Either this ad was filmed at the White House, or it was a damn good prop in the background. I don’t know what the bigger joke is. The fact that Obama apparently violated FEC campaign finance laws, or that Obama is trying to get votes by offering to have bite me Joe Biden join them for “dinner with Barack.”
Who knew that it's against the law to film campaign commercials in the White House? Apparently not the Harvard Law Degreed, Constitutional Law expert that currently resides in the White House.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Dick Durbin is a Douche Bag
After using illegal immigrants as props to push the DREAM Act, Sen. Durbin (D-IL) made the following statement at a Senate committee hearing:
"When I look around this room, I see America's future. Our doctors, our teachers, our nurses, our engineers, our scientists, our soldiers, our Congressman, our Senators and maybe our President."
However, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution says: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
I think that from now on, all candidates, for any elected office, should have to pass a test on the Constitution in order to be qualified to hold that office.
"When I look around this room, I see America's future. Our doctors, our teachers, our nurses, our engineers, our scientists, our soldiers, our Congressman, our Senators and maybe our President."
However, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution says: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
I think that from now on, all candidates, for any elected office, should have to pass a test on the Constitution in order to be qualified to hold that office.
CA Taxes Internet - Amazon Says Bye-Bye
Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law California's tax on Internet sales through affiliate advertising which will immediately cut small-business website revenue 20% to 30%, experts say.
The bill, AB 28X, takes effect immediately. The state Board of Equalization says the tax will raise $200 million a year, but critics claim it will raise nothing because online retailers will end their affiliate programs rather than collect the tax.
Amazon has already emailed its termination of its affiliate advertising program with 25,000 websites. The letter says, in part:
(The bill) specifically imposes the collection of taxes from consumers on sales by online retailers - including but not limited to those referred by California-based marketing affiliates like you - even if those retailers have no physical presence in the state.
We oppose this bill because it is unconstitutional and counterproductive. It is supported by big-box retailers, most of which are based outside California, that seek to harm the affiliate advertising programs of their competitors. Similar legislation in other states has led to job and income losses, and little, if any, new tax revenue. We deeply regret that we must take this action. Read More Here
Again statists like Jerry Brown, just don't get it. Taxes are bad for business. Afterall, you can't get blood from a turnip. Amazon has gone Galt.
The bill, AB 28X, takes effect immediately. The state Board of Equalization says the tax will raise $200 million a year, but critics claim it will raise nothing because online retailers will end their affiliate programs rather than collect the tax.
Amazon has already emailed its termination of its affiliate advertising program with 25,000 websites. The letter says, in part:
(The bill) specifically imposes the collection of taxes from consumers on sales by online retailers - including but not limited to those referred by California-based marketing affiliates like you - even if those retailers have no physical presence in the state.
We oppose this bill because it is unconstitutional and counterproductive. It is supported by big-box retailers, most of which are based outside California, that seek to harm the affiliate advertising programs of their competitors. Similar legislation in other states has led to job and income losses, and little, if any, new tax revenue. We deeply regret that we must take this action. Read More Here
Again statists like Jerry Brown, just don't get it. Taxes are bad for business. Afterall, you can't get blood from a turnip. Amazon has gone Galt.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
So, are you a fan of Texas Gov Rick Perry?
I only bring this up because Rick Perry "worked for Al Gore as his campaign manager" .
Interesting that he was a Democrat, now a Republican. Where do you think his allegiances lie? With Big Government Statism, that's where.
It matters not what he says, or which team he runs with. He is a statist, and truth be told, he's an approved globalist.
Interesting that he was a Democrat, now a Republican. Where do you think his allegiances lie? With Big Government Statism, that's where.
It matters not what he says, or which team he runs with. He is a statist, and truth be told, he's an approved globalist.
No You Can't Drill, But I'll Release Oil From The Reserves
"President Barack Obama has chosen a curious moment to release 30 million barrels of oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The president initially justified the release as protection against disruptions in supply caused by the conflict in Libya. Later, the administration changed the explanation, saying Obama hopes to stabilize gasoline prices going into the summer vacation driving season. Libya is an important source of oil. But the fighting there has not had a major impact on supplies. And oil prices have fallen back in recent weeks from their yearly highs. ... As we've said when previous presidents considered using the reserve to influence short-term prices, that's not what the stockpile is there for. The reserve is designed to shield the American economy from dramatic disruptions in the oil supply. Such a major cutoff hasn't happened. Using the reserve to manipulate market prices is a futile enterprise. ... The president's decision to release oil reserves, coming at a time when his approval rating is sinking, opens him to criticism that his re-election campaign is driving his economic and energy decisions. He can claim credit for future declines in gasoline prices that may have occurred naturally. If the priority of the administration is now to keep gasoline cheap, it should also drop its opposition to increased domestic oil production, which would have a larger impact on long-term oil prices than would tapping into the reserve. Likewise, that goal should also inform its current considerations of sharply higher fuel economy standards for the automotive fleet. ... In any case, the release of the oil reserves in response to fluctuations in the market is not sound policy."
The Detroit News
The Detroit News
Inside the Fed’s Vault: $1 Billion Worth of Unused Coins | Moneyland | TIME.com
Inside the Fed’s Vault: $1 Billion Worth of Unused Coins Moneyland TIME.com
Well, if they made them out of something with intrinsic value, like gold or silver, people might want them. These are not any different from paper money, except they are even less convenient.
Well, if they made them out of something with intrinsic value, like gold or silver, people might want them. These are not any different from paper money, except they are even less convenient.
Greek Austerity Vote Passes - Blood In The Streets!
Are the austerity protests and riots happening in Greece right now a glimpse of America's future? The truth is that both nations are absolutely drowning in debt. It is just that the "day of reckoning" has already arrived for Greece but it has not arrived for the United States yet. Yes, there are some important differences between the situation in Greece and the situation in the U.S., but there are also some important similarities. Budget cuts and other austerity measures are being promoted by the political leaders of both countries. Greek citizens have reacted very negatively to the economic austerity programs that have been implemented in that nation. As budget cuts on the federal, state and local levels in the United States start to really become painful, will we eventually see the same kind of austerity riots in this country that we are currently seeing in Greece?
Read More Here
Read More Here
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Dollar is over.
The dollar is over, and since it has no real backing, no gold, no silver, no oil, no military, no industrialised nation producing any real goods, nothing but great bar tending and waitressing jobs riding the wave of housing bubble entrepreneurs paper flow.......well, hate to break it to you, but, we are fucked.
Just look at what Financial Times has to say about the death of the dollar:
The US dollar will lose its status as the global reserve currency over the next 25 years, according to a survey of central bank reserve managers who collectively control more than $8,000Billion.
More than half the managers, who were polled by UBS, predicted that the dollar would be replaced by a portfolio of currencies within the next 25 years.
More
On this story
Euro stabilises in volatile trade
Trading Post Pound’s woes underline fears over UK debt exposure
King at odds with ECB on eurozone crisis
Fed holds rates on inflation concerns
Trading Post Peso vulnerable to US growth concerns
That marks a departure from previous years, when the central bank reserve managers have said the dollar would retain its status as the sole reserve currency.
UBS surveyed more than 80 central bank reserve managers, sovereign wealth funds and multilateral institutions with more than $8,000bn in assets at its annual seminar for sovereign institutions last week. The results were not weighted for assets under management.
The results are the latest sign of dissatisfaction with the dollar as a reserve currency, amid concerns over the US government’s inability to rein in spending and the Federal Reserve’s huge expansion of its balance sheet.
“Right now there is great concern out there around the financial trajectory that the US is on,” said Larry Hatheway, chief economist at UBS.
The US currency has slid 5 per cent so far this year, and is trading close to its lowest ever level against a basket of the world’s major currencies.
Holders of large reserves, most notably China, have been diversifying away from the dollar. In the first four months of this year, three quarters of the $200bn expansion in China’s foreign exchange reserves was invested in non-US dollar assets, Standard Chartered estimates.
The prediction of a multipolar currency world replacing the current dollar dominance chimes with the thinking of some leading policymakers.
Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank, last year proposed a new monetary system involving a number of major global currencies, including the dollar, euro, yen, pound and renminbi.
The system should also make use of gold, Mr Zoellick added. The results of the UBS poll also point to a growing role for bullion, with 6 per cent of reserve managers surveyed saying the biggest change in their reserves over the next decade would be the addition of more gold. In contrast to previous years, none of the managers surveyed was intending to make significant sales of gold in the next decade.
Central banks have bought about 151 tonnes of gold so far this year, led by Russia and Mexico, according to the World Gold Council, and are on track to make their largest annual purchases of bullion since the collapse in 1971 of the Bretton Woods system, which pegged the value of the dollar to gold.
The reserve managers predicted that gold would be the best performing asset class over the next year, citing sovereign defaults as the chief risk to the global economy.
The yellow metal has risen 19.5 per cent in the past year to trade at about $1,500 a troy ounce on Monday, buoyed by the emergence of sovereign debt concerns in the US as well as eurozone debt woes.
Read More Here: FT's Full Article
Just look at what Financial Times has to say about the death of the dollar:
The US dollar will lose its status as the global reserve currency over the next 25 years, according to a survey of central bank reserve managers who collectively control more than $8,000Billion.
More than half the managers, who were polled by UBS, predicted that the dollar would be replaced by a portfolio of currencies within the next 25 years.
More
On this story
Euro stabilises in volatile trade
Trading Post Pound’s woes underline fears over UK debt exposure
King at odds with ECB on eurozone crisis
Fed holds rates on inflation concerns
Trading Post Peso vulnerable to US growth concerns
That marks a departure from previous years, when the central bank reserve managers have said the dollar would retain its status as the sole reserve currency.
UBS surveyed more than 80 central bank reserve managers, sovereign wealth funds and multilateral institutions with more than $8,000bn in assets at its annual seminar for sovereign institutions last week. The results were not weighted for assets under management.
The results are the latest sign of dissatisfaction with the dollar as a reserve currency, amid concerns over the US government’s inability to rein in spending and the Federal Reserve’s huge expansion of its balance sheet.
“Right now there is great concern out there around the financial trajectory that the US is on,” said Larry Hatheway, chief economist at UBS.
The US currency has slid 5 per cent so far this year, and is trading close to its lowest ever level against a basket of the world’s major currencies.
Holders of large reserves, most notably China, have been diversifying away from the dollar. In the first four months of this year, three quarters of the $200bn expansion in China’s foreign exchange reserves was invested in non-US dollar assets, Standard Chartered estimates.
The prediction of a multipolar currency world replacing the current dollar dominance chimes with the thinking of some leading policymakers.
Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank, last year proposed a new monetary system involving a number of major global currencies, including the dollar, euro, yen, pound and renminbi.
The system should also make use of gold, Mr Zoellick added. The results of the UBS poll also point to a growing role for bullion, with 6 per cent of reserve managers surveyed saying the biggest change in their reserves over the next decade would be the addition of more gold. In contrast to previous years, none of the managers surveyed was intending to make significant sales of gold in the next decade.
Central banks have bought about 151 tonnes of gold so far this year, led by Russia and Mexico, according to the World Gold Council, and are on track to make their largest annual purchases of bullion since the collapse in 1971 of the Bretton Woods system, which pegged the value of the dollar to gold.
The reserve managers predicted that gold would be the best performing asset class over the next year, citing sovereign defaults as the chief risk to the global economy.
The yellow metal has risen 19.5 per cent in the past year to trade at about $1,500 a troy ounce on Monday, buoyed by the emergence of sovereign debt concerns in the US as well as eurozone debt woes.
Read More Here: FT's Full Article
TSA - Terminal Statist Agenda
http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/06/27/florida.tsa.incident/index.html
Well of course the TSA will deny it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, actually it reinforces the likelihood of it being true.
Hide everything in plain sight. Deny, Deny, Deny. Eventually, the public will accept it as truth.
Well of course the TSA will deny it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, actually it reinforces the likelihood of it being true.
Hide everything in plain sight. Deny, Deny, Deny. Eventually, the public will accept it as truth.
Blago Guilty - No Kidding!
Typical of the current level of statists in power. yes? Oh, hell yes! Blago needs to rot in prison and take Rahm Emanuel and Barry O with him.
The 20 Counts of Blagojevich NBC Chicago
The 20 Counts of Blagojevich NBC Chicago
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Why is there Hebrew writing on Doraville Police Cars?
This afternoon I saw this Doraville Police Car with "Service and Protection" written on the back of it in Hebrew. What the Fuck?
Don't get me wrong. I'm no anti-semite. I just can't quite figure out why it's in Hebrew, or whom they are actully serving and protecting. A little too New World Orderish for me.
A little digging turned this up on "The Jewish Georgian":
TRAINING LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS IN ISRAEL. Last issue, we told
you about a police car in Doraville with a
bumper sticker in Hebrew saying, “Service
and Protection,” part of a program by Police
Chief John King to have the stickers in
every language spoken by residents of the
city.
Turns out that Chief King visited Israel
last May as the guest of the Georgia
International Law Enforcement Exchange
(GILEE), Dr. Robert Friedmann’s program
that brings law enforcement and security
personnel to Israel for training and briefings
on terrorism and other such problems.
GILEE (www.gilee.org) is a joint project
of Georgia State University and local,
state, federal, and international law enforcement
agencies. Dr. Friedmann reports that
the car of Doraville’s Jewish police officer
is one of two sporting the sticker in Hebrew,
with Dr. Friedmann perhaps being the only
resident conversant in the language.
Dr. Friedmann has seen firsthand how
effective a trip to Israel can be in educating
people, especially law enforcement personnel,
on the needs of the Israelis and the
threats they face. In May and June of this
year, he took a delegation of 17 law
enforcement leaders from Georgia, Florida,
and Tennessee to Israel, where they visited
the Golan Heights.
I don't know about you, but I find the practice of training civil law enforcement officers in the same tactics used by the paramilitary police of Israel a little frightening.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Is the government tracking your every move through Facebook?
Of course not, I think, but....I dunno.
This wouldn't be quite so funny if it weren't for this: Job Screening Agency Archiving All of Facebook
This wouldn't be quite so funny if it weren't for this: Job Screening Agency Archiving All of Facebook
What the "Kinetic Military Action" in Libya is really about.
Before the US House of Representatives, February 15, 2006 - Rep. Ron Paul - (R-TX)
A hundred years ago it was called “dollar diplomacy.” After World War II, and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, that policy evolved into “dollar hegemony.” But after all these many years of great success, our dollar dominance is coming to an end.
It has been said, rightly, that he who holds the gold makes the rules. In earlier times it was readily accepted that fair and honest trade required an exchange for something of real value.
First it was simply barter of goods. Then it was discovered that gold held a universal attraction, and was a convenient substitute for more cumbersome barter transactions. Not only did gold facilitate exchange of goods and services, it served as a store of value for those who wanted to save for a rainy day.
Though money developed naturally in the marketplace, as governments grew in power they assumed monopoly control over money. Sometimes governments succeeded in guaranteeing the quality and purity of gold, but in time governments learned to outspend their revenues. New or higher taxes always incurred the disapproval of the people, so it wasn't long before Kings and Caesars learned how to inflate their currencies by reducing the amount of gold in each coin — always hoping their subjects wouldn't discover the fraud. But the people always did, and they strenuously objected.
This helped pressure leaders to seek more gold by conquering other nations. The people became accustomed to living beyond their means, and enjoyed the circuses and bread. Financing extravagances by conquering foreign lands seemed a logical alternative to working harder and producing more. Besides, conquering nations not only brought home gold, they brought home slaves as well. Taxing the people in conquered territories also provided an incentive to build empires. This system of government worked well for a while, but the moral decline of the people led to an unwillingness to produce for themselves. There was a limit to the number of countries that could be sacked for their wealth, and this always brought empires to an end. When gold no longer could be obtained, their military might crumbled. In those days those who held the gold truly wrote the rules and lived well.
That general rule has held fast throughout the ages. When gold was used, and the rules protected honest commerce, productive nations thrived. Whenever wealthy nations — those with powerful armies and gold — strived only for empire and easy fortunes to support welfare at home, those nations failed.
Today the principles are the same, but the process is quite different. Gold no longer is the currency of the realm; paper is. The truth now is: “He who prints the money makes the rules” — at least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority and control over the monetary printing presses.
Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation's people — just as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.
The pressure at home to inflate the currency comes from the corporate welfare recipients, as well as those who demand handouts as compensation for their needs and perceived injuries by others. In both cases personal responsibility for one's actions is rejected.
When paper money is rejected, or when gold runs out, wealth and political stability are lost. The country then must go from living beyond its means to living beneath its means, until the economic and political systems adjust to the new rules — rules no longer written by those who ran the now defunct printing press.
“Dollar Diplomacy,” a policy instituted by William Howard Taft and his Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, was designed to enhance U.S. commercial investments in Latin America and the Far East. McKinley concocted a war against Spain in 1898, and (Teddy) Roosevelt's corollary to the Monroe Doctrine preceded Taft's aggressive approach to using the U.S. dollar and diplomatic influence to secure U.S. investments abroad. This earned the popular title of “Dollar Diplomacy.” The significance of Roosevelt's change was that our intervention now could be justified by the mere “appearance” that a country of interest to us was politically or fiscally vulnerable to European control. Not only did we claim a right, but even an official U.S. government “obligation” to protect our commercial interests from Europeans.
This new policy came on the heels of the “gunboat” diplomacy of the late 19th century, and it meant we could buy influence before resorting to the threat of force. By the time the “dollar diplomacy” of William Howard Taft was clearly articulated, the seeds of American empire were planted. And they were destined to grow in the fertile political soil of a country that lost its love and respect for the republic bequeathed to us by the authors of the Constitution. And indeed they did. It wasn't too long before dollar “diplomacy” became dollar “hegemony” in the second half of the 20th century.
This transition only could have occurred with a dramatic change in monetary policy and the nature of the dollar itself.
Congress created the Federal Reserve System in 1913. Between then and 1971 the principle of sound money was systematically undermined. Between 1913 and 1971, the Federal Reserve found it much easier to expand the money supply at will for financing war or manipulating the economy with little resistance from Congress — while benefiting the special interests that influence government.
Dollar dominance got a huge boost after World War II. We were spared the destruction that so many other nations suffered, and our coffers were filled with the world's gold. But the world chose not to return to the discipline of the gold standard, and the politicians applauded. Printing money to pay the bills was a lot more popular than taxing or restraining unnecessary spending. In spite of the short-term benefits, imbalances were institutionalized for decades to come.
The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement solidified the dollar as the preeminent world reserve currency, replacing the British pound. Due to our political and military muscle, and because we had a huge amount of physical gold, the world readily accepted our dollar (defined as 1/35th of an ounce of gold) as the world's reserve currency. The dollar was said to be “as good as gold,” and convertible to all foreign central banks at that rate. For American citizens, however, it remained illegal to own. This was a gold-exchange standard that from inception was doomed to fail.
The U.S. did exactly what many predicted she would do. She printed more dollars for which there was no gold backing. But the world was content to accept those dollars for more than 25 years with little question — until the French and others in the late 1960s demanded we fulfill our promise to pay one ounce of gold for each $35 they delivered to the U.S. Treasury. This resulted in a huge gold drain that brought an end to a very poorly devised pseudo-gold standard.
It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.
Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency with no restraints placed on it — not even a pretense of gold convertibility, none whatsoever! Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread.
Realizing the world was embarking on something new and mind-boggling, elite money managers, with especially strong support from U.S. authorities, struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions. This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies and in essence “backed” the dollar with oil. In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup. This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region. The arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength, with tremendous financial benefits for the United States. It allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a great discount as dollar influence flourished.
This post-Bretton Woods system was much more fragile than the system that existed between 1945 and 1971. Though the dollar/oil arrangement was helpful, it was not nearly as stable as the pseudo—gold standard under Bretton Woods. It certainly was less stable than the gold standard of the late 19th century.
During the 1970s the dollar nearly collapsed, as oil prices surged and gold skyrocketed to $800 an ounce. By 1979 interest rates of 21% were required to rescue the system. The pressure on the dollar in the 1970s, in spite of the benefits accrued to it, reflected reckless budget deficits and monetary inflation during the 1960s. The markets were not fooled by LBJ's claim that we could afford both “guns and butter.”
Once again the dollar was rescued, and this ushered in the age of true dollar hegemony lasting from the early 1980s to the present. With tremendous cooperation coming from the central banks and international commercial banks, the dollar was accepted as if it were gold.
Fed Chair Alan Greenspan, on several occasions before the House Banking Committee, answered my challenges to him about his previously held favorable views on gold by claiming that he and other central bankers had gotten paper money — i.e. the dollar system — to respond as if it were gold. Each time I strongly disagreed, and pointed out that if they had achieved such a feat they would have defied centuries of economic history regarding the need for money to be something of real value. He smugly and confidently concurred with this.
In recent years central banks and various financial institutions, all with vested interests in maintaining a workable fiat dollar standard, were not secretive about selling and loaning large amounts of gold to the market even while decreasing gold prices raised serious questions about the wisdom of such a policy. They never admitted to gold price fixing, but the evidence is abundant that they believed if the gold price fell it would convey a sense of confidence to the market, confidence that they indeed had achieved amazing success in turning paper into gold.
Increasing gold prices historically are viewed as an indicator of distrust in paper currency. This recent effort was not a whole lot different than the U.S. Treasury selling gold at $35 an ounce in the 1960s, in an attempt to convince the world the dollar was sound and as good as gold. Even during the Depression, one of Roosevelt's first acts was to remove free market gold pricing as an indication of a flawed monetary system by making it illegal for American citizens to own gold. Economic law eventually limited that effort, as it did in the early 1970s when our Treasury and the IMF tried to fix the price of gold by dumping tons into the market to dampen the enthusiasm of those seeking a safe haven for a falling dollar after gold ownership was re-legalized.
Once again the effort between 1980 and 2000 to fool the market as to the true value of the dollar proved unsuccessful. In the past 5 years the dollar has been devalued in terms of gold by more than 50%. You just can't fool all the people all the time, even with the power of the mighty printing press and money creating system of the Federal Reserve.
Even with all the shortcomings of the fiat monetary system, dollar influence thrived. The results seemed beneficial, but gross distortions built into the system remained. And true to form, Washington politicians are only too anxious to solve the problems cropping up with window dressing, while failing to understand and deal with the underlying flawed policy. Protectionism, fixing exchange rates, punitive tariffs, politically motivated sanctions, corporate subsidies, international trade management, price controls, interest rate and wage controls, super-nationalist sentiments, threats of force, and even war are resorted to — all to solve the problems artificially created by deeply flawed monetary and economic systems.
In the short run, the issuer of a fiat reserve currency can accrue great economic benefits. In the long run, it poses a threat to the country issuing the world currency. In this case that's the United States. As long as foreign countries take our dollars in return for real goods, we come out ahead. This is a benefit many in Congress fail to recognize, as they bash China for maintaining a positive trade balance with us. But this leads to a loss of manufacturing jobs to overseas markets, as we become more dependent on others and less self-sufficient. Foreign countries accumulate our dollars due to their high savings rates, and graciously loan them back to us at low interest rates to finance our excessive consumption.
It sounds like a great deal for everyone, except the time will come when our dollars — due to their depreciation — will be received less enthusiastically or even be rejected by foreign countries. That could create a whole new ballgame and force us to pay a price for living beyond our means and our production. The shift in sentiment regarding the dollar has already started, but the worst is yet to come.
The agreement with OPEC in the 1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the dollar as the preeminent reserve currency. This has created a universal demand for the dollar, and soaks up the huge number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone M3 increased over $700 billion.
The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to “rule” the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is, it can't last.
Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble — generated by easy money — has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world's rejection of the dollar. It's bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979—1980, which required 21% interest rates to correct. But everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime. We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the whole charade going.
Greenspan, in his first speech after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about terrorism, and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many dollars during his tenure. Gold has to be discredited and the dollar propped up. Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the central banks and the IMF surely will do everything conceivable to soak up the dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually they will fail.
Most importantly, the dollar/oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged — as it already has been.
In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein — though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O'Neill.
It now is common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks, to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with no evidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat out misrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein.
There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros. Many believe this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation to wage war. Within a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oil sales were carried out in dollars. The Euro was abandoned.
In 2001, Venezuela's ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales. Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.
After these attempts to nudge the Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world's reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.
It's become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported.
Now, a new attempt is being made against the petrodollar system. Iran, another member of the “axis of evil,” has announced her plans to initiate an oil bourse in March of this year. Guess what, the oil sales will be priced Euros, not dollars.
Most Americans forget how our policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the years. In 1953 the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected president, Mohammed Mossadeqh, and install the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages were seized in 1979. Our alliance with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help matters, and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein. The administration announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the axis of evil didn't do much to improve the diplomatic relationship between our two countries. Recent threats over nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, doesn't seem to register with those who continue to provoke Iran. With what most Muslims perceive as our war against Islam, and this recent history, there's little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar. Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us. But that didn't stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern day Hitler ready to take over the world. Now Iran, especially since she's made plans for pricing oil in Euros, has been on the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before our invasion.
It's not likely that maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against Iraq, nor for agitating against Iran. Though the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein's connection to 9/11, were false. The dollar's importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neo-conservatives to remake the Middle East. Israel's influence, as well as that of the Christian Zionists, likewise played a role in prosecuting this war. Protecting “our” oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.
But the truth is that paying the bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old-fashioned way, with more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people. Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by many of our willing allies. That's not so today. Now, more than ever, the dollar hegemony — it's dominance as the world reserve currency — is required to finance our huge war expenditures. This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for, one way or another. Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.
For the most part the true victims aren't aware of how they pay the bills. The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid through price inflation. American citizens, as well as average citizens of Japan, China, and other countries suffer from price inflation, which represents the “tax” that pays the bills for our military adventures. That is, until the fraud is discovered, and the foreign producers decide not to take dollars nor hold them very long in payment for their goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it. If oil markets replace dollars with Euros, it would in time curtail our ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world's reserve currency.
It is an unbelievable benefit to us to import valuable goods and export depreciating dollars. The exporting countries have become addicted to our purchases for their economic growth. This dependency makes them allies in continuing the fraud, and their participation keeps the dollar's value artificially high. If this system were workable long term, American citizens would never have to work again. We too could enjoy “bread and circuses” just as the Romans did, but their gold finally ran out and the inability of Rome to continue to plunder conquered nations brought an end to her empire.
The same thing will happen to us if we don't change our ways. Though we don't occupy foreign countries to directly plunder, we nevertheless have spread our troops across 130 nations of the world. Our intense effort to spread our power in the oil-rich Middle East is not a coincidence. But unlike the old days, we don't declare direct ownership of the natural resources — we just insist that we can buy what we want and pay for it with our paper money. Any country that challenges our authority does so at great risk.
Once again Congress has bought into the war propaganda against Iran, just as it did against Iraq. Arguments are now made for attacking Iran economically, and militarily if necessary. These arguments are all based on the same false reasons given for the ill-fated and costly occupation of Iraq.
Our whole economic system depends on continuing the current monetary arrangement, which means recycling the dollar is crucial. Currently, we borrow over $700 billion every year from our gracious benefactors, who work hard and take our paper for their goods. Then we borrow all the money we need to secure the empire (DOD budget $450 billion) plus more. The military might we enjoy becomes the “backing” of our currency. There are no other countries that can challenge our military superiority, and therefore they have little choice but to accept the dollars we declare are today's “gold.” This is why countries that challenge the system — like Iraq, Iran and Venezuela — become targets of our plans for regime change.
Ironically, dollar superiority depends on our strong military, and our strong military depends on the dollar. As long as foreign recipients take our dollars for real goods and are willing to finance our extravagant consumption and militarism, the status quo will continue regardless of how huge our foreign debt and current account deficit become.
But real threats come from our political adversaries who are incapable of confronting us militarily, yet are not bashful about confronting us economically. That's why we see the new challenge from Iran being taken so seriously. The urgent arguments about Iran posing a military threat to the security of the United States are no more plausible than the false charges levied against Iraq. Yet there is no effort to resist this march to confrontation by those who grandstand for political reasons against the Iraq war.
It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It's only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.
The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.
But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.
Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.
And once again there's this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.
Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.
The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better.
And how that relates to Lybia:
A hundred years ago it was called “dollar diplomacy.” After World War II, and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, that policy evolved into “dollar hegemony.” But after all these many years of great success, our dollar dominance is coming to an end.
It has been said, rightly, that he who holds the gold makes the rules. In earlier times it was readily accepted that fair and honest trade required an exchange for something of real value.
First it was simply barter of goods. Then it was discovered that gold held a universal attraction, and was a convenient substitute for more cumbersome barter transactions. Not only did gold facilitate exchange of goods and services, it served as a store of value for those who wanted to save for a rainy day.
Though money developed naturally in the marketplace, as governments grew in power they assumed monopoly control over money. Sometimes governments succeeded in guaranteeing the quality and purity of gold, but in time governments learned to outspend their revenues. New or higher taxes always incurred the disapproval of the people, so it wasn't long before Kings and Caesars learned how to inflate their currencies by reducing the amount of gold in each coin — always hoping their subjects wouldn't discover the fraud. But the people always did, and they strenuously objected.
This helped pressure leaders to seek more gold by conquering other nations. The people became accustomed to living beyond their means, and enjoyed the circuses and bread. Financing extravagances by conquering foreign lands seemed a logical alternative to working harder and producing more. Besides, conquering nations not only brought home gold, they brought home slaves as well. Taxing the people in conquered territories also provided an incentive to build empires. This system of government worked well for a while, but the moral decline of the people led to an unwillingness to produce for themselves. There was a limit to the number of countries that could be sacked for their wealth, and this always brought empires to an end. When gold no longer could be obtained, their military might crumbled. In those days those who held the gold truly wrote the rules and lived well.
That general rule has held fast throughout the ages. When gold was used, and the rules protected honest commerce, productive nations thrived. Whenever wealthy nations — those with powerful armies and gold — strived only for empire and easy fortunes to support welfare at home, those nations failed.
Today the principles are the same, but the process is quite different. Gold no longer is the currency of the realm; paper is. The truth now is: “He who prints the money makes the rules” — at least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority and control over the monetary printing presses.
Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation's people — just as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.
The pressure at home to inflate the currency comes from the corporate welfare recipients, as well as those who demand handouts as compensation for their needs and perceived injuries by others. In both cases personal responsibility for one's actions is rejected.
When paper money is rejected, or when gold runs out, wealth and political stability are lost. The country then must go from living beyond its means to living beneath its means, until the economic and political systems adjust to the new rules — rules no longer written by those who ran the now defunct printing press.
“Dollar Diplomacy,” a policy instituted by William Howard Taft and his Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, was designed to enhance U.S. commercial investments in Latin America and the Far East. McKinley concocted a war against Spain in 1898, and (Teddy) Roosevelt's corollary to the Monroe Doctrine preceded Taft's aggressive approach to using the U.S. dollar and diplomatic influence to secure U.S. investments abroad. This earned the popular title of “Dollar Diplomacy.” The significance of Roosevelt's change was that our intervention now could be justified by the mere “appearance” that a country of interest to us was politically or fiscally vulnerable to European control. Not only did we claim a right, but even an official U.S. government “obligation” to protect our commercial interests from Europeans.
This new policy came on the heels of the “gunboat” diplomacy of the late 19th century, and it meant we could buy influence before resorting to the threat of force. By the time the “dollar diplomacy” of William Howard Taft was clearly articulated, the seeds of American empire were planted. And they were destined to grow in the fertile political soil of a country that lost its love and respect for the republic bequeathed to us by the authors of the Constitution. And indeed they did. It wasn't too long before dollar “diplomacy” became dollar “hegemony” in the second half of the 20th century.
This transition only could have occurred with a dramatic change in monetary policy and the nature of the dollar itself.
Congress created the Federal Reserve System in 1913. Between then and 1971 the principle of sound money was systematically undermined. Between 1913 and 1971, the Federal Reserve found it much easier to expand the money supply at will for financing war or manipulating the economy with little resistance from Congress — while benefiting the special interests that influence government.
Dollar dominance got a huge boost after World War II. We were spared the destruction that so many other nations suffered, and our coffers were filled with the world's gold. But the world chose not to return to the discipline of the gold standard, and the politicians applauded. Printing money to pay the bills was a lot more popular than taxing or restraining unnecessary spending. In spite of the short-term benefits, imbalances were institutionalized for decades to come.
The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement solidified the dollar as the preeminent world reserve currency, replacing the British pound. Due to our political and military muscle, and because we had a huge amount of physical gold, the world readily accepted our dollar (defined as 1/35th of an ounce of gold) as the world's reserve currency. The dollar was said to be “as good as gold,” and convertible to all foreign central banks at that rate. For American citizens, however, it remained illegal to own. This was a gold-exchange standard that from inception was doomed to fail.
The U.S. did exactly what many predicted she would do. She printed more dollars for which there was no gold backing. But the world was content to accept those dollars for more than 25 years with little question — until the French and others in the late 1960s demanded we fulfill our promise to pay one ounce of gold for each $35 they delivered to the U.S. Treasury. This resulted in a huge gold drain that brought an end to a very poorly devised pseudo-gold standard.
It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.
Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency with no restraints placed on it — not even a pretense of gold convertibility, none whatsoever! Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread.
Realizing the world was embarking on something new and mind-boggling, elite money managers, with especially strong support from U.S. authorities, struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions. This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies and in essence “backed” the dollar with oil. In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup. This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region. The arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength, with tremendous financial benefits for the United States. It allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a great discount as dollar influence flourished.
This post-Bretton Woods system was much more fragile than the system that existed between 1945 and 1971. Though the dollar/oil arrangement was helpful, it was not nearly as stable as the pseudo—gold standard under Bretton Woods. It certainly was less stable than the gold standard of the late 19th century.
During the 1970s the dollar nearly collapsed, as oil prices surged and gold skyrocketed to $800 an ounce. By 1979 interest rates of 21% were required to rescue the system. The pressure on the dollar in the 1970s, in spite of the benefits accrued to it, reflected reckless budget deficits and monetary inflation during the 1960s. The markets were not fooled by LBJ's claim that we could afford both “guns and butter.”
Once again the dollar was rescued, and this ushered in the age of true dollar hegemony lasting from the early 1980s to the present. With tremendous cooperation coming from the central banks and international commercial banks, the dollar was accepted as if it were gold.
Fed Chair Alan Greenspan, on several occasions before the House Banking Committee, answered my challenges to him about his previously held favorable views on gold by claiming that he and other central bankers had gotten paper money — i.e. the dollar system — to respond as if it were gold. Each time I strongly disagreed, and pointed out that if they had achieved such a feat they would have defied centuries of economic history regarding the need for money to be something of real value. He smugly and confidently concurred with this.
In recent years central banks and various financial institutions, all with vested interests in maintaining a workable fiat dollar standard, were not secretive about selling and loaning large amounts of gold to the market even while decreasing gold prices raised serious questions about the wisdom of such a policy. They never admitted to gold price fixing, but the evidence is abundant that they believed if the gold price fell it would convey a sense of confidence to the market, confidence that they indeed had achieved amazing success in turning paper into gold.
Increasing gold prices historically are viewed as an indicator of distrust in paper currency. This recent effort was not a whole lot different than the U.S. Treasury selling gold at $35 an ounce in the 1960s, in an attempt to convince the world the dollar was sound and as good as gold. Even during the Depression, one of Roosevelt's first acts was to remove free market gold pricing as an indication of a flawed monetary system by making it illegal for American citizens to own gold. Economic law eventually limited that effort, as it did in the early 1970s when our Treasury and the IMF tried to fix the price of gold by dumping tons into the market to dampen the enthusiasm of those seeking a safe haven for a falling dollar after gold ownership was re-legalized.
Once again the effort between 1980 and 2000 to fool the market as to the true value of the dollar proved unsuccessful. In the past 5 years the dollar has been devalued in terms of gold by more than 50%. You just can't fool all the people all the time, even with the power of the mighty printing press and money creating system of the Federal Reserve.
Even with all the shortcomings of the fiat monetary system, dollar influence thrived. The results seemed beneficial, but gross distortions built into the system remained. And true to form, Washington politicians are only too anxious to solve the problems cropping up with window dressing, while failing to understand and deal with the underlying flawed policy. Protectionism, fixing exchange rates, punitive tariffs, politically motivated sanctions, corporate subsidies, international trade management, price controls, interest rate and wage controls, super-nationalist sentiments, threats of force, and even war are resorted to — all to solve the problems artificially created by deeply flawed monetary and economic systems.
In the short run, the issuer of a fiat reserve currency can accrue great economic benefits. In the long run, it poses a threat to the country issuing the world currency. In this case that's the United States. As long as foreign countries take our dollars in return for real goods, we come out ahead. This is a benefit many in Congress fail to recognize, as they bash China for maintaining a positive trade balance with us. But this leads to a loss of manufacturing jobs to overseas markets, as we become more dependent on others and less self-sufficient. Foreign countries accumulate our dollars due to their high savings rates, and graciously loan them back to us at low interest rates to finance our excessive consumption.
It sounds like a great deal for everyone, except the time will come when our dollars — due to their depreciation — will be received less enthusiastically or even be rejected by foreign countries. That could create a whole new ballgame and force us to pay a price for living beyond our means and our production. The shift in sentiment regarding the dollar has already started, but the worst is yet to come.
The agreement with OPEC in the 1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the dollar as the preeminent reserve currency. This has created a universal demand for the dollar, and soaks up the huge number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone M3 increased over $700 billion.
The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to “rule” the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is, it can't last.
Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble — generated by easy money — has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world's rejection of the dollar. It's bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979—1980, which required 21% interest rates to correct. But everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime. We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the whole charade going.
Greenspan, in his first speech after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about terrorism, and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many dollars during his tenure. Gold has to be discredited and the dollar propped up. Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the central banks and the IMF surely will do everything conceivable to soak up the dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually they will fail.
Most importantly, the dollar/oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged — as it already has been.
In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein — though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O'Neill.
It now is common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks, to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with no evidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat out misrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein.
There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros. Many believe this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation to wage war. Within a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oil sales were carried out in dollars. The Euro was abandoned.
In 2001, Venezuela's ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales. Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.
After these attempts to nudge the Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world's reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.
It's become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported.
Now, a new attempt is being made against the petrodollar system. Iran, another member of the “axis of evil,” has announced her plans to initiate an oil bourse in March of this year. Guess what, the oil sales will be priced Euros, not dollars.
Most Americans forget how our policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the years. In 1953 the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected president, Mohammed Mossadeqh, and install the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages were seized in 1979. Our alliance with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help matters, and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein. The administration announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the axis of evil didn't do much to improve the diplomatic relationship between our two countries. Recent threats over nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, doesn't seem to register with those who continue to provoke Iran. With what most Muslims perceive as our war against Islam, and this recent history, there's little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar. Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us. But that didn't stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern day Hitler ready to take over the world. Now Iran, especially since she's made plans for pricing oil in Euros, has been on the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before our invasion.
It's not likely that maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against Iraq, nor for agitating against Iran. Though the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein's connection to 9/11, were false. The dollar's importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neo-conservatives to remake the Middle East. Israel's influence, as well as that of the Christian Zionists, likewise played a role in prosecuting this war. Protecting “our” oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.
But the truth is that paying the bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old-fashioned way, with more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people. Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by many of our willing allies. That's not so today. Now, more than ever, the dollar hegemony — it's dominance as the world reserve currency — is required to finance our huge war expenditures. This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for, one way or another. Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.
For the most part the true victims aren't aware of how they pay the bills. The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid through price inflation. American citizens, as well as average citizens of Japan, China, and other countries suffer from price inflation, which represents the “tax” that pays the bills for our military adventures. That is, until the fraud is discovered, and the foreign producers decide not to take dollars nor hold them very long in payment for their goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it. If oil markets replace dollars with Euros, it would in time curtail our ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world's reserve currency.
It is an unbelievable benefit to us to import valuable goods and export depreciating dollars. The exporting countries have become addicted to our purchases for their economic growth. This dependency makes them allies in continuing the fraud, and their participation keeps the dollar's value artificially high. If this system were workable long term, American citizens would never have to work again. We too could enjoy “bread and circuses” just as the Romans did, but their gold finally ran out and the inability of Rome to continue to plunder conquered nations brought an end to her empire.
The same thing will happen to us if we don't change our ways. Though we don't occupy foreign countries to directly plunder, we nevertheless have spread our troops across 130 nations of the world. Our intense effort to spread our power in the oil-rich Middle East is not a coincidence. But unlike the old days, we don't declare direct ownership of the natural resources — we just insist that we can buy what we want and pay for it with our paper money. Any country that challenges our authority does so at great risk.
Once again Congress has bought into the war propaganda against Iran, just as it did against Iraq. Arguments are now made for attacking Iran economically, and militarily if necessary. These arguments are all based on the same false reasons given for the ill-fated and costly occupation of Iraq.
Our whole economic system depends on continuing the current monetary arrangement, which means recycling the dollar is crucial. Currently, we borrow over $700 billion every year from our gracious benefactors, who work hard and take our paper for their goods. Then we borrow all the money we need to secure the empire (DOD budget $450 billion) plus more. The military might we enjoy becomes the “backing” of our currency. There are no other countries that can challenge our military superiority, and therefore they have little choice but to accept the dollars we declare are today's “gold.” This is why countries that challenge the system — like Iraq, Iran and Venezuela — become targets of our plans for regime change.
Ironically, dollar superiority depends on our strong military, and our strong military depends on the dollar. As long as foreign recipients take our dollars for real goods and are willing to finance our extravagant consumption and militarism, the status quo will continue regardless of how huge our foreign debt and current account deficit become.
But real threats come from our political adversaries who are incapable of confronting us militarily, yet are not bashful about confronting us economically. That's why we see the new challenge from Iran being taken so seriously. The urgent arguments about Iran posing a military threat to the security of the United States are no more plausible than the false charges levied against Iraq. Yet there is no effort to resist this march to confrontation by those who grandstand for political reasons against the Iraq war.
It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It's only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.
The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.
But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.
Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.
And once again there's this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.
Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.
The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better.
And how that relates to Lybia:
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Nanny State Alert!!!!! Seattle Requires Life Vest For All Swimmers
Are you freaking kidding me?
Talk about being over run by pussies and nanny staters!
King Co. requires life vests for swimmers, floaters
By CHRIS GRYGIEL, SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF
People who hope to beat the summer heat by swimming, floating or boating on rivers in King County must wear a life vest or face an $86 fine.
A divided County Council on Monday passed a personal flotation device ordinance by a five to four vote. Opponents said it was an intrusive move by "big government."
"This Council sometimes thinks it's everybody's mom," said Councilwoman Kathy Lambert, who voted "no."
Supporters said the new rule will save lives.
The law appears to be the first of its kind in the state. Staff with the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington said Kitsap and Clark counties had rules about people wearing life vests while on sail boards, water scooters and other water craft, but it didn't appear any other county required swimmers to wear the devices.
Voting "yes" were Councilmembers Larry Phillips, Joe McDermott, Bob Ferguson, Julia Patterson and Larry Gossett. Voting "no" were Lambert, Reagan Dunn, Pete von Reichbauer and Jane Hague.
County Executive Dow Constantine and Sheriff Sue Rahr supported the measure put forward by Councilmembers Phillips and McDermott. The new rule will be in effect until Oct. 1. Violators would first get a warning.
The new rule was prompted by safety concerns because excessive mountain snowpack could make area waterways particularly dangerous this summer.
"We are looking at a potentially deadly situation," Phillips said.
Authorities say there were 17 drowning deaths on major county rivers between 2005 and 2009.
Opponents who spoke before the Council said sheriff's deputies had better things to do than to write tickets for people on waterways and would be better off focusing on people engaging in dangerous behavior.
Thomas O'Keefe of the advocacy group American Whitewater testified in favor of the ordinance, but did have some concerns. He said other jurisdictions have focused on education rather than enforcement. He said the rule's impact should be studied and not automatically renewed in 2012.
"There are other approaches," he said. "Let's look at all the options."
Von Reichbauer worried that the ordinance was the wrong approach and would require too much of water safety officers that are already stretched thin.
Current state law requires that kids 12 and under must wear a live vest when on a boat that is less than 19 feet long. The new county law says everybody must wear the vests when they are on rivers that include the South, Middle and North Fork and main stem of the Snoqualmie River, the South Fork of the Skykomish, the Tolt River, the Raging River, the Sammamish River, the Cedar River, the White River and the Green River.
It applies to people intertubing, rafting, using a surfboard, canoe or kayak. Swimmers or people wading more than 5 feet from shore or in water more than 4 feet deep would also have to wear life vests. The new ordinance does not apply to people at designated public beaches or for people who are skin diving.
Dunn said the language was perhaps too specific and might require anglers to wear live vests if they waded too far into the river.
"I want to flag that as an issue," he said.
An amendment exempting adults who are fishing was passed.
Dunn also questioned whether it made sense to require intertubers to wear a life jacket because the tube itself is buoyant.
"Are we in redundant territory here?" he asked.
A sheriff's department representative said often tubers are unable to get back to the device they're riding when they fall off.
Dunn said he voted "no" on the ordinance because it was "too much of a blanket approach" and he worried it would eventually be expanded.
"I think it's the beginning of the era of life jackets in King County," he said.
Councilwoman Julia Patterson, a "yes" vote, said the same arguements Dunn made agains the life vest ordinance were also made against laws requiring child safety seats in automobiles and banning smoking in public places.
"We are improving the health for everyone because of these laws that we pass," she said.
Read more:
Talk about being over run by pussies and nanny staters!
King Co. requires life vests for swimmers, floaters
By CHRIS GRYGIEL, SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF
People who hope to beat the summer heat by swimming, floating or boating on rivers in King County must wear a life vest or face an $86 fine.
A divided County Council on Monday passed a personal flotation device ordinance by a five to four vote. Opponents said it was an intrusive move by "big government."
"This Council sometimes thinks it's everybody's mom," said Councilwoman Kathy Lambert, who voted "no."
Supporters said the new rule will save lives.
The law appears to be the first of its kind in the state. Staff with the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington said Kitsap and Clark counties had rules about people wearing life vests while on sail boards, water scooters and other water craft, but it didn't appear any other county required swimmers to wear the devices.
Voting "yes" were Councilmembers Larry Phillips, Joe McDermott, Bob Ferguson, Julia Patterson and Larry Gossett. Voting "no" were Lambert, Reagan Dunn, Pete von Reichbauer and Jane Hague.
County Executive Dow Constantine and Sheriff Sue Rahr supported the measure put forward by Councilmembers Phillips and McDermott. The new rule will be in effect until Oct. 1. Violators would first get a warning.
The new rule was prompted by safety concerns because excessive mountain snowpack could make area waterways particularly dangerous this summer.
"We are looking at a potentially deadly situation," Phillips said.
Authorities say there were 17 drowning deaths on major county rivers between 2005 and 2009.
Opponents who spoke before the Council said sheriff's deputies had better things to do than to write tickets for people on waterways and would be better off focusing on people engaging in dangerous behavior.
Thomas O'Keefe of the advocacy group American Whitewater testified in favor of the ordinance, but did have some concerns. He said other jurisdictions have focused on education rather than enforcement. He said the rule's impact should be studied and not automatically renewed in 2012.
"There are other approaches," he said. "Let's look at all the options."
Von Reichbauer worried that the ordinance was the wrong approach and would require too much of water safety officers that are already stretched thin.
Current state law requires that kids 12 and under must wear a live vest when on a boat that is less than 19 feet long. The new county law says everybody must wear the vests when they are on rivers that include the South, Middle and North Fork and main stem of the Snoqualmie River, the South Fork of the Skykomish, the Tolt River, the Raging River, the Sammamish River, the Cedar River, the White River and the Green River.
It applies to people intertubing, rafting, using a surfboard, canoe or kayak. Swimmers or people wading more than 5 feet from shore or in water more than 4 feet deep would also have to wear life vests. The new ordinance does not apply to people at designated public beaches or for people who are skin diving.
Dunn said the language was perhaps too specific and might require anglers to wear live vests if they waded too far into the river.
"I want to flag that as an issue," he said.
An amendment exempting adults who are fishing was passed.
Dunn also questioned whether it made sense to require intertubers to wear a life jacket because the tube itself is buoyant.
"Are we in redundant territory here?" he asked.
A sheriff's department representative said often tubers are unable to get back to the device they're riding when they fall off.
Dunn said he voted "no" on the ordinance because it was "too much of a blanket approach" and he worried it would eventually be expanded.
"I think it's the beginning of the era of life jackets in King County," he said.
Councilwoman Julia Patterson, a "yes" vote, said the same arguements Dunn made agains the life vest ordinance were also made against laws requiring child safety seats in automobiles and banning smoking in public places.
"We are improving the health for everyone because of these laws that we pass," she said.
Read more:
Sunday, June 19, 2011
The Deck Is Stacked
Here are some of the reasons why defeating Barack Obama in the 2012 election will be very difficut, but not impossible. We will have to educate enough people to the cause of Liberty to defeat him, and it's not going to be easy.
Let's get to work!
1) Blacks will vote for Obama blindly. Period. Doesn't matter what he does. It's a race thing. He's one of us, will be their mantra.
2) College educated women will vote for Obama. Though they will be offended by this, they swoon at his oratory. It's really not more complex than that.
3) Liberals will vote for Obama. He is their great hope.
4) Democrats will vote for Obama. He is the leader of their party and his coat tails will carry them to victory nationwide. Of course after the midterms, that might not be so certain.
5) Hispanics will vote for Obama. He is the path to citizenship for those who are illegal and Hispanic leaders recognize the political clout they carry in the Democratic Party.
6) Union members will vote overwhelmingly for Obama. He is their key to money and power in business, state and local politics.
7) Big Business will support Obama. They already have. He has almost $1 Billion dollars in his reelection purse gained largely from his connections with Big Business and is gaining more everyday. Big Business loves Obama because he gives them access to taxpayer money so long as they support his social and political agenda.
8) The media love him. They may attack the people who work for him, but they love him. After all, to not love him would be racist.
9) Most other minorities and special interest groups will vote for him. Oddly, the overwhelming majority of Jews and Muslims will support him because they won't vote Republican. American Indians will support him. Obviously homosexuals tend to vote Democratic. And lastly,
10) Approximately half of independents will vote for Obama. And he doesn't need anywhere near that number because he has all of the groups previously mentioned. The President will win an overwhelming victory in 2012.
Number of States won by: Obama:19 McCain: 29
Square miles of land won by: Obama:580,000 McCain: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Obama:127million McCain: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1
"In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Let's get to work!
1) Blacks will vote for Obama blindly. Period. Doesn't matter what he does. It's a race thing. He's one of us, will be their mantra.
2) College educated women will vote for Obama. Though they will be offended by this, they swoon at his oratory. It's really not more complex than that.
3) Liberals will vote for Obama. He is their great hope.
4) Democrats will vote for Obama. He is the leader of their party and his coat tails will carry them to victory nationwide. Of course after the midterms, that might not be so certain.
5) Hispanics will vote for Obama. He is the path to citizenship for those who are illegal and Hispanic leaders recognize the political clout they carry in the Democratic Party.
6) Union members will vote overwhelmingly for Obama. He is their key to money and power in business, state and local politics.
7) Big Business will support Obama. They already have. He has almost $1 Billion dollars in his reelection purse gained largely from his connections with Big Business and is gaining more everyday. Big Business loves Obama because he gives them access to taxpayer money so long as they support his social and political agenda.
8) The media love him. They may attack the people who work for him, but they love him. After all, to not love him would be racist.
9) Most other minorities and special interest groups will vote for him. Oddly, the overwhelming majority of Jews and Muslims will support him because they won't vote Republican. American Indians will support him. Obviously homosexuals tend to vote Democratic. And lastly,
10) Approximately half of independents will vote for Obama. And he doesn't need anywhere near that number because he has all of the groups previously mentioned. The President will win an overwhelming victory in 2012.
Number of States won by: Obama:19 McCain: 29
Square miles of land won by: Obama:580,000 McCain: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Obama:127million McCain: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1
"In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
An Amazing Historic President
During the run up to the 2008 Presidential Election, my wife and I (Fiscal Conservative Libertarians) were having drinks with some very Liberal friends of ours, who happen to be art dealers. We are art collectors, so it's a mutually benificial relationship. We were discussing the upcoming vote and I expressed a desire to have a conservative in the White House. I was amazed at how emphatically our friends fought me on my positions and supported Obama.
One of our friends, who I will call Mr. Dem to help protect his identity, with great zeal, said, and I quote, "We have a chance to be part of something Historic in voting for Obama!"
Well, Mr. Dem, you were spot on with being Historic. Let's hope history will forgive the arogance and ignorance of the people that elected this "Historic" President.
Thanks to Doug Ross for collecting some of those "Historic" moments:
"Yes, he's historic, alright.
• First President to Violate the War Powers Act
• First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels
• First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
• First President to Defy a Federal Judge's Court Order to Cease Implementing the 'Health Care Reform' Law
• First President to Require All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party
• First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs
• First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters
• First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees
• First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places
• First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It
• First President to Threaten Insurance Companies if they Publicly Speak out on the Reasons for their Rate Increases
• First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory
• First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago
• First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case
• First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts
• First President to Golf 73 Separate Times in His First Two-and-a-Half Years in Office
But remember: he will not rest until all Americans have jobs, affordable homes, green-energy vehicles, and the environment is repaired, etc., etc., etc."
Still feeling all hopey - changey - historic? Still happy with your vote?
Big Ole Hat Tip to Doug Ross
One of our friends, who I will call Mr. Dem to help protect his identity, with great zeal, said, and I quote, "We have a chance to be part of something Historic in voting for Obama!"
Well, Mr. Dem, you were spot on with being Historic. Let's hope history will forgive the arogance and ignorance of the people that elected this "Historic" President.
Thanks to Doug Ross for collecting some of those "Historic" moments:
"Yes, he's historic, alright.
• First President to Violate the War Powers Act
• First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels
• First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
• First President to Defy a Federal Judge's Court Order to Cease Implementing the 'Health Care Reform' Law
• First President to Require All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party
• First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs
• First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters
• First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees
• First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places
• First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It
• First President to Threaten Insurance Companies if they Publicly Speak out on the Reasons for their Rate Increases
• First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory
• First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago
• First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case
• First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts
• First President to Golf 73 Separate Times in His First Two-and-a-Half Years in Office
But remember: he will not rest until all Americans have jobs, affordable homes, green-energy vehicles, and the environment is repaired, etc., etc., etc."
Still feeling all hopey - changey - historic? Still happy with your vote?
Big Ole Hat Tip to Doug Ross
Thursday, June 16, 2011
South Carolina Boeing Employee Hits Machinist Union with Federal Charge for Illegal Retaliation
Washington, DC (June 15, 2011) – A Charleston-area Boeing Corporation (NYSE: BA) employee has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against the union behind the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) high-profile case against Boeing. The employee filed the charge with the NLRB regional office in Wilmington, North Carolina on Wednesday with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.
The charge is in response to the International Association of Machinists (IAM) union and its Local 751 abusing federal labor policy – which is supposedly intended to help workers protect their rights – to bully Boeing for locating a new production line for 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, partly because South Carolina is a Right to Work state.
The charge spells out how IAM union bosses are retaliating against the South Carolina employees by abusing the legal process to attempt to eliminate the jobs of over 1,000 Boeing employees in the Charleston area after the workers at the Dreamliner plant expelled the IAM from their workplace before the production line was located there.
The IAM Local 751 union's charges – which spurred NLRB Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon to file a complaint against Boeing – would eliminate over 1,000 existing jobs in South Carolina if successful, not to mention several thousand more jobs that would be created once the Boeing plant reaches full production capacity.
The workers in Boeing's South Carolina plant booted IAM union bosses from their plant to help attract the Dreamliner production, as the workers did not want union bosses interfering with their job prospects. The charge against the union points out that if the IAM union hierarchy still had a presence in the South Carolina plant, then the South Carolina workers' jobs would not be at risk.
"Workers should be free to choose whether or not to affiliate with a union and not have to worry about their jobs as a result," said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. "National Right to Work is proud to stand with the courageous employees as they fight to save their jobs and prevent the devastating effects the IAM union bosses’ and the NLRB's actions will have on their community and workers across the country."
National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed the charge for Boeing employee Dennis Murray, who led the effort to remove the union from the Charleston plant. Foundation attorneys also represent Murray; Cynthia Ramaker, the former president of the IAM local union which was removed from the plant; and employee Meredith Going, Sr. with a motion to intervene in the NLRB's case against Boeing. The employees' motion is currently pending appeal with the NLRB in Washington, D.C.
For more information, visit http://www.nrtw.org/boeing.
The charge is in response to the International Association of Machinists (IAM) union and its Local 751 abusing federal labor policy – which is supposedly intended to help workers protect their rights – to bully Boeing for locating a new production line for 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, partly because South Carolina is a Right to Work state.
The charge spells out how IAM union bosses are retaliating against the South Carolina employees by abusing the legal process to attempt to eliminate the jobs of over 1,000 Boeing employees in the Charleston area after the workers at the Dreamliner plant expelled the IAM from their workplace before the production line was located there.
The IAM Local 751 union's charges – which spurred NLRB Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon to file a complaint against Boeing – would eliminate over 1,000 existing jobs in South Carolina if successful, not to mention several thousand more jobs that would be created once the Boeing plant reaches full production capacity.
The workers in Boeing's South Carolina plant booted IAM union bosses from their plant to help attract the Dreamliner production, as the workers did not want union bosses interfering with their job prospects. The charge against the union points out that if the IAM union hierarchy still had a presence in the South Carolina plant, then the South Carolina workers' jobs would not be at risk.
"Workers should be free to choose whether or not to affiliate with a union and not have to worry about their jobs as a result," said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. "National Right to Work is proud to stand with the courageous employees as they fight to save their jobs and prevent the devastating effects the IAM union bosses’ and the NLRB's actions will have on their community and workers across the country."
National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed the charge for Boeing employee Dennis Murray, who led the effort to remove the union from the Charleston plant. Foundation attorneys also represent Murray; Cynthia Ramaker, the former president of the IAM local union which was removed from the plant; and employee Meredith Going, Sr. with a motion to intervene in the NLRB's case against Boeing. The employees' motion is currently pending appeal with the NLRB in Washington, D.C.
For more information, visit http://www.nrtw.org/boeing.
Today's government vs The Founders
Our country was built upon ideals such as those espoused by Thomas Jefferson, who said:
“A wise and frugal government….shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government” And today's government is formed by men that would rearrange that statement more like this:
"An ignorant and profilgate government .....shall free men to injure one another with assistance from a burgeoning legal system, shall restrict the liberty of their own profitable endeavours and attempts to improve upon the lives of others..., and will take, by force, from the mouths of the laborers, the bread and the fruits of those labors and redistribute them to those who will not nor cannot do for themselves and provide a meager subservient existance for the same. This is the sum of current government." - Doug Harman
“A wise and frugal government….shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government” And today's government is formed by men that would rearrange that statement more like this:
"An ignorant and profilgate government .....shall free men to injure one another with assistance from a burgeoning legal system, shall restrict the liberty of their own profitable endeavours and attempts to improve upon the lives of others..., and will take, by force, from the mouths of the laborers, the bread and the fruits of those labors and redistribute them to those who will not nor cannot do for themselves and provide a meager subservient existance for the same. This is the sum of current government." - Doug Harman
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Why Sue? Why wouldn't you Impeach?
Why would a group of law makers sue President Obama over the legality of the war in Libya?
As was reported in Politico:
"A bipartisan group of House members announced on Wednesday that it is filing a lawsuit charging that President Obama made an illegal end-run around Congress when he approved U.S military action against Libya.
“With regard to the war in Libya, we believe that the law was violated. We have asked the courts to move to protect the American people from the results of these illegal policies,” said Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), who led the 10-member anti-war coalition with Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.)The White House is expected on Wednesday to deliver to Congress a much-anticipated report detailing military activity in Libya.
According to Kucinich, the suit will challenge the Obama administration’s “circumvention of Congress and its use of international organizations such as the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to authorize the use of military force abroad.”"
Honestly, there is already a legal mechanism in place to deal with this sort of thing. Since President Obama is clearly in violation of not only Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution of These United States of America, and the War Powers Resolution of 1972, all that needs to be done is file Articles of Impeachment for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
I asked my representative, Congressman Paul Broun, MD (R-GA), well actually I demanded of him both via e-mail and in person, that he take the lead in impeachment of the president. Dr. Broun, of course, has a bit of a stake in the government continuing it's "business as usual" and has no interest in actually defending the Constitution. When I spoke with him last month at a "town hall" style forum at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 2872, Dr. Broun's best excuse for doing nothing was to say that he is "only one voice" in Congress. I reminded him that he was "My" voice in Congress and that as a citizen of the State of Georgia and his constituent, he actually works for me, as does the president, and would be held accountable for his inaction.
We should all stand up and ask "Why a law suit? Why not impeachment"?
As was reported in Politico:
"A bipartisan group of House members announced on Wednesday that it is filing a lawsuit charging that President Obama made an illegal end-run around Congress when he approved U.S military action against Libya.
“With regard to the war in Libya, we believe that the law was violated. We have asked the courts to move to protect the American people from the results of these illegal policies,” said Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), who led the 10-member anti-war coalition with Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.)The White House is expected on Wednesday to deliver to Congress a much-anticipated report detailing military activity in Libya.
According to Kucinich, the suit will challenge the Obama administration’s “circumvention of Congress and its use of international organizations such as the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to authorize the use of military force abroad.”"
Honestly, there is already a legal mechanism in place to deal with this sort of thing. Since President Obama is clearly in violation of not only Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution of These United States of America, and the War Powers Resolution of 1972, all that needs to be done is file Articles of Impeachment for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
I asked my representative, Congressman Paul Broun, MD (R-GA), well actually I demanded of him both via e-mail and in person, that he take the lead in impeachment of the president. Dr. Broun, of course, has a bit of a stake in the government continuing it's "business as usual" and has no interest in actually defending the Constitution. When I spoke with him last month at a "town hall" style forum at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 2872, Dr. Broun's best excuse for doing nothing was to say that he is "only one voice" in Congress. I reminded him that he was "My" voice in Congress and that as a citizen of the State of Georgia and his constituent, he actually works for me, as does the president, and would be held accountable for his inaction.
We should all stand up and ask "Why a law suit? Why not impeachment"?
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
GOP New Hampshire Debates
A - me, me, me - fest.
Now, granted, at this stage of the game, these folks are all in the business of drawing attention to themselves, but how about some substance?
The most presidential acting and looking person on stage last night? I hate to say it, as much as I can't stand the man, but, Newt Gingrich fit that bill. He's highly intelligent and well spoken and has a lot of experience manipulating the crowd. If the Republican Party is looking for someone to fit the NeoCon mold with a very presidential air about him, that's the guy. But then there is his record. Not so great. A failed "Contract With America" from 1994, some personal and personnel issues and he's off the list.
Romney, looks like a used car salesman and the way he leered at the other candidates while they were speaking, quite frankly gave me the creeps. He's also got some baggage left over from his stint as Massachusetts governor to deal with, like Romneycare. Scratch that one off the list.
Pawlenty, nope.
Bachmann, easy on the eyes and a fiery speaker, but really don't we have enough tax attorneys? If you want to run a campaign solely on " I'm not Obama" fine, but after the co opting of a truly grass roots, mostly Libertarian, Tea Party movement by her and her NeoCon cronies, no thanks.
Herman Cain, man, there is a Baptist church in Georgia missing out on a great, inspirational pastor. Don't get me wrong. I really enjoy listening to Mr. Cain speak. I really enjoyed his radio show in Atlanta. His affiliation with, and defense of, one of the most insidiously evil organizations in the history of the USA is where I have to draw the line with him. Mr. Cain was once upon a time, in addition to his "Deep Dish" days, the Chairman of The Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. This private bank, which issues our currency (which is, by the way unconstitutional, but that's for another time) has destroyed 98% of the value of the dollar since 1913, and Mr. Cain thinks that the Fed doesn't even need to be audited. No thanks.
Ron Paul. In his 12 terms in the House of Representatives, he's never voted for a tax increase, has called for abolishing the income tax, wants to end the Fed and return the USA to a gold standard of sound money. Ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988. I think it's time for Ron Paul to be President.
Now, granted, at this stage of the game, these folks are all in the business of drawing attention to themselves, but how about some substance?
The most presidential acting and looking person on stage last night? I hate to say it, as much as I can't stand the man, but, Newt Gingrich fit that bill. He's highly intelligent and well spoken and has a lot of experience manipulating the crowd. If the Republican Party is looking for someone to fit the NeoCon mold with a very presidential air about him, that's the guy. But then there is his record. Not so great. A failed "Contract With America" from 1994, some personal and personnel issues and he's off the list.
Romney, looks like a used car salesman and the way he leered at the other candidates while they were speaking, quite frankly gave me the creeps. He's also got some baggage left over from his stint as Massachusetts governor to deal with, like Romneycare. Scratch that one off the list.
Pawlenty, nope.
Bachmann, easy on the eyes and a fiery speaker, but really don't we have enough tax attorneys? If you want to run a campaign solely on " I'm not Obama" fine, but after the co opting of a truly grass roots, mostly Libertarian, Tea Party movement by her and her NeoCon cronies, no thanks.
Herman Cain, man, there is a Baptist church in Georgia missing out on a great, inspirational pastor. Don't get me wrong. I really enjoy listening to Mr. Cain speak. I really enjoyed his radio show in Atlanta. His affiliation with, and defense of, one of the most insidiously evil organizations in the history of the USA is where I have to draw the line with him. Mr. Cain was once upon a time, in addition to his "Deep Dish" days, the Chairman of The Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. This private bank, which issues our currency (which is, by the way unconstitutional, but that's for another time) has destroyed 98% of the value of the dollar since 1913, and Mr. Cain thinks that the Fed doesn't even need to be audited. No thanks.
Ron Paul. In his 12 terms in the House of Representatives, he's never voted for a tax increase, has called for abolishing the income tax, wants to end the Fed and return the USA to a gold standard of sound money. Ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988. I think it's time for Ron Paul to be President.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
China is going to want their money and they are gearing up to take it.
...Western defense officials and experts were surprised to see more than 25 different Chinese models of the unmanned aircraft, known as UAVs, on display at this week's Zhuhai air show in this southern Chinese city. It was a record number for a country that unveiled its first concept UAVs at the same air show only four years ago, and put a handful on display at the last one in 2008.The apparent progress in UAVs is a stark sign of China's ambition to upgrade its massive military as its global political and economic clout grows....The U.S. and Israel are currently the world leaders in developing such pilotless drones, which have played a major role in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and which analysts say could one day replace the fighter jet.This year's models in Zhuhai included several designed to fire missiles, and one powered by a jet engine, meaning it could—in theory—fly faster than the propeller-powered Predator and Reaper drones that the U.S. has used in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan....U.S. anxiety about China's UAVs were highlighted in a report released Wednesday by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which was formed by Congress in 2000 to assess the national security implications of trade and economic relations with China....The Chinese drone of greatest potential concern to the U.S. is the one with several missiles and a jet engine—called the WJ600—which was displayed by China Aerospace Science & Industry Corp., or Casic, one of China's top weapons makers.Casic officials declined to comment, but a video and a two-dimensional display by the company showed Chinese forces using the WJ600 to help attack what appeared to be a U.S. aircraft carrier steaming toward an island off China's coast that many visitors assumed to be Taiwan.
..And all this time I thought the most important Constitutional duty of the federal government was to protect America and its borders.Apparently, based upon the actions of President Obama and Democrats in Congress, I was mistaken.
Hat Tip - Doug Ross
..And all this time I thought the most important Constitutional duty of the federal government was to protect America and its borders.Apparently, based upon the actions of President Obama and Democrats in Congress, I was mistaken.
Hat Tip - Doug Ross
Obama's Road To Nowhere - Mark Steyn
‘There are always going to be bumps on the road to recovery,’’ President Obama said at a Jeep plant in Toledo the other day. “We’re going to pass through some rough terrain that even a Wrangler would have a tough time with.’’ His audience booed. They’re un-fire-able union members with lavish benefits, and even they weary of the glib lines from his twelve-year-old speechwriters.
We’re not on the road to recovery. You can’t get there from here, as they say. Obama was in Toledo to “celebrate” the sale of the government’s remaining stake in Chrysler to Fiat. That’s “Fiat” as in the Italian car manufacturer rather than “an authoritative or arbitrary decree (from the Latin ‘let it be done’),” which would be almost too perfect a name for an Obamafied automobile. The Treasury crowed that Fiat had agreed to pay a whopping $560 million for the government’s Chrysler shares.
Read the rest here
We’re not on the road to recovery. You can’t get there from here, as they say. Obama was in Toledo to “celebrate” the sale of the government’s remaining stake in Chrysler to Fiat. That’s “Fiat” as in the Italian car manufacturer rather than “an authoritative or arbitrary decree (from the Latin ‘let it be done’),” which would be almost too perfect a name for an Obamafied automobile. The Treasury crowed that Fiat had agreed to pay a whopping $560 million for the government’s Chrysler shares.
Read the rest here
Brush Fire
During the Revolutionary War, the casting off of tyranny of the English King George III, a very small group of Americans were all that were neccessary to win the fight. History shows that only 3% of Americans participated in the rebellion. Today 3% would equate to somewhere around 900,000 people.
How can Americans, disaffected and disillusioned with the way that today's government plays Robin Hood with our money, continue to support the nonsense in DC?
How can Americans, disaffected and disillusioned with the way that today's government plays Robin Hood with our money, continue to support the nonsense in DC?
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Scratching my head, again, and again.
If Jet A, JP-5, JP-4, or any other derivative of Kerosene, known as "jet fuel" burns at atmospheric pressure somewhere around 575F and Steel melts at 2750F. Could someone please do the math for me and tell me how that works?
Supply and Demand, Airfare Is Skyrocketing
June 10, 2011 by Douglas French
Jad Houawad reports for the New York Times that airlines have been able to continue filling their planes while still increasing prices. However, the airlines are worried, having
failed to raise fares in six of their seven efforts since March, suggesting that some passengers may be balking at the higher ticket prices. “Airlines have overreached,” said George Hobica, the founder of AirFareWatchdog.com.
Packed planes are a way of life for anyone who travels regularly. And for anyone who understands economics, fewer flights (less supply) and more demand (full planes) mean higher ticket prices.
But Teamsters union representative Kevin Currie, who occasionally flies to Florida to see relatives, never received the supply and demand memo.
“It’s getting ridiculously expensive,” said Currie. “There are more people flying right now, so shouldn’t their prices go down?”
Reporter Houawad then writes, “Of course, the airlines do not think that way. Since more passengers are vying for every available seat, they can keep raising fares and still fill their planes.”
Of course, no one thinks that way.
Some people, like Kevin Currie, just don't get it. The other issue is the airlines have cut back on the number of flights per day, due to operating expense, so they have partially created their own shortage of supply.
Years ago, when I first started traveling, (60 countries in 25 years) most aircraft were 30-50% filled to capacity, for every flight. No wonder airlines were losing their asses. Either way, the prices will rise due to demand.
Jad Houawad reports for the New York Times that airlines have been able to continue filling their planes while still increasing prices. However, the airlines are worried, having
failed to raise fares in six of their seven efforts since March, suggesting that some passengers may be balking at the higher ticket prices. “Airlines have overreached,” said George Hobica, the founder of AirFareWatchdog.com.
Packed planes are a way of life for anyone who travels regularly. And for anyone who understands economics, fewer flights (less supply) and more demand (full planes) mean higher ticket prices.
But Teamsters union representative Kevin Currie, who occasionally flies to Florida to see relatives, never received the supply and demand memo.
“It’s getting ridiculously expensive,” said Currie. “There are more people flying right now, so shouldn’t their prices go down?”
Reporter Houawad then writes, “Of course, the airlines do not think that way. Since more passengers are vying for every available seat, they can keep raising fares and still fill their planes.”
Of course, no one thinks that way.
Some people, like Kevin Currie, just don't get it. The other issue is the airlines have cut back on the number of flights per day, due to operating expense, so they have partially created their own shortage of supply.
Years ago, when I first started traveling, (60 countries in 25 years) most aircraft were 30-50% filled to capacity, for every flight. No wonder airlines were losing their asses. Either way, the prices will rise due to demand.
Friday, June 10, 2011
China ratings house says US defaulting: report - Yahoo! News
China ratings house says US defaulting: report - Yahoo! News
There goes the neighborhood. China believes the US is already in default and our moron in chief wants to help bail out Greece. With what? We are broke.
There goes the neighborhood. China believes the US is already in default and our moron in chief wants to help bail out Greece. With what? We are broke.
Monday, June 6, 2011
A Greater Depression....sounds great, right?
A Greater Depression
June 6, 2011 by Bob Livingston
“We’re on the verge of a great, great depression. The (Federal Reserve) knows it.” So said Peter Yastrow, market strategist for Yastrow Origer on CNBC Wednesday.
Yastrow’s point: Money managers can’t find an investment they feel is a safe haven for their investors. That’s because the Federal Reserve’s Ponzi scheme has been exposed for the fraud it is.
The debate in Washington, D.C., is about raising the debt ceiling. Should they, or shouldn’t they? Yes, and raise taxes, too, say some. Yes, raise taxes and cut spending say others. Yes, but only if a corresponding amount in Federal spending cuts accompany the increase, others say. No, say a few. But only a few.
Meanwhile, the manufacturing sector in the United States continues its death spiral. May saw the slowest growth in manufacturing since September 2009. Only 38,000 private-sector jobs were added in May (the Labor Department claimed 54,000). More than 300,000 new jobs per month are needed to significantly lower employment, which in May ticked up to 9.1 percent, according to the “official” count.
Mainstream economists, media talking heads and the Administration of President Barack Obama feign surprise every time bad economic news comes out. And bad news continues to trickle out despite strong-arm tactics of the Administration — and outright lies.
“We’re heading in the direction of a double dip — but you’d never know it if you listened to the upbeat messages coming out of Wall Street and Washington,” former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote in a blog on csmonitor.com in March 2011.
“But isn’t the economy growing again — by an estimated 2.5 to 2.9 percent this year? Yes, but that’s even less than peanuts. The deeper the economic hole, the faster the growth needed to get it back on track. By this point in the so-called recovery we’d expect growth of 4 to 6 percent.
“Consider that back in 1934, when it was emerging from the deepest hole of the Great Depression, the economy grew by 7.7 percent. The next year it grew over 8 percent. In 1936 it grew a whopping 14.1 percent,” Reich wrote.
Two months of economic news has not changed Reich’s mind. Last week, he wrote the following for the Financial Times: “The U.S. economy was supposed to be in bloom by late spring, but it is hardly growing at all. Expectations for second-quarter growth are not much better than the measly 1.8 percent annualized rate of the first quarter. That’s not nearly fast enough to reduce America’s ferociously high level of unemployment… Average hourly earnings of production and non-supervisory employees — who make up 80 percent of non-government workers — dropped to $8.76 in April. Adjusted for inflation, that’s lower than they were in the depths of the recession.”
And just how bad is the current economic situation? According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Federal debt is increasing at a rate of $1,148 per U.S. family per month… and has been since Obama was sworn in as President. In fact, the debt grew $3,646,116,554,704.36 from January 2009, when Obama took office, to April 2011, when Obama finally said there was a need to get a handle on the debt situation.
“The last month has been a horror show for the U.S. economy, with economic data falling off a cliff,” Mike Riddell, a fund manager with M&G Investments in London, told CNBC on Wednesday.
Riddell said almost every bit of data about the health of the U.S. economy has disappointed recently: House prices have fallen more than 5 percent year on year, pending home sales have collapsed and existing home sales have disappointed, the trend of improving jobless claims has arrested, the first quarter gross domestic product wasn’t revised upward as predicted, durable goods orders shrank and manufacturing surveys from the Philadelphia Fed, Richmond Fed and Chicago Fed were all very disappointing.
But the current situation is not just a crisis for the United States. It’s a crisis for the world. As World Bank President Robert Zoellick said in a speech in Washington, D.C., in April 2011, the world is “one shock away from a full-blown crisis.
“It’s probably too much to say that it’s a jobless recovery, but it’s certainly a recovery with not enough jobs. Especially because of youth unemployment… there is now a risk that this will be turned into a life sentence and that there is a possibility of a lost generation,” he said.
Currently, about 18.5 percent of American males between the ages of 18 and 55 are unemployed. About 40 million Americans are on food stamps. How long before we see riots in America like those in the Middle East and North Africa?
They may be starting already. Over the Memorial Day weekend, there were no fewer than seven incidents of riots or near riots in large crowds. Mob incidents, shootings, fights and looting broke out New York City; Rochester, N.Y.; Chicago; Miami; Myrtle Beach, N.C.; Nashville, Tenn.; Decatur, Ala.; and Boston. Beaches, water parks and streets were shut down. In recent weeks, there have been beat downs in hamburger joints, mob robberies and looting.
Trends forecaster Gerald Celente has said that when people lose everything and they have nothing else to lose, they lose it. The Federal Reserve and the Federal government have pillaged and looted and stolen about everything the American people have. But austerity is a dirty word to the elected elites. In Washington, in the States and in cities and towns across the country, elected elites are at least wishing they could raise taxes, if they are not outright doing so.
Talk of the slightest cuts in the Federal behemoth bring spurious claims that seniors will die and children will starve, that medical care will cease and food will be contaminated. So the Federal behemoth continues to grow.
According to The Washington Times, more than 77,000 Federal government employees are paid more than the Governors of their respective States. A report by the Center for Public Integrity revealed that the Federal limousine fleet almost doubled in the past two years, from 238 in fiscal year 2008 to 412 in fiscal year 2010.
Confidence in government is at an all-time low. More and more people are awake to the fact that the system has failed. Why? Because of the mass greed based on the rot of fiat currency. Fiat currency brings not only financial collapse but also the destruction of moral order.
What’s next? Only the mass realization that the financial system and the rule of law are no longer functioning.
I have been accused of scaremongering for warning of the coming collapse and encouraging you to buy precious metals and stockpile food and water. But now, the mainstream media are catching on.
It seems to me that anyone should be able to see the economic conditions behind the global government structure are crumbling. We are in the endgame. The earthquake is now rumbling. There are signs everywhere, for those who choose to see them.
Governments, including the U.S. government, are losing control.
Pray that the final collapse will be quick and the transition will be quick, without a prolonged period of infrastructure deterioration or destruction.
June 6, 2011 by Bob Livingston
“We’re on the verge of a great, great depression. The (Federal Reserve) knows it.” So said Peter Yastrow, market strategist for Yastrow Origer on CNBC Wednesday.
Yastrow’s point: Money managers can’t find an investment they feel is a safe haven for their investors. That’s because the Federal Reserve’s Ponzi scheme has been exposed for the fraud it is.
The debate in Washington, D.C., is about raising the debt ceiling. Should they, or shouldn’t they? Yes, and raise taxes, too, say some. Yes, raise taxes and cut spending say others. Yes, but only if a corresponding amount in Federal spending cuts accompany the increase, others say. No, say a few. But only a few.
Meanwhile, the manufacturing sector in the United States continues its death spiral. May saw the slowest growth in manufacturing since September 2009. Only 38,000 private-sector jobs were added in May (the Labor Department claimed 54,000). More than 300,000 new jobs per month are needed to significantly lower employment, which in May ticked up to 9.1 percent, according to the “official” count.
Mainstream economists, media talking heads and the Administration of President Barack Obama feign surprise every time bad economic news comes out. And bad news continues to trickle out despite strong-arm tactics of the Administration — and outright lies.
“We’re heading in the direction of a double dip — but you’d never know it if you listened to the upbeat messages coming out of Wall Street and Washington,” former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote in a blog on csmonitor.com in March 2011.
“But isn’t the economy growing again — by an estimated 2.5 to 2.9 percent this year? Yes, but that’s even less than peanuts. The deeper the economic hole, the faster the growth needed to get it back on track. By this point in the so-called recovery we’d expect growth of 4 to 6 percent.
“Consider that back in 1934, when it was emerging from the deepest hole of the Great Depression, the economy grew by 7.7 percent. The next year it grew over 8 percent. In 1936 it grew a whopping 14.1 percent,” Reich wrote.
Two months of economic news has not changed Reich’s mind. Last week, he wrote the following for the Financial Times: “The U.S. economy was supposed to be in bloom by late spring, but it is hardly growing at all. Expectations for second-quarter growth are not much better than the measly 1.8 percent annualized rate of the first quarter. That’s not nearly fast enough to reduce America’s ferociously high level of unemployment… Average hourly earnings of production and non-supervisory employees — who make up 80 percent of non-government workers — dropped to $8.76 in April. Adjusted for inflation, that’s lower than they were in the depths of the recession.”
And just how bad is the current economic situation? According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Federal debt is increasing at a rate of $1,148 per U.S. family per month… and has been since Obama was sworn in as President. In fact, the debt grew $3,646,116,554,704.36 from January 2009, when Obama took office, to April 2011, when Obama finally said there was a need to get a handle on the debt situation.
“The last month has been a horror show for the U.S. economy, with economic data falling off a cliff,” Mike Riddell, a fund manager with M&G Investments in London, told CNBC on Wednesday.
Riddell said almost every bit of data about the health of the U.S. economy has disappointed recently: House prices have fallen more than 5 percent year on year, pending home sales have collapsed and existing home sales have disappointed, the trend of improving jobless claims has arrested, the first quarter gross domestic product wasn’t revised upward as predicted, durable goods orders shrank and manufacturing surveys from the Philadelphia Fed, Richmond Fed and Chicago Fed were all very disappointing.
But the current situation is not just a crisis for the United States. It’s a crisis for the world. As World Bank President Robert Zoellick said in a speech in Washington, D.C., in April 2011, the world is “one shock away from a full-blown crisis.
“It’s probably too much to say that it’s a jobless recovery, but it’s certainly a recovery with not enough jobs. Especially because of youth unemployment… there is now a risk that this will be turned into a life sentence and that there is a possibility of a lost generation,” he said.
Currently, about 18.5 percent of American males between the ages of 18 and 55 are unemployed. About 40 million Americans are on food stamps. How long before we see riots in America like those in the Middle East and North Africa?
They may be starting already. Over the Memorial Day weekend, there were no fewer than seven incidents of riots or near riots in large crowds. Mob incidents, shootings, fights and looting broke out New York City; Rochester, N.Y.; Chicago; Miami; Myrtle Beach, N.C.; Nashville, Tenn.; Decatur, Ala.; and Boston. Beaches, water parks and streets were shut down. In recent weeks, there have been beat downs in hamburger joints, mob robberies and looting.
Trends forecaster Gerald Celente has said that when people lose everything and they have nothing else to lose, they lose it. The Federal Reserve and the Federal government have pillaged and looted and stolen about everything the American people have. But austerity is a dirty word to the elected elites. In Washington, in the States and in cities and towns across the country, elected elites are at least wishing they could raise taxes, if they are not outright doing so.
Talk of the slightest cuts in the Federal behemoth bring spurious claims that seniors will die and children will starve, that medical care will cease and food will be contaminated. So the Federal behemoth continues to grow.
According to The Washington Times, more than 77,000 Federal government employees are paid more than the Governors of their respective States. A report by the Center for Public Integrity revealed that the Federal limousine fleet almost doubled in the past two years, from 238 in fiscal year 2008 to 412 in fiscal year 2010.
Confidence in government is at an all-time low. More and more people are awake to the fact that the system has failed. Why? Because of the mass greed based on the rot of fiat currency. Fiat currency brings not only financial collapse but also the destruction of moral order.
What’s next? Only the mass realization that the financial system and the rule of law are no longer functioning.
I have been accused of scaremongering for warning of the coming collapse and encouraging you to buy precious metals and stockpile food and water. But now, the mainstream media are catching on.
It seems to me that anyone should be able to see the economic conditions behind the global government structure are crumbling. We are in the endgame. The earthquake is now rumbling. There are signs everywhere, for those who choose to see them.
Governments, including the U.S. government, are losing control.
Pray that the final collapse will be quick and the transition will be quick, without a prolonged period of infrastructure deterioration or destruction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)