabet. The tradition moved all over Germany and extended to Austria and Switzerland. With the first German settlers this tradition came to Namibia and has been kept till today. Almost every German speaking Namibian has started his school career with a "Zuckertüte".
Most "Zuckertüten" are bought in shops these days but you will still find some moms who make them themselves and decorate them with lots of detail and love. You will immediately know what the child likes and does, be it a girl who likes the colour pink and likes to play with dolls or the boy who is a big soccer fan. However, the "Zuckertüte" should never be a status symbol.
Who of the DSW first graders has got the most beautiful "Zuckertüte" this year and seems to enjoy the first day at school most? Have a look at the photos on Facebook and decide by liking the photo which expresses these features best. The child on the image with the most Likes will win a weekend at The Delight Swakopmund with her/his family. Also don't miss next week's first day at school at the DHPS where we will have the same Facebook competition!


The northern frontier of the United States, as is almost too well known to need repetition, bounds on the British provinces of Upper and Lower Canada. The line, or barrier, as far as we need take notice of it, consists of a rapid river, the St.-Lawrence, and the navigable lakes Ontario, Erie, and Huron. From Quebec to Kingston, which stands at the entrance of Lake Ontario, the distance is about 180 miles, but the water communication is interrupted by shoals and rapids. Lake Ontario is about 180 miles long and 50 broad, and is navigable for ships of any burden. The strait of Niagara, in length about 36 miles, but interrupted at one part by its famous falls, connects Ontario with Lake Erie ; which is about 220 miles in length, and about 40 broad, and is also navigable for large ships. Of Lake Huron, it will suffice to say, that it is connected with Erie by the river Detroit; on which river stands the British post of Amherstburgh, distant just 800 miles from Quebec.
The regular force, scattered over the Canadas at the breaking out of the war, consisted of between 4000 and 5000 men, chiefly fencible and veteran or invalid troops. The British commander-in-chief was Lieutenant-general Sir George Prevost. Ontario was the only lake that contained any armed vessels belonging to the British. These consisted of the Royal-George, a ship of 340 tons, mounting 20 guns, a brig of 14 guns, and two or three smaller vessels; all manned by Canadians, and commanded by a provincial officer, named Earle. The force of the Americans on this lake, at the commencement of the war, consisted of only one solitary brig, the Oneida, of 16 guns, commanded by Lieutenant Melancthon Thomas Woolsey, of the national navy. The principal port of the British was Kingston ; that of the Americans, Sackett's-Harbour.
On the 15th of July, 1812, Commodore Earle, with his squadron, appeared off Sackett's-Harbour, with the avowed intention of taking or destroying the Oneida; but a fire from two or three guns, mounted on a point of land near the harbour's mouth, was sufficient to deter the Canadian (we will not call him British) commodore from attempting that, with his five vessels, which the Royal-George alone, well manned and appointed, might easily have accomplished. Imboldened by the dastardly behaviour of his opponent, Lieutenant Woolsey fitted out a captured British merchant schooner with one long 32-pounder and two sixes ; and, manning her with about 30 seamen and a company of riflemen to act as marines, sent her, under the command of Lieutenant Henry Wells, to Ogdensburg, on the St.-Lawrence. On her way thither, the Julia encountered, and actually beat off without losing a man, the Moira of 14, and the Gloucester of 10 guns.
Notwithstanding the glaring incompetency of Earle, Sir George Prevost neither removed nor censured him. About this time the British 20-gun ship Tartarus, Captain John Pasco, arrived at Quebec from Halifax ; and, had the governor-general of British America but given his sanction to the measure, the captain would have laid his ship up, and, with his officers and men, have proceeded straight to Kingston, and superseded Earle in the command of the squadron. Instead of this, an attempt was made to hire sailors at Quebec, at one half of the wages which the merchants were giving; as if sailors could be of any use, without an officer capable, or willing (for, we believe, Earle, as well as Sir George, was born on the wrong side of the boundary line), to lead them against the enemy.
In the month of October, 1812, Commodore Isaac Chauncey arrived at Sackett's-Harbour, as commander-in-chief; and, having brought with him a number of officers, and between 400 and 500 prime sailors, from the Atlantic frontier, was enabled, by the 6th of November, to appear on the lake with the Oneida and six fine schooners, mounting altogether 48 guns, including several long 24 and 32 pounders ; and many of the guns, being mounted on pivot or traversing carriages, were as effective as double the number. With this comparatively formidable force, Commodore Chauncey chased the Royal-George into Kingston, cannonaded the town and batteries, and possessed the entire command of the lake. On the 26th of November the Madison, a fine ship of 600 tons, pierced to carry 24 guns on a flush deck, was launched at Sackett's-Harbour; and, as soon as she was fitted, the commodore shifted his broad pendant to her. Soon afterwards Sir George Prevost ordered two ships of war to be built, to mount 24 guns each; one at Kingston, the other at York, an unprotected port at the opposite extremity of the lake.
On Lake Erie, while the Americans possessed only one armed vessel, the Adams, a small brig mounting six 6-pounders, the British colonial authorities, by hiring or purchasing some merchant vessels and arming them, had assembled a force, consisting of one ship of 280 tons, the Queen-Charlotte, mounting 16 light carronades, a brig of 10 guns, a schooner of 12, and three smaller vessels, mounting between them seven guns. These six vessels were manned by 108 Canadians, and subsequently by 160 soldiers in addition. On the 16th of July, at, the surrender of Detroit, the Adams fell into the hands of the British, and was afterwards named the Detroit and sent down the lake, manned by a small Canadian crew. Early in the month of October, 1812, the American government sent Lieutenant Jesse D. Elliot, and between 50 and 60 petty officers and seamen, to superintend the construction of some schooners at Black-Rock. On the 9th Lieutenant Elliot, with the whole of his seamen and about 50 soldiers, boarded and carried the Detroit, and a merchant brig, the Caledonia, of one or two swivels, in her company. The former the Americans were afterwards obliged to burn, to save her from falling into the hands of a detachment of soldiers from Fort Erie; but the Caledonia and her valuable cargo, they carried safe to Black-Rock.
On the 25th of April, 1813, having received a reinforcement of seamen, Commodore Chauncey sailed from Sackett's-Harbour with his fleet, now augmented to 10 vessels, on board of which was a body of troops under General Dearborn, to attack the port of York, and destroy the ship of war there building. The Americans landed and drove away the few British troops at the post; but, previously to their retreat, the latter saved the Americans the trouble of burning the ship on the stocks, by destroying her themselves. Commodore Chauncey took away a considerable quantity of naval stores and a small unserviceable 10-gun brig, the Gloucester, and returned to Sackett's-Harbour in triumph.
On the 6th of May the British troop-ship Woolwich, Captain Thomas Ball Sullivan, arrived at Quebec from Spithead, having on board Captain Sir James Lucas Yeo, four commanders of the navy, eight lieutenants, 24 midshipmen, and about 450 picked seamen, sent out by government expressly for service on the Canadian lakes. Such was the zeal of the officers and men to get to the scene of action, that they departed, the same evening, in schooners for Montreal. In four or five days they reached Kingston; and, although the number of seamen was not half enough to man the vessels in the harbour, now augmented by the 24-gun ship Wolfe, launched on the 5th or 6th of May, Sir James Yeo, with the aid of the provincial sailors already on the lake, and of a few companies of soldiers, was ready, by the end of the month, to put to sea with two ships, one brig, and three schooners, besides a few small gun-boats.
Sir George Prevost now allowed himself to be persuaded to embark 750 troops on board the squadron, for the purpose of making an attack upon Sackett's-Harbour; but, to mar the successful issue of the plan, he resolved to head the troops himself. On the 27th of May, when an excellent opportunity was afforded by the absence of the American squadron at the opposite end of the lake, the British squadron, in high glee, sailed from Kingston, and with a fair wind stood across to the enemy's depot. At noon the squadron arrived off Sackett's-Harbour, and lay to, with every thing in readiness for the troops to disembark. Sir George hesitated, looked at the place, mistook trees for troops, and blockhouses for batteries, and ordered the expedition to put back.
Just as the ships had turned their heads towards Kingston, and, with the wind now changed, were beginning to sail before it, about 50 Indians, brought off a party of American soldiers from the shore near Sackett's-Harbour. Encouraged by this, Sir George permitted the squadron to begin working its way back to the American port. On the morning of the 29th some of the lighter vessels got close to the shore, and the troops were landed. They drove the Americans like sheep, compelled them to set fire to the General-Pike, a new frigate on the stocks, the Gloucester, captured at York, and a barrack containing, among other valuable articles, all the naval stores taken on the same occasion. At this moment some resistance unexpectedly made at a log barrack caused the British commander-in-chief to sound a retreat. The indignant, the victorious officers and men were obliged to obey the fatal bugle, and the British retired to their vessels; and the Americans, as soon as they could credit their senses, hastened to stop the conflagration. The General-Pike, being built of green wood, was saved; but the Gloucester, and the barrack containing the stores, were entirely consumed.
That Sir George Prevost was as fond of writing official letters, as he was of substituting the first personal pronoun for the third, has already appeared in these pages; but, in the present instance, contrary to all precedent, he required his adjutant-general, Colonel Edward Baynes, to pen the dispatch. That obedient gentleman did so; and the European public scarcely knows at this hour, through whose fault it was, that Sackett's Harbour was not taken from the Americans in May, 1813. The Canadian public, besides being in the secret, were less surprised at the result of the enterprise; because they knew that Sir George, a few months before, had rejected an excellent opportunity of marching across the ice to Sackett's-Harbour, and destroying the whole American lake-navy at a blow.
On the 3d of June Sir James Yeo sailed from Kingston with his squadron, composed of the ship Wolfe, of 23 guns and 200 men, ship Royal-George, of 21 guns and 175 men, brig Melville, of 14 guns and 100 men, schooners, Moira, of 14 guns and 92 men, Sidney-Smith, of 12 guns and 80 men, and Beresford, of eight guns and 70 men, together with a few gun-boats. On the 8th, at daylight, the squadron arrived in sight of the American camp at Forty-mile creek; but, as it was calm, the only vessels that could get close to the shore were the Beresford, Captain Francis Brockell Spilsbury, and the gun-boats, commanded by Lieutenant Charles Anthony, first of the Wolfe. A spirited attack by the schooner and gun-boats compelled the American troops to make a precipitate retreat, and all their camp equipage, provisions, and stores fell into the hands of the British. Sir James then landed the troops that were on board his squadron, and steered to the westward. On the 13th he captured two American schooners and some boats containing supplies. Receiving information from the prisoners, that there was a depot of provisions at Genessee river, Sir James proceeded thither; and, landing some seamen and marines, brought off the whole. On the 19th he took another supply of provisions from Great Sodus, and on the 29th re-anchored in Kingston.
All this while Commodore Chauncey was waiting at Sackett's Harbour for the General-Pike to be got ready for sea. At length, towards the latter end of July, that fine ship was armed, manned, and stored. The Pike alone was nearly a match for the whole of Sir James Yeo's squadron: she measured about 850 tons, and mounted 26 long 24-pounders on a flush deck, another 24-pounder on a pivot-carriage upon her forecastle, and a second, similarly mounted, upon her quarterdeck; and her crew, including some soldiers serving as marines, amounted to 400 men. With this ship, the Madison, Oneida, and 11 fine schooners, Commodore Chauncey sailed from Sackett's-Harbour for the head of the lake. On the 8th of August, in the morning, while the American fleet lay at anchor off Fort Niagara, the British squadron hove in sight; and, that a better opinion may be formed of the situation of the parties, we will state the force of each. The British had six vessels, mounting 92 guns; of which, two were long 24-pounders, 13, long 18-pounders, five, long 12 and 9 pounders, and 72, carronades of different calibers, including six 68-pounders; and the vessels were manned with 717 officers and men. The Americans, by their own admission, had 14 vessels, armed, also by their admission, with 114 guns ; of which, seven were long 32-pounders, 32, long 24-pounders, eight, long 18-pounders, 19, long 12 and 9 pounders, and 48, carronades, 40 of which were 32 and 24 pounders. Nearly one fourth of the long guns and carronades were on pivot-carriages, and were consequently as effective in broadside as twice the number. The 14 American vessels, thus armed, were manned with 1193 officers and men.
Commodore Chauncey immediately got under way, and stood out, with his 14 vessels, formed in line of battle; but, as the six British vessels approached, the American vessels, after discharging their broadsides, wore and stood under their batteries. Light airs and calms prevented Sir James Yeo from closing; and during the night, in a heavy squall, two of the American schooners, the Hamilton and Scourge, upset, and their crews unfortunately perished. On the 9th the two parties were again in sight of each other, and continued manoeuvring during that and the succeeding day. On the 10th, at night, a fine breeze sprang up, and Sir James Yeo immediately took advantage of it, by bearing up to attack his powerful opponent; but, just as the Wolfe got within gun-shot of the Pike and Madison, these two powerful American ships bore up, fired their stern-chase guns, and made sail for Niagara; leaving two fine schooners, the Julia and Growler, each armed with one long 32 and one long 12 pounder on pivots, and manned with a crew of 40 men, to be captured without an effort to save them. With his two prizes, and without the loss of a man, and with no greater injury to his ships than a few cut ropes and torn sails, Sir James Yeo returned to Kingston.
The " United States' Gazette," of September 6, gave a letter from one of the General-Pike's officers. The writer, having previously stated the American force at two ships, one brig, and. 11 schooners, says: "On the 10th, at midnight, we came within gun-shot, every one in high spirits. The schooners commenced the action with their long guns, which did great execution. At half-past 12, the Commodore fired his broadside, and gave three cheers, which was returned from the other ships, the enemy closing fast. We lay by for our opponent, the orders having been given, not to fire until she came within pistol-shot, though the enemy kept up a constant fire. Every gun was pointed, every match ready in hand, and the red British ensign plainly to be descried by the light of the moon; when, to our utter astonishment, the commodore wore, and stood S.E., leaving Sir James Lucas Yeo to exult in the capture of two schooners, and in our retreat; which was certainly a very fortunate one for him." No wonder, an order soon afterwards issued from Washington, that no officer should write, with the intention of publication, accounts of the operations of the fleet and army. Sir James could not have had his assertions more ably supported, than they were by the Pike's officer. The latter was mistaken., however, as to any "execution" having been done by the American squadron. The captured schooners of course made no resistance; although the American editors trumped up a story about their desperate defence; how they tore and ripped up the enemy, &c.
The Pike's officer has described two other "chases;" differing chiefly from the last, in no loss having been suffered, or even shot fired. He says: " We proceeded directly for Sackett's Harbour; where we victualled; and put to sea, the next day after our arrival, August 14. On the 16th we discovered the enemy again, again hurried to quarters; again got clear of the enemy by dint of carrying sail, and returned to Sackett's Harbour. On the 18th we again fell in with the enemy steering for Kingston, and we reached the harbour on the 19th. This is the result of two cruises; the first of which, by proper guidance, might have decided in our favour the superiority on the lake, and consequently in Canada." This is what many of the American editors called "chasing the British commander all round the lake." Commodore Chauncey, although he had lost four of his 14 vessels, appeared in September with 11 sail; having brought out with him, the Schooner Elizabeth, of about the same force as the Growler or Julia, and the new schooner Sylph, mounting, at that time, four long 32-pounders upon pivot-carriages, and four long sixes. This schooner was described by the Americans as upwards of 400 tons. She was afterwards converted into a brig.
On the 11th of September, while the British squadron lay becalmed off Genessee river, the American fleet of 11 sail, by the aid of a partial wind, succeeded in getting within range of their long 24 and 32 pounders; and during five hours cannonaded the British, who did not fire a carronade, and had only six guns in all the squadron that could reach the enemy. At sunset a breeze sprang up from the westward, when Sir James steered for the American fleet; but the American commodore avoided a close meeting, and thus the affair ended. It was so far unfortunate for Sir James Yeo, that he had a midshipman (William Ellery) and three seamen killed and seven wounded. In his official letter on the subject of this action, Commodore Chauncey most uncandidly says: "I was much disappointed that Sir James refused to fight me, as he was so much superior in point of force, both in guns and men, having upwards of 20 guns more than we have, and heaves a greater weight of shot."
Another partial engagement took place on the 28th of September. Commodore Chauncey, having the weathergage, kept his favourite distance, and one of his shot carried away the Wolfe's main topmast; which, in its fall, brought down the mizen topmast and cross jack yard. It was this, and not, as Mr. Clark says, "a manoeuvre of the commodore's," that " threw the British in confusion." Even with this great advantage, Commodore Chauncey would not venture within carronade-range. Mr. Clark, in describing this action, speaks of the British "frigate" Wolfe; upon which he had previously mounted "36 guns." Only two shot from the Americans did any material damage; the one already mentioned, and another that struck the Royal-George's fore topmast, which fell, upon her anchoring. Mr. Clark says: "Prudence forbad any further pursuit on the part of the Americans;" and the editor of the "History of the War" another American publication, adds: "The commodore was obliged to give up the chase; his ship was making water so fast, that it required all his pumps to keep her clear, and others of his vessels were much damaged. The General-Pike suffered a considerable loss of men; among whom were 22 killed or wounded by the bursting of a gun." Other American accounts stated the commodore's loss in men, at upwards of 60 killed and wounded. It was therefore the damages and loss sustained by the American squadron, and not the "British batteries on Burlington heights," upon which not a musket was mounted, that "obliged the commodore to give up the chase." The effect produced by Sir James's few long guns gave a specimen of what his carronades would have done, had his opponent allowed them to be used.
In the month of May, 1813, Captain Robert Heriot Barclay was appointed to the command of the British flotilla on this lake; an appointment which had been declined by Captain William Howe Mulcaster, another of Sir James Yeo's commanders, on account of the exceedingly bad equipment of the vessels. These, owing to the loss of one of them, now consisted of five; and they were not equal in aggregate tonnage or force to a British 20-gun ship. With a lieutenant, and 19 rejected seamen of the Ontario squadron, Captain Barclay, towards the middle of June, joined his enviable command; and, with the aid of the seamen he had brought, a ship was forthwith laid down at Amherstburgh, intended to be of 305 tons, and to mount as many as 18 guns.
Since the latter end of March Captain Oliver Hazard Perry, of the United States' navy, had arrived at the port of Erie, with a numerous supply of officers and seamen, to equip a flotilla; and, by the time Captain Barclay arrived, the American force consisted of one brig, the Caledonia, six fine schooners, and one sloop, mounting 15 heavy long guns, all on traversing carriages. Two brigs, of about 460 ton's each, to mount 18 carronades, 32-pounders, and two long twelves, had also been laid down at Presqu'isle, and were in a state of some forwardness. The destruction of these vessels on the stocks, would have enabled the British to maintain the ascendancy on the lake, and would have averted the fatal blow that was afterwards struck in this quarter. Colonel Proctor, the British commanding officer at Amherstburgh, saw this; as well as the facility with which the thing might be done, if Sir George Prevost would send him the long promised supply of troops, and about 100 sailors. He wrote letter after letter to Sir George on the subject, but all in vain. The latter, when he had exhausted his excuses, became petulant and rude. The two American brigs were launched; and, although they had to pass a bar, with their guns and stores out, and almost on their beam-ends, the Niagara and Lawrence, by the beginning of August, were riding on the lake, in readiness for action.
By the latter end of August, the Detroit, as the new ship was named, was launched; and the next difficulty was to get guns for her. For this, the fort of Amherstburgh was stripped, and 19, of four different calibers, were obtained. It will convey some idea of the expense of hastily fitting vessels at this distance from home, to mention, that every round shot cost one shilling a pound for the carriage from Quebec to Lake Erie, that powder was ten times as dear as at home, and that, for anchors, their weight in silver would be scarcely an over-estimate. But, were the Americans on this lake any better off? In five days an express reaches Washington. It would, under the most favourable circumstances as to weather and dispatch in office, take as many months to get an article ordered from England, or even permission to stir a peg out of the common routine of service. The American vessels were therefore completely at home, while the British vessels were upwards of 3500 miles from home; penned up in a lake on the enemy's borders, inaccessible by water, and to which the land-carriage, for heavy articles, ordnance and naval stores especially, was most difficult and tedious.
Early in September, Captain Barclay received a draught of seamen from the Dover troop-ship; and many of these would have scarcely rated as "ordinaries" on board the regular ships of war. He had now 50 British seamen to distribute among two ships, two schooners, a brig, and a sloop, armed altogether with 63 carriage-guns. It must have been the incredibility of this that induced some of the British journals, in their account of the proceedings on this lake, to state "150," instead of 50 seamen. It is asserted, on the express authority of Captain Barclay himself, that no more than 50 seamen were at any time on board the Lake Erie flotilla; the complements having been made up by Canadian peasants and soldiers, men that, without disparagement to either, were sorry substitutes for British sailors. On the other hand, the ships of the Americans, as their newspapers informed us, were equipped in the most complete manner; and through the same channel we learned, that large draughts of seamen had repeatedly marched to Lake Erie from the sea-board. The best of riflemen were to be obtained on the spot. What else was required, to render the American ships in these waters quite as effective as the best appointed ships on the ocean?
On the 9th of September Captain Barclay was lying, with his little squadron, in the port of Amherstburgh, anxiously waiting the arrival of a promised supply of seamen. Almost surrounded by hostile shores, his people on half-allowance of food, not another day's flour in store, a large body of Indians, whose friendship would cease, with the least abridgment in their accustomed supply, close in his rear; alike hopeless of succour and of retreat, what was Captain Barclay to do? Impelled by dread of famine, and, not improbably, of Indian treachery too, he sailed out in the evening, to risk a battle with an enemy's fleet, whose force he knew was nearly double his own.
Long guns No. No. Long guns No. No.
But this is supposing, that the two squadrons were fitted in an equal manner; whereas, however incredible it may appear, before they could fire a single great gun on board the Detroit, the men were obliged to discharge a pistol at the touch-hole! By adding 80 Canadians, and 240 soldiers from the Newfoundland and 41st regiments, to the 50 British seamen, the crew of Commodore Barclay's squadron is made to amount to 345; whereas Commodore Perry had picked crews to all his vessels, particularly on board the Lawrence and her sister-brig, and his total of men amounted to at least 580.
On the 10th, soon after daylight, Commodore Barclay discovered the American squadron at anchor in Put-in bay, and immediately bore up, with the wind from the south-west, to bring the enemy to action. Captain Perry thereupon got under way to meet the British; who, at 10 a.m., by a sudden shift of wind to south-east, were thrown to leeward of their opponents. Commodore Barclay, who carried his broad pendant on board the Detroit, so stationed his vessels, that those which were the nearest to an equality of force in the two squadrons might be opposed together. The schooner Chippeway, commanded by master's mate J. Campbell, was in the van. Then came, in succession, the Detroit and Queen-Charlotte, the latter commanded by Captain Robert Finnis, brig Hunter, Lieutenant George Bignell, schooner Lady-Prevost, Lieutenant Edward Buchan ; and the sloop Little-Belt, by whom commanded we are not aware, brought up the rear.
At about 11 h. 45 m. a.mthe action began ; and the Detroit became closely engaged with the Lawrence, Commodore Perry's brig, supported by the schooners Ariel and Scorpion. Although the matches and tubes of the Detroit were so defective, that pistols were obliged to be fired at the guns to set them off, the seamen, Canadians, and soldiers plied their guns so well that, in the course of two hours, they knocked the Lawrence almost to pieces, and, after driving Captain Perry out of her, compelled her to surrender ; but, having sailed with only one boat, and that being cut to pieces, the Detroit could not take possession of the American brig, and the latter, as soon as she had dropped out of gun-shot, rehoisted her colours.
In the mean time the Queen-Charlotte, with her 24-pounder carronades, had been opposed by the Niagara, supported, as the Lawrence had been, by two schooners with heavy long guns. In a few minutes Captain Finnis was killed; and his successor in the command, Lieutenant John Stokes, was struck senseless by a splinter. The next officer, provincial Lieutenant Irvine, was without any experience, and therefore comparatively useless. The Queen-Charlotte soon afterwards struck her colours. From having kept out of the range of the Charlotte's carronades, the Niagara was a fresh vessel, and to her Captain Perry proceeded. As soon as he got on board, the American commodore, accompanied by some of his schooners, bore down, and took a raking position athwart the bows of the already disabled Detroit. In a short time Lieutenant John Garland, first of the Detroit was mortally, and Captain Barclay himself most severely, wounded. The command then devolved upon Lieutenant George Inglis; who fought his ship in the most determined manner, until, out of the 10 experienced British seamen on board, eight were killed or wounded, and every hope of success or of escape had fled: he then ordered the colours of the Detroit to be struck. The Hunter and Lady-Prevost surrendered about the same time; as did the Chippeway and Trippe, as soon as some of the American vessels overtook them on their retreat.
The loss on the British side amounted to three officers and 38 men killed, and nine officers and 85 men wounded. The officers killed were, Lieutenant S. J. Garden, of the Newfoundland regiment, and John Garland, the first lieutenant, on board the Detroit; and the captain of the Queen-Charlotte. The officers wounded were Captain Barclay most dangerously in his left or remaining arm, Mr. John M. Hoffmeister, purser of the Detroit, Lieutenant John Stokes, and midshipman James Foster, of the Queen-Charlotte, Lieutenants Edward Buchan and Francis Roulette, and master's mate Henry Gateshill, of the Lady-Prevost, and master's mate J. Campbell, commanding the Chippeway. The loss on the American side, as taken from Captain Perry's letter, amounted to 27 killed and 96 wounded, including 22 killed and 61 wounded on board the Lawrence.
The fact of this brig having surrendered is admitted by Captain Perry himself, in the following words: "It was with unspeakable pain, that I saw, soon after I got on board the Niagara, the flag of the Lawrence come down, although I was perfectly sensible that she had been defended to the last, and that to have continued to make a show of resistance, would have been a wanton sacrifice of her brave crew. But the enemy was not able to take possession of her, and circumstances soon permitted her flag again to be hoisted." The chief fault to be found with Captain Perry's letter is, that it does not contain the slightest allusion to the bravery of Captain Barclay, or the inferiority of his means of resistance.
As the Americans are by this time pretty well ashamed of all the bombastic nonsense circulated by the press of the United States, day after day during many months of the war, on the subject of Captain Perry's "Nelsonic" victory, we shall not rake the trash up again; but we fear that the professional, and therefore presumably correct, dictum of a contemporary, that, " in number and weight of guns, the two squadrons were nearly equal," [Brenton, vol V p. 132] will make the Americans imagine, that they really had some ground for their extravagant boasting. However, onreferring again to our contemporary's account, we feel satisfied that little harm will arise; for, should the evident partiality that is shown to Sir George Prevost miss being seen, the statement, that " both the Detroit and Queen-Charlotte struck to the United States' ship St.-Lawrence, Commodore Perry," will satisfy the American reader, that Captain Brenton knew very little about the action he was attempting to describe.
On the 16th of September, 1814, Captain Barclay, and his surviving officers and men, were tried by a court-martial on board the Gladiator at Portsmouth, for the loss of the late Erie flotilla, and the following was the sentence pronounced: "That the capture of his majesty's late squadron was caused by the very defective means Captain Barclay possessed to equip them on Lake Erie; the want of a sufficient number of able seamen, whom he had repeatedly and earnestly requested of Sir James Yeo to be sent to him; the very great superiority of the enemy to the British squadron; and the unfortunate early fall of the superior officers in the action. That it appeared, that the greatest exertions had been made by Captain Barclay, in equipping and getting into order the vessels under his command; that he was fully justified, under the existing circumstances, in bringing the enemy to action; that the judgment and gallantry of Captain Barclay in taking his squadron into action, and during the contest, were highly conspicuous, and entitled him to the highest praise; and that the whole of the other officers and men of his majesty's late squadron conducted themselves in the most gallant manner; and did adjudge the said Captain Robert Heriot Barclay, his surviving officers and men to be most fully and honourably acquitted." Rear-admiral Edward James Foote, president.
Notwithstanding this flattering testimonial, notwithstanding the severity of his wounds, wounds by one of which his right arm had been entirely lost, many .years before the Lake Erie defeat, and by two others, received in that action, his remaining arm had been rendered permanently motionless, or nearly so, and a part of his thigh cut away, Captain Barclay was not confirmed as a commander until the 19th of November, 1813; and was only promoted to post rank in 1824.
The first naval event of the late war upon Lake Champlain, a lake, all, except about one-twentieth part, within the boundaries of the United States, occurred on the 3d of June, 1813. Two American armed sloops appeared in sight of the British garrison at Isle-aux-nois. Three gun-boats immediately got under way to attack them; and the crews of two batteaux and of two row-boats were landed, to annoy the enemy in the rear, the channel being very narrow. After a contest of three hours and a half, the two sloops surrendered. They proved to be the Growler and Eagle, mounting 11 guns, and having a complement of 50 men, each; both under the command of Lieutenant Sidney Smith, of the United States' navy. The British had three men wounded; the Americans, one man killed, eight severely wounded, and, including the latter, 99 prisoners. No British naval officer was present. The feat was performed by detachments of the 100th. regiment, and royal artillery, under the direction of Major Taylor, of the former.
On the 1st of August, some officers and seamen having arrived from Quebec, Captain Thomas Everard, late of the 18-gun brig-sloop Wasp, with the two prize-sloops, three gunboats, and several batteaux, containing about 1000 troops under the command of Colonel Murray, entered the American port of Plattsburg. Here the colonel landed with his men ; and, after driving away the American militia at the post, destroyed all the arsenals, block-houses, barracks, and stores of every description, together with the extensive barracks at Saranac. The two enterprising officers then proceeded off Burlington and Swanton, in Vermont; where they seized and destroyed several sloops laden with provisions, and did other considerable injury. At this time the United States' troops at Burlington, distant only 24 miles from Plattsburg, under the command of Major-general Hampton, amounted to about 4000 men. Although a letter written by an inhabitant of Burlington, and published in most of the American papers, declares that the British troops "did no injury whatever to private property," an American historian states thus: "They (the British) wantonly burned several private store-houses, and carried off immense quantities of the stock of individuals."
As a proof that a little energy on the part of the Americans might have averted the Plattsburg misfortune, it appears by a statement, published in the United States within three weeks after the above affair happened, that the American naval force on Lake Champlain then consisted of the President, of 12 guns, the Commodore-Preble and Montgomery of 11 guns each, the Frances, of 6 guns, two gun-boats, of one 18-pounder each, and six scows, of one 12-pounder each.


text:
Home News Fortis Fortuna Adiuvat: Fortune Favours The Strong
Fortis Fortuna Adiuvat: Fortune Favours The Strong
APRA Media Release
WAYNE BYRES
Keynote address at the AFR Banking & Wealth Summit 2017, Sydney
Thank you for the opportunity to be part of the third AFR Banking & Wealth Summit. This is the third time I have been asked to speak at this event, and I am going to return to my usual theme: the strength in the Australian banking system. I've titled my remarks today with the Latin phrase, fortis fortuna adiuvat.1 Over the years, this has been interpreted in a number of ways – often as fortune favours the brave or fortune favours the bold. However, as a prudential regulator, I am attracted to an earlier interpretation: fortune favours the strong. As a proverb from Roman times, it remains highly relevant today.
In the past few days, there has been a great deal of attention given to our recent announcement on additional measures to strengthen one particular part of the financial system: the residential mortgage lending market. These measures build on the steps we have taken over the past two years to bolster loan underwriting practices and moderate investor lending, in an environment that we considered to be one of heightened risk. Those measures had a positive impact (Chart 1), but at the same time the risk environment certainly hasn't moderated:
house prices remain high;
household income growth remains subdued;
the already high ratio of household debt to income has got higher;
the already low official cash rate has got lower (although not all of this reduction has flowed to borrowers, particularly investors - Chart 2); and
competitive pressures haven't diminished.
It's important to be clear that our goal in implementing the additional measures we announced on Friday is not to determine house prices. Housing prices are not within the control, nor the mandate, of the prudential regulator. Nor, as the Reserve Bank Governor said last night, can prudential measures address underlying supply-demand issues within the housing market. Rather, our role in the current environment is to promote a higher-than-normal degree of prudence – definitely by lenders and, ideally, also borrowers – in both credit decisions and balance sheet strength. On this occasion, we have focussed on interest-only lending to complement our earlier measures. Although there are perfectly legitimate reasons why individual borrowers might prefer an interest-only loan, in aggregate the level of interest-only lending creates additional vulnerabilities and we came to the view some additional moderation in this area was warranted.
We chose not to lower the investor lending growth benchmark at this point in time, given the need to accommodate the increasing supply of housing in the construction pipeline. However, limitations on the volume of new interest-only lending will impact investors more acutely than owner-occupiers, given that around two-thirds of lending to investors is on an interest-only basis. Furthermore, although the 12-month annual growth rate for investor lending is currently below the 10 per cent benchmark, the run rate in more recent months has been closer to (if not a little above) 10 per cent on an annualised basis. Therefore, even with the benchmark unchanged, lenders are still likely to have to tighten their lending practices and slow lending from that in recent months to ensure they remain comfortably below the desired level.
This latest step is a tactical response to current market conditions – we can and will do more (or less) as conditions evolve. We also developing a more strategic response that recognises that, in the Australian banking system, housing lending risks and capital adequacy are far from independent issues. I'll come back to that point a bit later.
Building strength
First, a recap. Building strength in the financial system has been at the core of the post-crisis financial reform agenda. Amongst other things, substantial reforms were enacted by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to lift both the quality and quantity of capital. As part of the G20, Australia implemented those reforms. Having a banking system that was less impacted by the financial crisis than others reflected good management, no doubt, but also a healthy dose of good fortune (remember, fortune favours the strong!). As a result, we were also able to claim to be one of the first countries that could say its banking system met the new global minimums. In the periodic bouts of financial fragility that have occurred in recent years, there is no doubt that strength has been a virtue.
The conclusion that Australia benefits from a strong banking system was endorsed by the Financial System Inquiry (FSI) in 2014. The first – and probably most prominent – recommendation of the FSI was that APRA should set capital standards such that the capital ratios of Australian deposit-takers are 'unquestionably strong.'2 In making this recommendation, the FSI did not dispute that the Australian banking system was in good shape, but simply that some further strengthening was a worthwhile investment for the Australian community.
In thinking how to put the recommendation into practice, we have been mindful that the international bank capital regime is still undergoing further fine-tuning. We therefore chose to hold off implementing the 'unquestionably strong' recommendation until the work in Basel was completed. We thought it made sense to tackle both issues together, on the basis that implementing one set of changes rather than two was likely to be more efficient and provide greater certainty for everyone.
I still think that decision was the right one, even though the final Basel agreement has now been delayed. And it is important to remember that neither we nor the banking industry has stood still in the meantime. Notably, we have already taken steps to strengthen capital requirements for residential mortgages for those banks using internal models to determine their risk weights,3 which added in the order of $10 billion to system capital requirements. This policy change had the effect of reducing the major banks' Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio by just under 80 basis points, and the benefit of tackling two issues in one: strengthening the capital position of the largest Australian banks relative to their international peers, and bolstering the capital backing for mortgage exposures in the current environment. Despite that change, the banking system has continued to lift its capital ratios (Chart 3).
However, without clarity as to a deadline for an agreement in Basel, we have decided it does not make sense to wait any longer to deal with the question of 'unquestionably strong'.
Before talking a little about how we propose to do that, I want to respond to three questions that I've been asked recently.
Is it still necessary?
The first question is: is it still necessary? The 'unquestionably strong' concept was proposed a few years ago now – maybe it is no longer valid or worth the effort?
In response, I'd like to make three points:
First, the underlying rationale for the FSI's recommendation continues to hold. Australia remains dependent on the willingness of foreigners to lend us their savings. And the banking system does a large part of that borrowing. We learnt from the financial crisis that threats to our on-going access to international financial markets can quickly and severely impede the flow of credit to the community. We also learnt that, as a relatively small part of the global economy, few international investors need to lend to Australia. Particularly in times of stress, they can be inclined to run first, and ask questions later.
The good news is that the system is less exposed to that particular risk than previously, given the increasing proportion of the banking system's balance sheet that is funded by domestic deposits and longer-term wholesale borrowing. But it is not a risk that has disappeared. Keeping the confidence of international investors remains an important goal.
Second, our relative positioning is under threat as the rest of the world recovers from the financial crisis. As I noted earlier, Australia could lay claim to being one of the first jurisdictions to meet the new global minimum standards. That is no longer a particularly notable badge of honour. Banking systems in North America, Asia and – slowly but surely – Europe have been strengthened, and continue to do so. Australia's relative strength will not be sustained without further action.
Chart 4 shows the interquartile range of CET1 capital ratios for large internationally-active banks. The range has risen pretty steadily, with no sign of levelling off just yet. This accumulation of capital must surely slow soon, but given many banks are still building capital we expect the trend to go on a bit further before it does so. The dot shows where the major banks collectively sat in June 2014, and the arrow represents what we estimated, at that time, would be required to be comfortably in the top quartile over the longer term. We estimated at least 200 basis points: many thought that estimate was quite high, but it has proven to be a pretty useful forecast.
And third, the risk environment has not markedly improved since the FSI's recommendation, so there is little room for complacency. Internationally, there appears to be a slightly more optimistic economic outlook in the short term, with the US and most Asian economies strengthening, and Europe continuing to grow. But the skies are not entirely blue: the Reserve Bank has noted, for example, there continues to be significant uncertainty about policy in China and the United States and the implications for global growth and trade after 2017. Domestically, the outlook is again cautiously optimistic, but reliant on ongoing support from very low interest rates. Commodity prices are higher than a year or so ago, but have fallen a bit from their most recent peaks, and there continues to be on-going slack in the labour market. And I've already spoken about housing.
But regardless of the short term outlook, prudential policy should not be based on the here and now. Good prudential policy is set for the long-run benefit of the community, weighing up the costs and benefits associated with policy settings through the cycle, and preparing for adversity when times are good. As we have said many times, it is easiest to build resilience when the system is in good health than try to do so when times are tougher.
Isn't the rest of the world changing direction?
The second question is: in pursuing 'unquestionably strong' now, could we find ourselves moving in the opposite direction to the rest of the world?
We always keep a close eye on trends in the rest of the world, but I don't see anything at present that would cause us to change direction.
The delays in Basel are unfortunate. There are only a few issues that remain subject to negotiation, but the fact they remain unresolved means they are obviously important issues. I'm still hopeful, however, that we can get an agreement sooner rather than later, but if no agreement proves possible, the status quo remains and we will continue to measure ourselves against that.
I fully expect to see some deregulatory measures in the United States. However, the US starts with a regulatory system that is, on a number of dimensions, one of the strongest in existence. Many of the issues that seem to be the primary candidates for change – the Volcker Rule, the stress testing regime, the Department of Labour's fiduciary rule, the roles and activities of the Financial Sector Oversight Council and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau – are domestic initiatives that exist over and above internationally-agreed minimum standards. Changes in any of these areas would not necessitate a change in our approach one iota.4
Of course, the risk of a broader move away from international cooperation and coordination in the area of financial regulation can't be dismissed lightly. That might even be superficially appealing for those who dislike the work of the international standard setters. But be careful what you wish for. Such a shift would likely see a raft of new regulations produced at a national or jurisdictional level, potentially quite different in objective and detail, and at least some with a strong element of domestic bias, that are not well suited to efficient cross-border banking or international financial markets. That is not in Australia's interests. If it were to occur, it would only make it more important - not less - that our standards were as strong as they could be to guarantee continued market access.
Haven't we done enough already?
The third question is: haven't we done enough already?
The banking system certainly has higher capital adequacy ratios than it used to. But overall leverage has not materially declined. The proportion of equity that is funding banking system assets has improved only modestly, from a touch under 6 per cent a decade ago to just on 6½ per cent at the end of 2016.5 (By the way, Chart 5 is a nice reminder that, notwithstanding the extra capital that new regulation has required, banking remains a highly leveraged business).
The difference between improved risk-based measures of capital adequacy, and the more limited improvement in non-risk based measures of leverage (Chart 6), is driven to a significant degree by changes in asset composition. In particular, it reflects the increasing concentration of the banking system in mortgage lending (which benefits from lower risk weights – Chart 7).6 It implies the system has de risked more than deleveraged. But that assessment is itself premised on a critical assumption: that a high and increasing concentration in mortgages is generating a lower risk banking system. In the current environment, it is certainly an assumption that deserves a bit more scrutiny. While it might be a reasonable proposition most of the time, we need to be wary of the fallacy of composition when concentrations grow.
Unquestionably strong
One way to think about our objective in establishing 'unquestionably strong' capital requirements is that we should be able to assert, with credibility, that the banking system can withstand reasonably foreseeable adversity and continue to provide its core function of financial intermediation for the Australian community.
Unfortunately, there is no universal measure of financial strength that provides a clear cut answer to that test. So we need to be able to look at this question through multiple lenses. In thinking about the concept of 'unquestionably strong', there are three basic ways to do that:
relative measures: the FSI adopted a relative approach in suggesting that unquestionably strong regulatory capital ratios would be positioned in the top quartile of international peers. We have said on a number of occasions that we do not intend to tie ourselves mechanically to some particular percentile, but top quartile positioning is a useful sense check which we can certainly use to guide our policy-making.
alternative measures: regulators do not have exclusive domain over measures of financial strength. There are a range of alternative measures, such as those used by rating agencies, which can be used to benchmark Australian banks. Again, we do not intend to tie ourselves too closely to these measures, but it would be difficult to argue the banking system is unquestionably strong if alternative measures of capital strength, particularly those that are influential in investment decision-making, were to suggest something to the contrary.
absolute measures: relative and alternative measures are useful guides, but the real test for a bank to claim it is unquestionably strong is whether it can comfortably survive extreme but plausible adversity. So stress testing, which doesn't rely on relativities with other banks, or competing measures of strength, provides another useful guide for us.
Using multiple measures will provide useful insights on the banking system's strength, but unfortunately will be unlikely to give us a single 'right' answer. At best it will provide a range for possible calibration which would reasonably meet our objective that, whichever lens you look through, we can credibly claim to have capital standards that produce an unquestionably strong banking system. We will still need to exercise judgement, taking account of other dimensions of risk within the system – both quantitative (such as liquidity and funding) and qualitative (such as risk management and risk culture within banks, and the strengths of the statutory framework and crisis management powers on which the stability of the system is built). Inevitably, some will argue the calibration should be higher, and others think it too high, but at the very least our logic and rationale should be transparent, and we can readily explain how our decisions are consistent with the FSI's intent.
As things stand today, our plan is to issue an information paper around the middle of the year, which will set out how we view the banking system through the various lenses that I have just mentioned, the extent of further strengthening required, and the timeframe over which that can be achieved in an orderly manner.
Beyond establishing the aggregate level of capital, we will need to follow that up with consultation on how the regulatory framework should allocate that capital across the different types of risk exposure. Some of those changes will flow from the inevitable direction of the work in Basel that I referred to earlier: this will include, for example, greater limitations on the use of internal credit risk models, and the inevitable removal of operational risk models. These changes will primarily impact the larger banks.
But, coming back to my starting point, probably the biggest issue we will need to resolve in ensuring capital is appropriately allocated is whether and how we adjust the risk weights for housing-related exposures. Our announcement last week reflected a tactical response to current conditions in the housing market. We will continue to refine these sorts of measures as long as they are needed. But a longer term and more strategic response will involve a review, during the course of our work on 'unquestionably strong', of the relative and absolute capital requirements for housing exposures. That should not be taken to imply that there will be a dramatic increase in capital requirements for housing lending: APRA has always imposed capital requirements for housing exposures that are well above international minimum standards, so we do not start with glaring deficiencies. By anyone's standard, however, we have a banking system that has a notable concentration in housing. It is therefore important we give that issue particular attention as we think about how to put the concept of 'unquestionably strong' into practice.
The case for the Australian banking system to be seen as unquestionably strong remains as valid today as it did when the FSI recommended it in 2014. And, as much as we would like international policy deliberations to be complete, we do not think it right to defer a decision on this issue any longer.
In moving ahead, we will be looking at many components of the capital adequacy framework, but given its position as the dominant asset on the balance sheet of the banking system, the adequacy of capital requirements for housing-related risks will be a critical part of that assessment. Beyond the recently-announced tactical responses to current conditions in the housing market, making sure the system is on a sound footing for the longer term is even more important. Put simply, the capital adequacy framework needs to address the concentration in housing lending that has built up in the banking system over time: if we are going to put an increasing number of eggs into a single basket, we'd better make sure that basket is a (unquestionably) strong one.
After all, fortune favours the strong.
1 The phrase 'fortis fortuna adiuvat' is often attributed to the Roman playwright Terence, and can be found in his play, Phormio. A literal translation is 'the strong ones, Fortune helps'.
2 The Government subsequently endorsed that recommendation, along with most others from the Inquiry.
3 These banks account for around 85 per cent of the stock of outstanding housing loans granted by all APRA-regulated ADIs.These banks account for around 85 per cent of the stock of outstanding housing loans granted by all APRA-regulated ADIs.
4 It is also worth noting that the Executive Order on financial regulation signed by the new US President includes as a core principle that regulation should be designed to 'prevent taxpayer funded bail-outs'. Minimising risk to the taxpayer was also an important consideration in the FSI's recommendation to strengthen the financial position of the banking system.
5 This net change slightly understates the improvement in the ratio of shareholders' funds to assets: at its lowest, in late 2008, the ratio was 5.5 per cent.
6 For a fuller explanation of the impact of shifts in asset composition, see Byres, W (2014), Seeking strength in adversity: Lessons from APRA's 2014 stress test on Australia's largest banks, Speech to AB+F Randstad Leaders Lecture Series, Sydney. Available at www.apra.gov.au.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
The Batman (Matt Reeves)
View Poll Results: The Batman
Thread: The Batman (Matt Reeves)
Philip J. Fry
Hedonismbot
IMDb / wiki / RT / Metacritic
A Man Called Otto (M. Forster, 2022) ☆
AmbuLAnce (M. Bay, 2022) ☆
The Pale Blue Eye (S. Cooper, 2022) ☆
Drive My Car (R. Hamaguchi, 2021)
In Bruges (M. McDonagh, 2008)
Bullet Train (D. Leitch, 2022) ☆
Chungking Express (Wong K., 1994)
Persona (I. Bergman, 1966) ☆
Le Samouraï (J. Melville, 1967)
Avatar: the Way of Water (J. Cameron, 2022) ☆
First time ☆
StuSmallz
I just saw this a couple of days ago, and I don't quite have as much to say about it as I was hoping I would, but that's not because I didn't like it; on the contrary, because I actually liked it quite a bit on the whole. Rather... [
my lack of thoughts is more a natural result of how familiar an experience The Batman was at times, not just with the obvious inspiration it took from Nolan's Bat-trilogy (particular during a scene where another famous Batbaddie broadcasts his sadistic hostage-taking), but also from David Fincher's murky "serial thrillers", and even the elaborate death traps of the Saw movies, which resulted in the film feeling more derivative than it should have, especially coming from a director as skilled with blockbusters as Matt Reeves has proven himself to be.
However, despite that, and the fact that its somewhat convoluted plot and nearly 3-hour runtime both could've done with a little bit of pruning, The Batman still succeeds as meaty, intelligent, and engaging blockbuster filmmaking throughout, the kind that's disappointingly uncommon in modern Hollywood, as Reeves showcases his knack in directing memorable setpieces, and fully leans into the rich iconography and symbolism that's made its central character such an enduring figure in pop culture, creating a moody, thrilling experience that ultimately proves to be (mostly) worth the afternoon I spent to watch it. And, while its creative choices can't help but keep it somewhat in the shadow of The Dark Knight, which still remains the franchise's high water mark to date, The Batman still manages to be the runner-up Batfilm for me for now, and a strong foundation to build higher upon for whenever the inevitable sequel comes out; bring on some more cinematic battiness, baby!
Also, one thing I didn't care for was the way that it hinted at yet ANOTHER version of The... [
...Joker ready to emerge at the end; not only is it obvious sequel bait (something I'm already tired of in Superhero movies), and another element cribbed off of The Dark Knight trilogy, but I'm just tired of seeing the character at all in general. Like, part of the reason why Ledger's Joker was so impactful was that it had been nearly twenty years since we'd seen that character in a Batman movie, given us time to get eager for a new version, but then they give us Leto's Joker less than a decade later, then Phoenix's Joker, and now we're getting ANOTHER version of the character just a few years after that. It's like, I love the character too, but we need to give him a break for a while; there are other Batbaddies out there, you know!
Ezee E
Described this in my Letterboxd as, "The most BATMAN Batman," in that it truly focuses on Batman rather than the villains involved. I suppose Batman Begins does it too, but I really liked how this just went with him already being established in a very seedy Gotham City.
I'd be totally fine if Zoe got her own thing out of this too.
Barbarian - ***
Bones and All - ***
Tar - **
transmogrifier
Batman Returns > Batman (1989) > The Batman > The Dark Knight Rises > solidly good movies > The Dark Knight > Joker > Lego Batman > Batman Begins > Batman Forever > Batman & Robin.
Haven't seen Batman (1966) or Batman vs. Superman.
Last edited by transmogrifier; 03-06-2022 at 06:54 AM.
Last 10 Movies Seen
(90+ = canonical, 80-89 = brilliant, 70-79 = strongly recommended, 60-69 = good, 50-59 = mixed, 40-49 = below average with some good points, 30-39 = poor, 20-29 = bad, 10-19 = terrible, 0-9 = soul-crushingly inept in every way)
Run (2020) 64
The Whistlers (2019) 55
Pawn (2020) 62
Matilda (1996) 37
The Town that Dreaded Sundown (1976) 61
Moby Dick (2011) 50
Soul (2020) 64
Heroic Duo (2003) 55
A Moment of Romance (1990) 61
As Tears Go By (1988) 65
Stuff at Letterboxd
Listening Habits at LastFM
Quoting transmogrifier (view post)
Batman Returns > Batman (1989) > The Batman > The Dark Knight Rises > solidly good movies > The Dark Knight > Joker > Batman Begins > Batman Forever > Batman & Robin.
No Mask of the Phantasm?
Quoting Philip J. Fry (view post)
Haven't seen that. But you have reminded me to add in Lego Batman
You've got to watch that one (and Under the Red Hood).
Morris Schæffer
Finale isn't the movie's strongest aspect. So Riddler's [
end game is to turn this into a Roland Emmerich flick ?!
Been reading a lot of reports about folks who are ecstatic about this finally being a batman detective story, but it's hardly as gripping as Se7en. Clues are deciphered with remarkable ease and it doesn't help we know right from the start who the culprit is.
And the movie's grounded approach just doesn't align with Batman talking a double barreled shogun blast to the chest and still living. Or being inches from an explosion and still living.
I mean, I liked it a lot in spite of that, but sometimes I just fucking wish I'd see a blockbuster and didn't have to have second thoughts about it. No yeah buts, just sheer transformative movie magic.
[+] closer to next rating / [-] closer to previous rating
Dark (S3) ✦✦✦½ [-]
Fall (Mann, 2022) ✦✦✦½ [-]
Ms. Marvel (S1) ✦½ [+]
Dark (S2) ✦✦✦✦
Moon Knight (S1) ✦✦½ [-]
Get Carter (Hodges, 1971) ✦✦✦½ [+]
Prey (Trachtenberg, 2022) ✦✦✦ [-]
Black Bird (S1) ✦✦✦✦
Better Call Saul (S6) ✦✦✦½ [+]
Halo (S1) ✦✦✦ [-]
Slow Horses (S1) ✦✦✦½ [+]
H4Z4RD (Govaerts, 2022/BE) ✦✦½ [-]
Gangs of London (S1) ✦✦✦½ [+]
We Own This City (S1) ✦✦✦½ [+]
Thor: Love and Thunder (Waititi, 2022) ✦✦ [+]
Btw that Shot of Batman finally flying was astounding, epic... And then he [
hit a bus for silly comic effect. Wish they left that out.
I like that he fucked that up. It shows that he is still learning the ropes. However, the entire third act is a snooze and just ends like all other superhero movies with random destruction by the bad guy and faceless goons and a lot of stupidity. It was really good up until then.
I like that he fucked that up. It shows that he is still learning the ropes.
Valid point. I guess it ruined that moment a bit for me because it was visually insane. Also because it looked like for a brief moment this immensely grounded superhero movie turned into a road runner cartoon, where the nastiest falls/collisions do virtually nothing.
Quoting Morris Schæffer (view post)
That's a problem throughout the film. Like...why do you even need to have bad guys shoot him point blank in the chest with a shotgun and have him shrug it off in the first place? It makes it hard to suspend disbelief. Like... just have him be wary of being shot in the chest point blank with a shotgun and like, avoid it? For some reason, superhero films really need their superheros to defy physics, common sense, etc. just in case the audience mistakes them for ordinary boring fucking human beings with bones and blood and shit.
Pop Trash
Guttenbergian
The Yay Area
I agree. I think it's better directed than written. I like the look of this and what Reeves is doing in theory, I just wish the detective work was more interesting. Less deciphering clues from the Riddler and more trying to figure out and profile who/what/where the Riddler is. Zodiac (which is an influence here) had them tracking down a house with a basement in California (a rarity) among other things through a process of deduction. I also had a hard time believing a guy like this iteration of the Riddler would have some clone army dressed up like him to conveniently dispatch. It would be like if there were a bunch of John Does from Se7en (also an influence here) running around committing conceptual homicides for him. I do like all the corruption in Gotham City. John Tuturro as an aging mafia leader effectively running the city with an interchangeable corrupt system of mayors and DAs all on his payroll.
Ratings on a 1-10 scale for your pleasure:
Top Gun: Maverick - 8
Top Gun - 7
McCabe & Mrs. Miller - 8
Crimes of the Future - 8
Videodrome - 9
Valley Girl - 8
Summer of '42 - 7
In the Line of Fire - 8
Passenger 57 - 7
Everything Everywhere All at Once - 6
[ETM]
Second star to the right
Novi Sad, Serbia
I can't say I disagree with anything you guys said, but MAN was this way, WAY too long. A friend literally dozed off and my wife was checking her phone throughout the second half. It feels like there could be a two, two and a half hour cut made out of this without losing anything of substance - just shortening the shots that go on for far too long with no particular purpose. In the end, my favorite thing in the movie was probably the sound of the Batmobile.
Cast is all pretty great... save Paul Dano who I never like in anything. Its a mild nay from me, mainly because this movie is too fucking long and its finale was stupid (giving me The Dark Knight Rises vibes from its awful football field destruction). But I dug Pattinson as Batman. He's not a Bruce, but he's really solid under the mask and performing under all that hardware. Zoe Kravitz probably gave my favorite performance. Their chemistry was there and her ability to somewhat tell the backstory for all of this from her presence alone, without feeling forced in as a device, was admirable. Mob stuff wasn't well written, yet Penguin's brief moments showed me a glimpse of how better off the movie would have been by having him in a more central role. I wouldn't mind a sequel... a shorter one, please. And give Jeffrey Wright more to do as Gordon.
https://letterboxd.com/mmmallory/
Don't forget about the moment when [
Penguin's car did a million crazy flips when the Batmobile rammed it, and yet he walked away with seemingly zero injuries; c'mon, movie...
Quoting StuSmallz (view post)
Yeah, it fell just on the wrong side of crazy and I'd be more ok with that if this was Fast & Furious 14.
Really enjoyed it. As for runtime, I expected lots of long sweeping shots of Gotham, but I only saw a few shots that needed trimmed. I would maybe cut 10 minutes. I thought it was actually fairly dense for its runtime.
Last edited by Skitch; 03-13-2022 at 09:14 AM.
You don't think that entire third act was tacked on and generic?
Generic perhaps, I wouldn't argue that. I thought it was a bit of a copy of TDK 3rd act, in that, villain attempting to manipulate others into doing villainous stuff. I didn't think it was tacked on though, because it followed through on the vengeance theme and altered the arc of the character.
I'm not really defending any of this, I'm just giving first impressions and I know I'm the literal worst person to ask for critisms of this stuff lol
Milky Joe
Scott of the Antarctic
That's a problem throughout the film. Like...why do you even need to have bad guys shoot him point blank in the chest with a shotgun and have him shrug it off in the first place?
To be fair, he was entirely immobilized from that blast until he forced himself to use the adrenaline shot. I liked the fact that all the goons brought rifles ("rifles are good"), so Bats was probably not expecting a shotgun in that moment.
I had a lot of problems with the plotting, but man what a great production overall. It was too long but I could have watched more of it, if that makes sense. Great noir vibe, great music. I saw this in Dolby cinema and the place was absolutely quaking for the car chase.
The severed arm perfectly acquitted itself, because of the simplicity of its wishes and its total lack of doubt.
A Platypus
I feel like I owe it a second watch to fully digest a lot of stuff but overall I really liked this. It's no masterpiece, and it's certainly long to a fault, but Reeves succeeded in building the noir, pulpy atmosphere I anticipated. It only goes "beam in the sky" at the very end, in which literally the Bat fights a hanging wire. The marketing around the Bat and the Cat is well justified because they had genuine chemistry together. Farrell/Penguin MVP, look forward to see him chompin' on a cigar.
I described it to a friend as "It's like Dark City and Seven had a one night stand and the basterd came out wearing a cape."


So I have some surface rust on my fuel tank that's really starting to irritate me. The tank is only 3 or 4 years old, so I don't think I should replace it. Anyone painting their tank? What paint are you using? Thanks for input!
Scuff off the surface rust, clean, paint. Color options are Argent, Dull Aluminum, etc.
I used tank tone from Eastwood.


React is a 2 day, single track conference with follow-on tutorials about building reactive applications. Created, curated and delivered by developers at the heart of the reactive programming community, React is your opportunity to share in their experiences and lessons learned in building some of the most complex and demanding software systems.
The conference takes place on the 18th and 19th. The optional follow-on workshops on the 20th and 21st November.
Check out our Twitter account and those of our speakers for discount codes. All see below or simply get in touch at react@reactconf.com.
React is first and foremost a learning conference, focused very much on you the attendee. We will do our best to look after your every need whilst in our company. This includes great food, high quality coffee for the hipsters, light refreshments and so on. Breakfast and lunch is covered both days, as is dinner on day 1 & an open bar during the conference party.
A key part of React is the speaker clinics where you get to chat and ask questions directly to the experts, both during an informal Q&A session and over a beer or glass of wine later. We genuinely want you to feel that this conference is about 2 things: learning more about reactive systems and you.
Please note that the basic conference pass covers the main conference only, 18th-19th November, and not the workshops. These are booked and paid for separately from the main conference. It is entirely possible to attend a workshop without attending the main conference, but obviously we would encourage you to attend both!
We will get in touch after you purchase your workshop ticket to confirm which ones you would like to attend.
Bookings can be cancelled up to two weeks prior to the event, in which case we will refund 50% of the original purchase price. There will be no refunds after this time.
All payment is through Stripe. We are using Tito to manage your booking. When you purchase a ticket you will be redirected through to their website, http://ti.to.
React is entitled to alter the times, dates, itineraries or speakers of the event by notice to you at any time. React will not be liable for any loss or damages arising from such changes.
We're still working on the finer details of React, but do expect things to evolve over the coming weeks/months. We'll keep you updated on any changes. For general enquiries or to pay by invoice please get in touch at react@instil.co.
NONPROFIT (30% off) Nonprofit discount. Please bring proof of full-time employment at a 501(c)(3) nonprofit or equivalent.
ACADEMIC (30% off) Academic discount. Please bring proof of full or part-time academic employment at a licensed academic institution.
GOVERN (30% off) Government discount. Please bring proof of employment with a local, state, or federal government agency.
VETERAN (50% off) Active Military and Veteran Discount. Please bring proof of active or past service.
STUDENT (65% off) Student discount. Please bring proof of full-time enrolment.
We would advise you to take out travel insurance to ensure that you are adequately covered throughout your stay. You should ensure that you have adequate medical, liability, accident and other insurance covers during your trip. You are responsible for your own health and safety throughout the duration of the conference. React declines any liability in this area.


text:
Updated: Tue, Sep 27, 2016, 8:34 am
Uploaded: Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 6:05 pm
Tonight: Woodside council weighs steps to increase voter turnout
by Dave Boyce	/ Almanac
Woodside has a history of low voter turnouts for Town Council elections. On Tuesday, Sept. 27, the council will consider making changes to comply with a 2015 state law intended to increase voter participation.
The meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. in the town's Independence Hall, 2955 Woodside Road.
The council will consider moving elections, now held in odd-numbered years, to even-numbered years, when there are statewide general elections and the turnout is usually higher.
The council's seven members run for election once every four years in sets of three and four. The current terms of Mayor Deborah Gordon, Councilman Dave Tanner and Councilwoman Anne Kasten expire in 2017; terms for councilmen Peter Mason, Tom Livermore, Chris Shaw and Daniel Yost expire in 2019.
The options before the council are:
• Either extend each council member's term by a year, thereby advancing the staggered elections to 2018 and 2020, or restructure the elections in 2017 and 2019 to be for three-year or five-year terms.
• Prepare a plan before Jan. 1, 2018, that would realign council elections with statewide general elections by November 2022. Under this scenario, the council could structure the 2017 elections to be for either three-, four- or five-year terms, the 2019 elections for three- or five-year terms, and the 2021 election for three-year terms.
• Ask the voters in November 2017 to choose between options of shortening council member terms, or lengthening them, by one year. No nearby city, town or other public agency has taken this route, Town Manager Kevin Bryant said, adding that he does not recommend it.
Changes to the election schedule require the approval of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors.
At the Sept. 27 meeting, the council will also consider implementing term limits for council members.
Follow the Almanac on Twitter and Facebook for breaking news, local events and community news.


text:
IMF World Economic Outlook
SHOOT DATE
2.	Wideshot IMF news conference
3.	SOUNDBITE: (English) Gita Gopinath, IMF Head of Research:
"In terms of the divergences, that is one of the main messages of this WEO update, which is that while the global economy in terms of growth is projected at six percent, which is unchanged from April, the composition has changed. We have an upgrade for advanced economies, offset entirely by downgrade for emerging and developing economies. And that is the big concern because it was already diverging and that is exacerbated in this period. It's a reflection of some very big fault lines that are growing, which is one: unequal access to vaccinations. The second is that fiscal support is much easier to maintain in advanced economies, which have easy access to financing. But on the other hand, for many developing countries, it's either already over and they're pulling back. And again, in terms of risks that come with food price inflation, inflation in general, that's leading interest rates. So these are very important divides that are widening."
4.	Midshot cutaway
"Well, just broadly comment on the phenomenon of inflation for emerging markets and developing economies. Well, we are seeing for several of those economies is that because of a combination of factors, including their currency weakening, we are seeing some very high inflation readings. And several of these countries have actually started raising interest rates because of the concern that these inflation pressures could become persistent. And this is a concern. So I would make a distinction between emerging and developing economies and a lot of advanced economies where, again, in advanced economies you are seeing inflationary pressures. But in emerging and developing economies, we are seeing the show up and markets are expecting that interest rates will go up actually much faster than in then in the advanced economies."
6.	Wideshot cutaway
"Our inflation forecast for the US are to have, you know, a high inflation reading this year around four percent, but then by the end of next year, we expect core PC - core personal consumption expenditure inflation to come down to around two and a half percent. So our baseline is very much the case where we expect a lot of the inflation pressures to be transitory and then to return to much more normal ranges next year. In terms of what would be concerning, it would be if the case were if we saw medium term inflation expectations de-anchoring. So if they were moving kind of durably away from the Fed's two percent target and moving away in a way that we haven't seen before, then that would indeed give absolutely, you know, pause for concern, because that would be the sign that what we're seeing right now is no longer transitory, but it could show up in more persistent inflation because it's going to entail wage contracts is going to enter pricing contracts and so on."
9.	B-ROLL: IMF exterior


text:
Less-Lethal Force
Article(5)
Shots Fired: Clackamas County, Oregon, 12/05/2005
Seemingly as insensate to his own pain as that he inflicted on others, Donald Graham also possessed a reputation as a man who backed his words. And no promise meant more to him than the one he'd made his wife that he'd never go back to prison. He'd do what he had to do.
Shots Fired: Gaston County, N.C. 07/06/2009
Shaw tried to deflect the gun with the flashlight in his left hand. But hearing the shot, he jumped back, landing on his backside about seven feet away from Burris.
Do We Still Need Batons?
The Rodney King incident still colors how the public views the use of batons. For that reason and others, some officers are reluctant to use the tool.
The State of American Law Enforcement - Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't
Perhaps nowhere in contemporary American society does the question of the right tool for the right job come into play more often than in matters of police use of force.
In Search of the Star Trek Phaser
When it comes to capturing, subduing, and arresting bad guys, law enforcement currently has four types of less-lethal and less-than-lethal tools: physical restraint such as handcuffs and Ripp Hobble restraints, chemical weapons such as oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray, electrical shock devices such as Tasers, and impact tools such as batons and Asps.


Let me start out by saying that I love your site. The people posting on this site, for the majority, are VERY bright people.
I started out many moons ago, asking the same questions and found similar responses to almost all of my questions. This is why I feel that I now owe in-return.
I must say that you are receiving many posts concerning a course directed toward a networking solution.. Perhaps a new Networking topic is in order. Like I said....just a thought.
Lets face it...many networking hardware manus. are making the SoHo networking solution an "automatic" process. And still even, there are questions, not only from SoHo administrators, but from low-end administrators with an already upscaled knowledge level.
Networking for the Corporation, Office and Home is the future....and the future appears to be now......what do ya say????


text:
Q: Working with multiple parameter packs to convert runtime values into compile template arguments On my first venture into variadic templates I'm trying to create a function that instantiates a derived class with all combinations of template arguments. The idea being to have a runtime options class be able to select the exact template instantiation to use. I've been able to get the base-case to work with 1 and 2 template arguments. But the general case is not working, the third invocation of SelectInstance below fails to compile with the following error:

candidate function not viable: requires 3 arguments, but 2 were provided
  AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func, Args... args)

The complete code is the following:
#include <memory>
#include <iostream>

struct Options
{
  bool GetFirstParameter() { return true; }
  bool GetSecondParameter() { return false; }
  bool GetThirdParameter() { return true; }
};

struct AbstractBase
{
  virtual void PrintMe() = 0;
};

template<class... Args>
struct Derived : public AbstractBase
{
  virtual void PrintMe() { std::cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << std::endl; }
};

template<class... Args>
AbstractBase *SelectInstance()
{
  return new Derived<Args...>();
}

template<class Func, class... UnpackedArgs>
AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func)
{
  if (func())
    return SelectInstance<float, UnpackedArgs...>();
  else
    return SelectInstance<double, UnpackedArgs...>();
}

template<class Func, class... Args, class... UnpackedArgs>
AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func, Args... args)
{
  if (func())
    return SelectInstance<Args...,  float, UnpackedArgs...>(args...);
  else
    return SelectInstance<Args..., double, UnpackedArgs...>(args...);
}

int main()
{
  Options opts;
  std::unique_ptr<AbstractBase> one(
    SelectInstance(
      std::bind(&Options::GetFirstParameter, &opts)
      )
    );
  one->PrintMe();

  std::unique_ptr<AbstractBase> two(
    SelectInstance(
      std::bind(&Options::GetFirstParameter, &opts),
      std::bind(&Options::GetSecondParameter, &opts)
      )
    );
  two->PrintMe();

  // this one fails to compile!
  std::unique_ptr<AbstractBase> three(
    SelectInstance(
      std::bind(&Options::GetFirstParameter, &opts),
      std::bind(&Options::GetSecondParameter, &opts),
      std::bind(&Options::GetThirdParameter, &opts)
      )
    );
  three->PrintMe();
}

I'm probably misusing the variadic templates improperly to convert functors into a new parameter pack. Any guidance is appreciated.

A: The reason your attempt fails is that the compiler can't tell which arguments you're providing for what. Let's say our function types are A, B, and C for simplicity. The initial call is:
// Func = A, Args... = {B, C}, UnpackedArgs... = {}
AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func, Args... args)

From here, we call SelectInstance<Args...,  float, UnpackedArgs...>(args...); Which is to say, SelectInstance<B, C, float>(b, c); You're intending that to mean:
// Func = B, Args... = {C}, UnpackedArgs... = {float}
AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func, Args... args)

but really parameter packs are greedy and take everything. Args... takes every subsequent type argument you explicitly provide. So really that call is interpreted as:
// Func = B, Args... = {C, float}, UnpackedArgs... = {}
AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func, Args... args)

This function takes three arguments (a B, a C, and a float) but you're only passing two (b and c), hence the error.

To fix this, flip the ordering of your template arguments to put the non deduced ones first, and the deduced ones last. This way, you can still use template deduction to do the right thing and even avoid an extra overload:
template<class... Args>
AbstractBase *SelectInstance()
{
  return new Derived<Args...>();
}

template<class... UnpackedArgs, class Func, class... Args>
AbstractBase *SelectInstance(Func func, Args... args)
{
  if (func()) {
    return SelectInstance<float, UnpackedArgs...>(args...);
  }
  else {
    return SelectInstance<double, UnpackedArgs...>(args...);
  }
}

This works because now all the arguments you provide go into UnpackedArgs... and deduction figures out Func and Args... - which is exactly what you want.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


New Zealand's second iconic flightless bird features on this very cool sticker. You have the opportunity to customise with your own individual message. Simply add your wording to the top and bottom text of the stickers.


Welcome to MusicOntario's Member Directory. In this section, you will find an extensive list of Ontario music producers, production companies, music labels, music publishers, publicists, recording studios and more.
All companies listed here are registered MusicOntario members. They enjoy the benefits of belonging to Ontario's leading trade organization representing the country's independent music and sound recording sector. You can browse our members by their business category, or alphabetically, or you can search for a member.
Lone Wolf Under A Blue Moon, Ink.