The Federal Deficit vs. The Federal Reserve
I'd like to point out the EXTREME conflict of interest that Congress has with the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve directly or indirectly is funding a great part of the Federal Deficit authorized by Congress. Thus, until the Federal Deficit is wiped out we are holden to our Providers. Congress "can't" audit the Federal Reserve because they need the Federal Reserve.
Here is the kicker. Congress doesn't need the Federal Reserve for money. They have the Constitutional Power to create it themselves. Switching the system would be too disruptive to the powers that fund the Senators.
So they won't. So sad.
Keiser Report №17: Markets! Finance! Scandal!
We've been at financial war with China for many, many years. No one talks about the Chinese only letting us go through the kindness of their communist heart. At some point China is going start selling their worthless dollars, which will show just how little they are actually worth.
It's amazing that Goldman Sacks PROFITED from the hiding the Greek debt through derivatives and manipulating market prices. This only shows that derivatives really should be regulated. How exactly I don't know but maybe putting a cap on a derivative at $100 million would be a good idea. If banks move off shore to do this business so be it, would that put enough distance to be safe should the speculation hysteria burst?
I couldn't agree more with Keiser. The sooner and faster, the better. The more we delay the harder it will be. And there are some significant changes needed. Fiat money needs to go which is going to change a lot of things. But this is the only way to actually fix things.
If we don't fix this problem, then the banks will take everything because we all are using their future money which we need to pay back. The system is designed to make people fall off because not enough value has been, or ever could be, created to pay off their debt money with interest.
This is not a system of stable value. More money must be created to support the base of money in existence, with interest. This is an ever growing problem because the value represented by the dollar, the economy, needs to keep pace in order to stabilize the value. For decades they've created a little more money than created in the economy but now the economy has no more steam and cannot continue growing except through the shadow banking economy to which we are not allowed access. There has been extraordinary market distortions since the creation of the Federal Reserve and fiat money. That whole big mess needs to unwind before we get back on a sustainable track. This means a lot of changes which could be a complete mess if not actually planned by the government.
Not only that, but let me remind you that fiat money in the USA is actually unconstitutional.
Debt is everywhere because it is what we use as money! If you have money, it is really possessing other people's debts which they have to get back from you because, ultimately, it must go back to the bank with interest. We are literally slaves to our money system. Wasn't slavery made unconstitutional at some point?
The odd thing is that the money you do have usually lives at the bank. If you read the fine print of a new account document you'll see that it is really a loan to the bank. In exchange you get numbers in an account and the ability to (hopefully) get it back at some point in the future. Alas, they use this money as reserves to create new money and perpetuate the system.
Keiser Report №15: Markets! Finance! Scandal!
Remarkable that we let the government, the corporations, and these people do what they do.
The Greatest Recession
I pulled this image from the National Inflation Association- Charts
This is a wild chart. I super imposed my best guestimate fitting curve. As you can see, i tried to be conservative and deal with the bumps along the way. It's most certainly not perfect but it will do to demonstrate the ideas.
That red area is the area of the recession. There are a few notable things about this chart. The decline we've had in the recreated M3 over the last year has never happened in the last 40 years. Given the charts I've seen, this has never happened in the last century.
In order to be as prosperous as we were before the recession we need about $2.5 trillion more dollars in the system RIGHT NOW. Not some bailout for the banks or tax refund bull crap. The banks need to be loaning that amount within the next few months for us to really recover the way economists (at least were) talking about.
The dollars where the green line ends and the black line hitting 2010, is about $13.7 and $16.2 trillion dollars. The difference is about $2.5 trillion.
This is about the same amount the government has spent in budget deficits over the last 2 years. This is significant because as you can see that $2.5 trillion didn't move us up to where we "should" be. It shows either 1) just how ineffective government spending is in replacing economic output; or 2) The recreated M3 would be at $11.2 trillion if we are to believe that government spending was 100% effective at producing economic growth. I'd like to thank both the Federal Government and the banking industry for this monster.
My sense is that excessive government spending doesn't produce real sustainable economic growth. This includes the huge budget for the military. Funding technology in the military is important but only when it has real civilian use. Research, yada, yada. Agreed. Though it most certainly could and probably should be sliced in half if not more. That would be value being directly injected into the economy through lower inflation and lower taxes in the long run. This is getting at least closer to a more sustainable future.
By January 2011, this estimate shows the M3 needing to be ~$18 trillion. Obama just submitted his budget. It's enormous. The deficit is estimated to be $1.6 trillion. $18 trillion minus $16.2 is $1.8 trillion. That's damn close.... and that won't do a damn thing except cause more inflation. They need to get that value some how. (Stealing it from you is socially acceptable, no?)
Our single party system, the Corporate Republicrats, have no idea what they are doing to secure America. Removing our freedoms "for security" is giving the terrorists exactly what they want. As soon as we started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan the "enemy" shipped out. Better to live to fight another day. The got us bogged down and now have the Military Industrial Complex stuck in a growing feedback loop which is sucking down our national value. More military is not the correct answer... A smarter, leaner, more efficient, and productive military is. Until our "leaders" realize that terrorism is the application of "We will fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" we won't get anywhere and we won't be all that much more secure either. If they take a page from our playbook, which a smart terrorist would do, they will attack US HERE... not our military there. The former is much scarier. Duh. I'm not going to get into how terrorism is likely a false flag operation especially given all the shady circumstances.
Obama! Yo! Fix it! Also, can we put Bush on trial as a War Criminal? Congress didn't even declare war. They put a face on terrorism and then funded its destruction without actually consenting to explicitly to kill it. Then the Republicans declare the Democrats as being soft? That's a load of bull crap. If you want something to happen, do it the way the Constitution defines it be done. It's not legitimate if you don't. You can't make claims that anybody is "soft on terror" because they believe in the constitution. In fact, making these claim only makes you "soft on democracy."
Ah yes, how is this for communist/facsist?
If you don't follow the corporate party line (on either side), you are ostracized and made not important by the corporate mega-phone media.
Wait a minute... Isn't this reminiscent of Communist Russia?
Bankrupt Bogus Bonuses
This holds for Goldman Sacks too... they are giving out $150 billion of OUR MONEY to each other. Just remember when you do your taxes for last year that at least $500 of that is paying for Goldman Sacks bonuses. Just their bonuses!
Why aren't these people in jail?
Jon Stewart Warns Dems: Republicans Are “F**king With You!”
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Blues Clueless | ||||
|
||||
It's really amazing how politics is so fucked up. You have to ask yourself, how much of it is real? What part is purely peacock distractions?
How the banks make the big bucks (by taking it from you)
Does Obama know this is going on? If he does, why doesn't he stop it?
Obama is a really smart guy. How could he not know this is going on?
Two things:
1- if he doesn't know, then he's incompetent.
2- if he does know and isn't doing anything about it, he's implicitly authorizing theft of government coffers at a biblical scale.
Lastly, why isn't the FBI investigating this kind of fraud?
Elizabeth Warren On The Daily Show: If We Don’t Act ‘The Game Really Is Over’
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Elizabeth Warren | ||||
|
||||
I've always liked Elizabeth Warren because she is right.
Just as I posted earlier, people are waking up to the fact that politics is theatre and that politicians do not represent us (at least most of them). It's angering but it's important to get a third party or more going in America.
My solution to making third parties real is laws stating that all elections are to be instant run-off. Instead of voting for one candidate, you prioritize them. If the one you chose first doesn't have enough votes your next in line is thus counted as your choice. So, you could have voted in the last Presidential Election like this
- Ron Paul
- Cynthia McKinney
- Ralph Nader
- Dennis Kucinich
- Barack Obama
How sweet would that be? If none of your other choices had a chance, you still could have helped to defend against McCain (or visa versa). You could actually vote based on your principles instead of the lesser of two evils. If course it must be said that our political party election system is more like voting for the one evil as they really are the same party with different faces. I ask you, what would McCain have done substantially different from Obama? And how is Obama any different than Bush?
Democrats And The 60 Vote Lie
It seems that people are starting to get it that politics is just a theatre for thieves to profiteer but for very few. This is particularly disturbing now knowing that the Conservative Supreme Court just gave corporations nearly full access to politicians through money. This will utterly drown out everyone else. This means laws will, wait, will? THEY ARE being made for the benefit of corporations because it keeps the corrupt in power. Ad-Infinitum.
We absolutely must pass a constitutional amendment stating this:
Reclaim Democracy: Proposed Constitutional Amendments
An Amendment to Preclude Corporations from Claiming Bill of Rights Protections
SECTION 1. The U.S. Constitution protects only the rights of living human beings.
SECTION 2. Corporations and other institutions granted the privilege to exist shall be subordinate to any and all laws enacted by citizens and their elected governments.
SECTION 3. Corporations and other for-profit institutions are prohibited from attempting to influence the outcome of elections, legislation or government policy through the use of aggregate resources or by rewarding or repaying employees or directors to exert such influence.
SECTION 4. Congress shall have power to implement this article by appropriate legislation.
More on why we need to revoke corporate constitutional privileges (a.k.a., corporate personhood)
Of course, no crooked Republican or Democrat (which is most of them) in their right mind would vote for this lest their corporate master overlords wrath. Then the states very likely wouldn't pass it either.