Monday, April 30, 2012
Reality Check 1/2 Hour Special *No Commercials* (Ron Paul Vote Fraud) - YouTube
Reality Check 1/2 Hour Special *No Commercials* (Ron Paul Vote Fraud) - YouTube
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OHAdm64U-cs?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OHAdm64U-cs?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OHAdm64U-cs?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OHAdm64U-cs?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
Bernanke's Pickle
Dr. Bernanke is in a pickle. And when Bernanke is in trouble, we’re all in trouble.
Why is Bennie in trouble? He is in trouble because he has a debt, or should I say an obligation to Obama for reappointing him Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the Fed. Here’s where the problem lies. In order to fulfil this bond of duty, Bennie and his buddies down at the Fed will need to pull off slight of hand tricks that would put the best of magicians to shame. They will need to keep people’s attention focused on the left hand while the right continues to do their ‘dirty work’. (i.e. print new currency and create inflation at ever-increasing rates.) They will need to print ever-increasing currency because the hollowed out US economy demands it, Presidential election year or not. But of course because this is an election year, and Bennie has this debt to Obama to make the economy appear as good as possible (so he can get re-elected), you can expect the Fed and all their friends in the larger bureaucracy (government, media, etc.) to work overtime creating obfuscation about what they are doing on one hand, while keeping other fingers on the button – the currency printing button. (i.e. think True Money Supply [TMS] growth, unstated Quantitative Easing [QE], and all the other sources of currency printing not accounted for in “conventional money supply measures”.)
None of this is new of course, it’s just more extreme this time around because we are feeling the effects of long-wave cycles that could be far more profound than most realize, or care to admit. We will have more to say on this subject below once we get into the charts because they will conclusively demonstrate that as a society we are still well embedded in denial about our future prospects, where it’s characteristic for the masses to ignore unpleasant realities and the cold harshness of the inevitable. Be that as it may, and maintaining our focus on what we will term more ‘near-term influences’, in terms of the above, we are referring to the Presidential Cycle naturally, the four-year cycle that revolves around the election occurring later this year in November. Here, it is now widely understood by almost everybody who is involved in the investing game, from institutions to the small speculator, the effects on the economy of Fed largesse in the third and fourth years of this period, with emphasis on the fourth year here today given present circumstances.
What then, is unique about present circumstances, and why is this a pickle for Bernanke? In short, and in borrowing from subject matter already introduced above, Bernanke’s problem is embedded in the fact the US (and larger Western) economy is dangerously hollowed out due to the ever-increasing needs of our very mature fiat currency monetary system, implying debasement rates must continue to rise even if this means a parabolic trajectory. This in itself is of course a big enough pickle for Bernanke to deal with all on its own, attempting to hide the increasing currency debasement (inflation) via obfuscation and hand shuffling of sorted varieties. What’s more, it’s this condition that will likely make it impossible for him to deliver on Obama’s debt because in order to not have our hollowed out economy collapse prior to the election he will need to keep increasing currency debasement rates to the point inflation becomes noticeable despite all of the ‘official rhetoric’ (propaganda) to the opposite, with gasoline prices the number one measure in this regard ever present on voter’s minds.
And as you may well know, as it has been the source of considered discussion already of late, no US President has ever been re-elected with gasoline prices rising and making new highs regularly, which places both Mr.’s Bernanke and Obama in one pickle jar, and the rest of us in others. For Obama, unless the Bernanke can get gasoline prices back in the bottle this would likely mean no second term if history is a good guide. And for the rest of us, broadly speaking, such an outcome would mean even higher energy costs in all likelihood because by implication this would infer currency debasement rates continue to accelerate, where we know this must occur in faltering and very mature fiat currency based monetary systems / economies. Again however, even if this occurs don’t expect the media or government agencies to paint such a picture, as is the case at present. Expect to see more doctored data and attempts to hide reality and persuade to the opposite, where over the past few months the powers that be (with help from our loved financial institutions) have been tightening the screws on the precious metal stocks pickle jar.
This is because they know speculators believe precious metal shares both lead and outperform in strong moves to the upside in the sector; and if they can be trashed, for whatever reason, even if false, at a minimum this would create the impression (and give the Fed, government, and the mainstream media ammo to aid their collective cause) inflation is well contained. Now I realize this may sound ‘out there’ to those who choose to ignore the Fed’s own propaganda. And to an extent I can sympathize with such a view in knowing wrong headed speculators continue to furnish market conditions that will not allow for rising precious metals prices barring hyperinflation, where some of you may remember my previous discussions on this topic – gambler betting practices in paper precious metals derivatives. At the forefront of understandings in this regard, it must be remembered / recognised that until currency debasement rates trip the light fantastic the ‘authorities’ will be able to continue exploiting these wrong headed speculators using High Frequency Trading (HFT), algorithms, etc., toppling them over at key times (think expiries, key data releases, etc.) repeatedly, maintaining the illusion inflation must be under control with precious metals shares collapsing.
That’s the pickle jar precious metals investors are in at present, all bottled up by the powers that be, but with a great deal of pressure building due to all the inflation, ignored presently as it may be. This will change however, and such change can be very rapid depending on how exhausted hair-brained speculators within the paper based precious metals space become. (Please note the naked shorting of precious metals shares and physical bullion supply issues are factors here too, however at the margin, it will require a change in ETF speculator betting practices to spark a new cyclical bull market phase in the sector.) Given precious metals shares are both oversold and undervalued at present, any such exhaustion should be profound once it arrives. And I can tell WHY this will in fact be the case. This will be the case for the exact opposite reason speculators are buying calls on key paper precious metals representations at present, generally causing put / call ratios in the ETF space to remain well below unity and approaching .5 on the important ones. (i.e. GLD, SLV, and GDX) In this regard it’s essential to realize there is generally two calls for every put in this market presently, making the prospect of a short squeeze impossible. And again, this dynamic is the chief mechanism by which the authorities can conduct raids in the sector, like the one just last week at Fed meeting time, proving to all that Da Boyz are still in charge – or so they think.
Let’s hope they are enjoying themselves at present because one of these days, likely at an options expiry sometime between now and the election in November, bullish speculators will become exhausted, sending put / call ratios back up through unity across the sector, and they will not come back into this space for considerable time. Why? Because once November is passed they will assume Bernanke’s debt to Obama will be discharged whether he is successful or not, and that he will back off currency debasement rates post election as is the custom associated with traditional Presidential Cycle related thinking. This, you see, is the forensic ‘why’ you can expect a significant rally in the precious metals sector post the election. Is it possible the rally begins earlier? Yes, it’s definitely possible for a bottom to occur prior to the election, however the best part of the rally will likely not occur until the bullish speculators are broken, which cannot be expected until closer to election time. To know the odds in this respect, simply keep your eye on the open interest put / call ratios for GLD, SLV, and GDX (GDX has the large open interest) attached above. Once they are back above unity this will signal bullish speculator exhaustion, and precious metals should be able to rally subsequently whether liquidity conditions remain favourable. (i.e. people will panic into increasingly scare precious metals in order to preserve their wealth.)
European Reality Check
The first reality check is to recognize that the EU is a failed experiment. The EU was a noble idea aimed at allowing the free flow of people and trade throughout the EU. A further objective was the development of a common currency, the Euro. There was a flaw in the original plan which allowed individual countries to retain their sovereign governments and control of their own fiscal destinies. The EU was in control of the monetary levers. Individual countries agreed to limit their government deficits to less than 3% of GDP but there were no measures to deal with countries that did not comply with this requirement.
Prior to the introduction of the Euro, investors considering purchasing the sovereign bonds of countries like Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal, had to factor in the possibility (probability?) of currency losses in the drachma, lira, peseta or escudo during the period of the investment. The arrival of the Euro allowed investors to believe that the currency risk had been eliminated. They were buying the sovereign bonds of EU countries denominated in Euros and thus the risk of currency loss was ignored.
This enabled those countries involved to issue vast quantities of new sovereign bonds at very favorable rates, funding budget deficits well in excess of the 3% of GDP that they were obliged to respect. These countries now have debts which are incapable of being repaid under any normal circumstances.
The second reality check is to recognize that individual EU countries do not have the ability to create vast amounts of new Euros to inflate their debt problems into oblivion. Thus EU countries that are experiencing difficulties have limited options. To repay their sovereign debts these countries must first achieve budget surpluses, which requires economic growth. To do this they need to improve their competitive positions relative to their northern neighbors. Denied the ability to quickly improve their positions by devaluing their currencies, these countries are forced to adopt austerity policies aimed at deflating internal wages and asset prices to the point where they eventually become competitive. This is a slow process that causes a lot of financial pain resulting in social unrest and riots.
If the social unrest gets to be excessive, these countries may consider another option to get rid of their debt. It is an option that is being ignored because of the drastic consequences for the EU and the Euro if this course of action was adopted. This option is to “wipe the slate clean” by declaring bankruptcy, defaulting on their debts and starting afresh with a new currency of their own. The new currency will quickly depreciate to the point where their competitive position will become attractive. With no debt to service and with a competitive economy, the country could adopt disciplined monetary and fiscal policies, hopefully followed by economic growth. read full article here European Reality Check
Dutch central banker's memoirs confirm gold price suppression
| By: Chris Powell |
-- Posted Sunday, 29 April 2012 | | Source: GoldSeek.com
Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:
With his new study, "Dr. Zijlstra's Final Settlement: Gold as the Monetary Cosmos' Sun," appended here, our good friend the Netherlands economist Jaco Schipper of MarketUpdate.nl today adds substantially to the growing documentation of the Western central bank gold price suppression scheme.
Zijlstra is the late Dutch treasurer, prime minister, and central banker Jelle Zijlstra, in whose memoirs Schipper has found confirmations of that scheme, including a confirmation involving former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, whose involvement in gold price suppression often has been noted by GATA:
http://www.gata.org/node/10923
http://www.gata.org/node/8209
Zijlstra knew what he was writing about, as he served not only as president of the Netherlands Central Bank but also, simultaneously until his retirement in 1981, as president of the Bank for International Settlements, where gold price suppression long has been a primary function:
http://www.gata.org/node/8773
http://www.gata.org/node/11012
http://www.gata.org/node/11257
As noted by Schipper, in his memoirs Zijlstra recounts repeated efforts by the U.S. government to discourage the use of gold as a measure of currency values and writes, "Gold is artificially kept at a far too low price."
Schipper also calls attention to Zijlstra's notation that central banks had begun to count as an asset not only gold but "an asset on an equal footing," apparently some claim to gold not quite in a central bank's own possession, perhaps the original form of the somewhat mysterious "gold receivables" that now reside on the books of many central banks, mechanisms of imaginary inflation of official gold reserves.
We welcome Zijlstra, if only posthumously, to the ranks of gold "conspiracy theorists," and will have a tin-foil hat engraved in his honor.
CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
read full article here Dutch central banker's memoirs confirm gold price suppression
FDA refuses to ban antibiotics in livestock, resorts to voluntary phase out that will be ignored by industry
FDA refuses to ban antibiotics in livestock, resorts to voluntary phase out that will be ignored by industry
NaturalNews) In a desperate attempt to avoid implementing an actual ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotic drugs in factory animal feed, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has once again made it abundantly clear that it favors corporate interests over public health. In a recent announcement, the FDA publicly petitioned the factory food industry to voluntarily stop using antibiotics, claiming that this hands-off, non-regulatory approach will somehow be more effective at curbing antibiotic overuse than a mandatory ban would be.
The announcement comes just weeks after a federal judge took the FDA to task for its blatant disregard for public health, and ordered the agency to begin withdrawing approval for the non-therapeutic use of certain antibiotics in animal feed (http://www.ucsusa.org). But instead of stepping up to the plate to fulfill these federally-mandated legal duties, the FDA has instead chosen to stage a meaningless publicity stunt that will do absolutely nothing to fix the problem.
Meanwhile, the drug companies that produce penicillin and tetracycline, the two antibiotics ordered by the federal judge to be banned, have the opportunity to challenge the ruling. But if they fail at an evidentiary hearing to prove the drugs' safe and effective use in animal feed, which they likely will be unable to do, then the FDA will not get away with simply requesting that the food industry withdraw the drugs' use -- on the contrary, the FDA will be required to ban their use in accordance with the law.
"For the past 35 years, while advocates and citizens alike have been urging FDA to take action, the problem has steadily worsened and FDA has sat on its hands, which begs the question of whose interests the agency is protecting," said Margaret Mellon, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists' (UCS) Food & Environment Program, in a statement. "The FDA has known since the 1970s that the routine use of powerful antibiotics in livestock leads to the evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which cause infections that are more difficult to treat in both people and animals."
But rather than acknowledge it in a sound and reasonable way, the FDA has resorted to playing word games that completely dodge the issue. Despite the fact that a federal judge has already ordered the two most common antibiotic culprits to be banned, for instance, the FDA is now claiming that this voluntary approach will perform the same function without the need for litigation.
"The new strategy will ensure farmers and veterinarians can care for animals while ensuring the medicines people need remain safe and effective," FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg is quoted as saying in a recent Reuters report.
Huh? Farmers and veterinarians will still have the ability to "care for animals" following a ban on non-therapeutic antibiotic use, hence the "non-therapeutic" designation. And yet Hamburg would have us all believe that simply asking the industry to regulate itself will somehow better address the problem than actually regulating it. Do not be fooled by such nonsense.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.reuters.com
http://www.naturalnews.com/034148_antibiotics_animal_feed.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/032824_antibiotics_animal_feed.html
NaturalNews) In a desperate attempt to avoid implementing an actual ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotic drugs in factory animal feed, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has once again made it abundantly clear that it favors corporate interests over public health. In a recent announcement, the FDA publicly petitioned the factory food industry to voluntarily stop using antibiotics, claiming that this hands-off, non-regulatory approach will somehow be more effective at curbing antibiotic overuse than a mandatory ban would be.
The announcement comes just weeks after a federal judge took the FDA to task for its blatant disregard for public health, and ordered the agency to begin withdrawing approval for the non-therapeutic use of certain antibiotics in animal feed (http://www.ucsusa.org). But instead of stepping up to the plate to fulfill these federally-mandated legal duties, the FDA has instead chosen to stage a meaningless publicity stunt that will do absolutely nothing to fix the problem.
Meanwhile, the drug companies that produce penicillin and tetracycline, the two antibiotics ordered by the federal judge to be banned, have the opportunity to challenge the ruling. But if they fail at an evidentiary hearing to prove the drugs' safe and effective use in animal feed, which they likely will be unable to do, then the FDA will not get away with simply requesting that the food industry withdraw the drugs' use -- on the contrary, the FDA will be required to ban their use in accordance with the law.
"For the past 35 years, while advocates and citizens alike have been urging FDA to take action, the problem has steadily worsened and FDA has sat on its hands, which begs the question of whose interests the agency is protecting," said Margaret Mellon, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists' (UCS) Food & Environment Program, in a statement. "The FDA has known since the 1970s that the routine use of powerful antibiotics in livestock leads to the evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which cause infections that are more difficult to treat in both people and animals."
FDA plays word games to conceal itsselling out tothe factory food industry
The FDA really has no valid excuse as to why it has deliberately failed for more than 35 years to address the problem of non-therapeutic antibiotic use in factory animal feed. And now that the public is finally catching on to the FDA's cozy coalescence with the factory food industry, the agency is being forced to at least acknowledge the issue.But rather than acknowledge it in a sound and reasonable way, the FDA has resorted to playing word games that completely dodge the issue. Despite the fact that a federal judge has already ordered the two most common antibiotic culprits to be banned, for instance, the FDA is now claiming that this voluntary approach will perform the same function without the need for litigation.
"The new strategy will ensure farmers and veterinarians can care for animals while ensuring the medicines people need remain safe and effective," FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg is quoted as saying in a recent Reuters report.
Huh? Farmers and veterinarians will still have the ability to "care for animals" following a ban on non-therapeutic antibiotic use, hence the "non-therapeutic" designation. And yet Hamburg would have us all believe that simply asking the industry to regulate itself will somehow better address the problem than actually regulating it. Do not be fooled by such nonsense.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.reuters.com
http://www.naturalnews.com/034148_antibiotics_animal_feed.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/032824_antibiotics_animal_feed.html
CISPA passes the House; epic privacy battle moves to the Senate
CISPA passes the House; epic privacy battle moves to the Senate
NaturalNews) If you're not familiar with "Washingtonspeak" - that odd, unique variance of the English language in which words don't really mean what they are supposed to mean - you might not know that the lawmakers who wrote the new Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) aren't really too concerned about the protection aspect of the legislation, at least as it applies to the general public's concern about privacy.
Yes, the word "protection" is in the title, but a closer examination of the language of the bill, as well as its intent, by those who know how things works on Capitol Hill, find that the only "protection" the bill offers is that afforded the federal government.
According to a summary of the bill by the Congressional Research Service, the legislation amends "the National Security Act of 1947 to add provisions concerning cyber threat intelligence and information sharing." In particular, cyber threat intelligence is defined "as information in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity [...]"
What that means, essentially, is that it will be easier for the government and the private sector to share information about cyber threats, which, truthfully, is a major emerging national security problem.
Making conditions ripe for privacy violations - again
Trouble is, according to groups opposed to CISPA, once again citizens' privacy concerns are taking a back seat in this Information Age. And that could be one reason why the White House has threatened to veto it, should CISPA pass the Senate.
On the one hand, business groups say the bill is necessary to make it easier for companies in the private sector to share potential cyber threat information with government security elements such as the National Security Agency.
On the other, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) think the law will be used as yet another tool to violate privacy rights.
The CDT, which initially backed the legislation, pulled its support after becoming "disappointed that CISPA passed the House in such flawed form and under such a flawed process." The group said its biggest concern was that the law, as it is now written, would allow information to move "from the private sector directly to the NSA." The bill also inappropriately allows information to be applied to national security issues other than just cyber security - and therein lies the problem.
"CISPA goes too far for little reason," says ACLU legislative counsel Michelle Richardson, according to the Washington Post. "Cybersecurity does not have to mean abdication of Americans' online privacy. As we've seen repeatedly, once the government gets expansive national security authorities, there's no going back. We encourage the Senate to let this horrible bill fade into obscurity."
CISPA: Bypassing privacy on weakest of excuses
The impetus of the legislation - to protect U.S. infrastructure, which is run by computer - from attack is as noble as it is necessary in these digital times. Cyber attacks on the U.S. have been mounting quickly, especially against U.S. military, industrial and corporate targets. But as usual, critics point out that the legislation isn't what it appears to be.
"I do think there is a need for companies to get more information from the government in a timely fashion. The problem that arises with CISPA is that it does so much more than that," says Rainey Reitman, activism director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
"It also opens the floodgates for companies to intercept communications of everyday Internet users and pass unredacted personal information to the governments," she added.
CISPA would let companies essentially bypass current privacy laws "and pass citizens' personal data to the government even if there's a weak excuse that the information is related to cyber security purposes," says a report by PC World.
"The government in return has said that if they get information that's unrelated to cyber security they 'may' - don't have to, but may choose to - remove some of the implications toward civil liberties. But they don't have to and there's no real guidelines on what they would have to do about it," Reitman said.
Protecting the country from cyber attacks is imperative. Some say the cyber-equivalent of a Pearl Harbor-style attack is on the horizon.
Fine - let's protect our electronic and digital infrastructure. But for once, let's not trample the constitutional rights of our citizens in the process.
Sources for this article include:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.03523:
http://www.washingtonpost.com
http://www.pcworld.com
NaturalNews) If you're not familiar with "Washingtonspeak" - that odd, unique variance of the English language in which words don't really mean what they are supposed to mean - you might not know that the lawmakers who wrote the new Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) aren't really too concerned about the protection aspect of the legislation, at least as it applies to the general public's concern about privacy.
Yes, the word "protection" is in the title, but a closer examination of the language of the bill, as well as its intent, by those who know how things works on Capitol Hill, find that the only "protection" the bill offers is that afforded the federal government.
According to a summary of the bill by the Congressional Research Service, the legislation amends "the National Security Act of 1947 to add provisions concerning cyber threat intelligence and information sharing." In particular, cyber threat intelligence is defined "as information in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity [...]"
What that means, essentially, is that it will be easier for the government and the private sector to share information about cyber threats, which, truthfully, is a major emerging national security problem.
Making conditions ripe for privacy violations - again
Trouble is, according to groups opposed to CISPA, once again citizens' privacy concerns are taking a back seat in this Information Age. And that could be one reason why the White House has threatened to veto it, should CISPA pass the Senate.
On the one hand, business groups say the bill is necessary to make it easier for companies in the private sector to share potential cyber threat information with government security elements such as the National Security Agency.
On the other, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) think the law will be used as yet another tool to violate privacy rights.
The CDT, which initially backed the legislation, pulled its support after becoming "disappointed that CISPA passed the House in such flawed form and under such a flawed process." The group said its biggest concern was that the law, as it is now written, would allow information to move "from the private sector directly to the NSA." The bill also inappropriately allows information to be applied to national security issues other than just cyber security - and therein lies the problem.
"CISPA goes too far for little reason," says ACLU legislative counsel Michelle Richardson, according to the Washington Post. "Cybersecurity does not have to mean abdication of Americans' online privacy. As we've seen repeatedly, once the government gets expansive national security authorities, there's no going back. We encourage the Senate to let this horrible bill fade into obscurity."
CISPA: Bypassing privacy on weakest of excuses
The impetus of the legislation - to protect U.S. infrastructure, which is run by computer - from attack is as noble as it is necessary in these digital times. Cyber attacks on the U.S. have been mounting quickly, especially against U.S. military, industrial and corporate targets. But as usual, critics point out that the legislation isn't what it appears to be.
"I do think there is a need for companies to get more information from the government in a timely fashion. The problem that arises with CISPA is that it does so much more than that," says Rainey Reitman, activism director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
"It also opens the floodgates for companies to intercept communications of everyday Internet users and pass unredacted personal information to the governments," she added.
CISPA would let companies essentially bypass current privacy laws "and pass citizens' personal data to the government even if there's a weak excuse that the information is related to cyber security purposes," says a report by PC World.
"The government in return has said that if they get information that's unrelated to cyber security they 'may' - don't have to, but may choose to - remove some of the implications toward civil liberties. But they don't have to and there's no real guidelines on what they would have to do about it," Reitman said.
Protecting the country from cyber attacks is imperative. Some say the cyber-equivalent of a Pearl Harbor-style attack is on the horizon.
Fine - let's protect our electronic and digital infrastructure. But for once, let's not trample the constitutional rights of our citizens in the process.
Sources for this article include:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.03523:
http://www.washingtonpost.com
http://www.pcworld.com
Pro Libertate: Officer Regina Tasca Goes "Rogue"
Pro Libertate: Officer Regina Tasca Goes "Rogue": On April 29, 2011, Tasca was on patrol when she got a call for medical assistance. Former Bogota Council Member Tara Sharp, concerned about the erratic behavior of her 22-year-old son Kyle, called the police to take him to the hospital for a psychological evaluation. Requesting police intervention, particularly in cases of this kind, is never a good idea. Sharp was exceptionally fortunate that Officer Tasca was the first to respond: She has years of experience as an EMT and had just completed specialized training on situations involving psychologically disturbed people.
“When the call came, I heard that a couple of officers from Ridgefield Park were coming to provide backup, which I thought was OK, Tasca related to Pro Libertate. “Kyle had been shouting and swearing when I got there, but I got him calmed down.” The young man’s mood changed abruptly when he saw the other officers arrive.
“He noticed them and asked me, `Why is there another police officer here from another town?’ Then he said that he was leaving, and he moved maybe two or three steps when one of the Ridgefield officers jumped him.”
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hVOj-SoDeHQ?version=3&feature=player_embedded"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hVOj-SoDeHQ?version=3&feature=player_embedded" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
“When the call came, I heard that a couple of officers from Ridgefield Park were coming to provide backup, which I thought was OK, Tasca related to Pro Libertate. “Kyle had been shouting and swearing when I got there, but I got him calmed down.” The young man’s mood changed abruptly when he saw the other officers arrive.
“He noticed them and asked me, `Why is there another police officer here from another town?’ Then he said that he was leaving, and he moved maybe two or three steps when one of the Ridgefield officers jumped him.”
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hVOj-SoDeHQ?version=3&feature=player_embedded"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hVOj-SoDeHQ?version=3&feature=player_embedded" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
22 Signs That The Collapsing Spanish Economy Is Heading Into A Great Depression
22 Signs That The Collapsing Spanish Economy Is Heading Into A Great Depression
What happens when debt-fueled false prosperity disappears? Just look at Spain. The 4th largest economy in the eurozone was riding high during the boom years, but now the Spanish economy is collapsing with no end in sight. When a debt bubble gets interrupted, the consequences can be rather chaotic. Just like we saw in Greece, austerity is causing the economy to slow down in Spain. But when the economy slows down, tax revenues fall and that makes it even more difficult to meet budget targets. So even more austerity measures are needed to keep debt under control and the cycle just keeps going. Unfortunately, even with all of the recently implemented austerity measures the Spanish government is still not even close to a balanced budget. Meanwhile, the housing market in Spain is crashing and unemployment is already above 24 percent. The Spanish banking system is a giant, unregulated mess that is on the verge of a massive implosion, and the Spanish stock market has been declining rapidly. The Spanish government is going to need a massive bailout and so will the entire Spanish banking system. But that is going to be a huge problem, because the Spanish economy is almost 5 times as large as the Greek economy. When the Spanish financial system collapses, the entire globe is going to feel the pain and there will be no easy solution.
So just how bad are things in Spain at this point?
The following are 22 signs that the collapsing Spanish economy is heading into a great depression....
#1 The unemployment rate in Spain has reached 24.4 percent - a new all-time record high. Back in April 2007, the unemployment rate in Spain was only 7.9 percent.
#2 The unemployment rate in Spain is now higher than the U.S. unemployment rate was during any point during the Great Depression of the 1930s.
#3 According to CNBC, some analysts are projecting that the unemployment rate in Spain is going to go above 30 percent.
#4 The unemployment rate for those under the age of 25 in Spain is now a whopping 52 percent.
#5 There are more than 47 million people living in Spain today. Only about 17 million of them have jobs.
#6 Retail sales in Spain have declined for 21 months in a row.
#7 The Bank of Spain has officially confirmed that Spain has already entered another recession.
#8 Last week, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services slashed Spain's credit rating from A to BBB+.
#9 The yield on 10-year Spanish bonds is up around 6 percent again. That is considered to be very dangerous territory.
#10 Two of Spain's biggest banks have announced that they are going to stop increasing their holdings of Spanish government debt.
#11 Of all the loans held by Spanish banks, 8.15 percent are considered to be "bad loans".
#12 The total value of all bad loans in Spain is equivalent to approximately 13 percent of Spanish GDP.
#13 Of all real estate assets held by Spanish banks, more than 50 percent of them are considered to be "troubled" by the Spanish government.
#14 That total amount of money loaned out by Spanish banks is equivalent to approximately 170 percent of Spanish GDP.
#15 Home prices in Spain fell by 11.2 percent last year, and the number of property repossessions in Spain rose by a staggering 32 percent during 2011.
#16 Spanish housing prices are now down 25 percent from the peak of the housing market and Citibank's Willem Buiter expects the eventual decline to be somewhere around 60 percent.
#17 It is being projected the the economy of Spain will shrink by 1.7 percent this year, although there are some analysts that feel that projection is way too optimistic.
#18 The Spanish government has announced a ban on all cash transactions larger than 2,500 euros.
#19 One key Spanish stock index has already fallen by more than 19 percent so far this year.
#20 The Spanish government recently admitted that its 2011 budget deficit was much larger than originally projected and that it probably will not meet its budget targets for 2012 either.
#21 Spain's debt to GDP ratio is projected to rise by more than 11 percent during 2012.
#22 Worldwide exposure to Spanish debt is estimated to be well over a trillion euros.
Spain is going down the exact same road that Greece went down.
What happens when debt-fueled false prosperity disappears? Just look at Spain. The 4th largest economy in the eurozone was riding high during the boom years, but now the Spanish economy is collapsing with no end in sight. When a debt bubble gets interrupted, the consequences can be rather chaotic. Just like we saw in Greece, austerity is causing the economy to slow down in Spain. But when the economy slows down, tax revenues fall and that makes it even more difficult to meet budget targets. So even more austerity measures are needed to keep debt under control and the cycle just keeps going. Unfortunately, even with all of the recently implemented austerity measures the Spanish government is still not even close to a balanced budget. Meanwhile, the housing market in Spain is crashing and unemployment is already above 24 percent. The Spanish banking system is a giant, unregulated mess that is on the verge of a massive implosion, and the Spanish stock market has been declining rapidly. The Spanish government is going to need a massive bailout and so will the entire Spanish banking system. But that is going to be a huge problem, because the Spanish economy is almost 5 times as large as the Greek economy. When the Spanish financial system collapses, the entire globe is going to feel the pain and there will be no easy solution.
So just how bad are things in Spain at this point?
The following are 22 signs that the collapsing Spanish economy is heading into a great depression....
#1 The unemployment rate in Spain has reached 24.4 percent - a new all-time record high. Back in April 2007, the unemployment rate in Spain was only 7.9 percent.
#2 The unemployment rate in Spain is now higher than the U.S. unemployment rate was during any point during the Great Depression of the 1930s.
#3 According to CNBC, some analysts are projecting that the unemployment rate in Spain is going to go above 30 percent.
#4 The unemployment rate for those under the age of 25 in Spain is now a whopping 52 percent.
#5 There are more than 47 million people living in Spain today. Only about 17 million of them have jobs.
#6 Retail sales in Spain have declined for 21 months in a row.
#7 The Bank of Spain has officially confirmed that Spain has already entered another recession.
#8 Last week, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services slashed Spain's credit rating from A to BBB+.
#9 The yield on 10-year Spanish bonds is up around 6 percent again. That is considered to be very dangerous territory.
#10 Two of Spain's biggest banks have announced that they are going to stop increasing their holdings of Spanish government debt.
#11 Of all the loans held by Spanish banks, 8.15 percent are considered to be "bad loans".
#12 The total value of all bad loans in Spain is equivalent to approximately 13 percent of Spanish GDP.
#13 Of all real estate assets held by Spanish banks, more than 50 percent of them are considered to be "troubled" by the Spanish government.
#14 That total amount of money loaned out by Spanish banks is equivalent to approximately 170 percent of Spanish GDP.
#15 Home prices in Spain fell by 11.2 percent last year, and the number of property repossessions in Spain rose by a staggering 32 percent during 2011.
#16 Spanish housing prices are now down 25 percent from the peak of the housing market and Citibank's Willem Buiter expects the eventual decline to be somewhere around 60 percent.
#17 It is being projected the the economy of Spain will shrink by 1.7 percent this year, although there are some analysts that feel that projection is way too optimistic.
#18 The Spanish government has announced a ban on all cash transactions larger than 2,500 euros.
#19 One key Spanish stock index has already fallen by more than 19 percent so far this year.
#20 The Spanish government recently admitted that its 2011 budget deficit was much larger than originally projected and that it probably will not meet its budget targets for 2012 either.
#21 Spain's debt to GDP ratio is projected to rise by more than 11 percent during 2012.
#22 Worldwide exposure to Spanish debt is estimated to be well over a trillion euros.
Spain is going down the exact same road that Greece went down.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
One Nifty Little Gun: The new Ruger SR22
One Nifty Little Gun: The new Ruger SR22
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PMKrvyM90Us?version=3&feature=player_embedded"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PMKrvyM90Us?version=3&feature=player_embedded" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PMKrvyM90Us?version=3&feature=player_embedded"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PMKrvyM90Us?version=3&feature=player_embedded" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
Insight: Falling home prices drag new buyers under water | Reuters
That figure, provided to Reuters by tracking firm CoreLogic, represents about one out of 10 home loans made during that period.
It is a sobering indication the U.S. housing market remains deeply troubled, with home values still falling in many parts of the country, and raises the question of whether low-down payment loans backed by the FHA are putting another generation of buyers at risk.
As of December 2011, the latest figures available, 31 percent of the U.S. home loans that were in negative equity - in which the outstanding loan balance exceeds the value of the home - were FHA-insured mortgages, according to CoreLogic.
Many borrowers, particularly since late 2010, thought they were buying at the bottom of a housing market that had already suffered steep declines, but have been caught out by a continued fall in prices in wide swaths of America.
Even for loans taken out in December - less than four months ago and the last month for which data is available - nearly 44,000 borrowers, or about 7.5 percent of the total, now find themselves under water.
"The overwhelming majority of the U.S. is still seeing home prices decline," said CoreLogic senior economist Sam Khater. "Many borrowers continue to be quickly wiped out."
The problem is not uniform around the country. In some areas, such as Washington, D.C., Miami and parts of northern California, prices are on the rise.
CoreLogic predicts the overall U.S. housing market will finally bottom out this year.
And the number of homeowners falling under water each month has decreased significantly since the peak of the financial crisis in 2008 and early 2009.
Still, Khater said, since October 2010 average home prices have fallen 7.4 percent. Overall, CoreLogic data shows that 11.1 million, or 22.8 percent, of U.S. residential properties with a mortgage are in negative equity, unchanged from the summer of 2010.
read full article here Insight: Falling home prices drag new buyers under water | Reuters
Bob Chapman - USAprepares (1/2) - April 24, 2012 - YouTube
Bob Chapman - USAprepares (1/2) - April 24, 2012 - YouTube
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oY7BwL54p9M?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oY7BwL54p9M?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oY7BwL54p9M?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oY7BwL54p9M?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
Friday, April 27, 2012
Home Owners Across the Nation Sue All Bank Servicers and Their Offshore Havens; Spire Law Officially Announces Filing of Landmark Lawsuit - MarketWatch
Home Owners Across the Nation Sue All Bank Servicers and Their Offshore Havens; Spire Law Officially Announces Filing of Landmark Lawsuit - MarketWatch
NEW YORK, NY, Apr 23, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- In a lawsuit alleged to involve the largest money laundering network in United States history, Spire Law Group, LLP -- on behalf of home owners across the Country -- has filed a mass tort action in the Supreme Court of New York, County of Kings. Home owners across the country have sued every major bank servicer and their subsidiaries -- formed in countries known as havens for money laundering such as the Cayman Islands, the Isle of Man, Luxembourg and Malaysia -- alleging that while the Obama Administration was publicly encouraging loan modifications for home owners, it was privately ratifying the formation of these shell companies in violation of the United States Patriot Act, and State and Federal law. The case further alleges that through these obscure foreign companies, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan, Wells Fargo Bank, Citibank, Citigroup, One West Bank, and numerous other federally chartered banks stole hundreds of millions of dollars of home owners' money during the last decade and then laundered it through offshore companies. The complaint, Index No. 500827, was filed by Spire Law Group, LLP, and several of the Firm's affiliates and partners across the United States.
Far from being ambiguous, this is a complaint that "names names." Indeed, the lawsuit identifies specific companies and the offshore countries used in this enormous money laundering scheme. Federally Chartered Banks' theft of money and their utilization of offshore tax haven subsidiaries represent potential FDIC violations, violations of New York law, and countless other legal wrongdoings under state and federal law.
"The laundering of trillions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money -- and the wrongful taking of the homes of those taxpayers -- was known by the Administration and expressly supported by it. Evidence uncovered by the plaintiffs revealed that the Administration ignored its own agencies' reports -- and reports from the Department of Homeland Security -- about this situation, dating as far back as 2010. Worse, the Administration purported to endorse a 'national bank settlement' without disclosing or having any public discourse whatsoever about the thousands of foreign tax havens now wholly owned by our nation's banks. Fortunately, no home owner is bound to enter into this fraudulent bank settlement," stated Eric J. Wittenberg of Columbus, Ohio -- a noted trial lawyer, author and student of US history -- on behalf of plaintiffs in the case.
The suing home owners reveal how deeply they were defrauded by bank and governmental corruption -- and are suing for conversion, larceny, fraud, and for violations of other provisions of New York state law committed by these financial institutions and their offshore counterparts.
This lawsuit explains why loans were, in general, rarely modified after 2009. It explains why the entire bank crisis worsened, crippling the economy of the United States and stripping countless home owners of their piece of the American dream. It is indeed a fact that the Administration has spent far more money stopping bank investigations, than they have investigating them. When the Administration's agencies (like the FDIC) blew the whistle, their reports were ignored.
The case is styled Abeel v. Bank of America, etc., et al. -- and includes such entities as ML Banderia Cayman BRL Inc., ML Whitby Luxembourg S.A.R.L. and J.P Morgan Asset Management Luxembourg S.A. -- as well as hundreds of other obscure offshore entities somehow "owned" by federally chartered banks and formed "under the nose" of the Administration and the FDIC.
Commenting further on the case, Mr. Wittenberg stated: "As if it is not bad enough that banks collect money and do not credit it to homeowners' accounts, and as if it is not bad enough that those banks then foreclose when they know they do not have a legally enforceable interest in the realty, we now learn that they have been operating under unbridled free reign given by the Administration and some states' Attorneys General in formulating this international money laundering network. Now that the light of day has been shined on it, I believe we can all rest assured that the beginning of the end of the bank crisis has arrived."
All United States home owners may have the right to bring a lawsuit of this kind if they paid money to a national bank servicer during the years 2003 through 2009.
One lawyer impacted by the corruption -- Mitchell J. Stein, who formerly represented the FDIC, the RTC and the FSLIC during the Savings and Loan scandal of the 1990s, and who predicted all of the foregoing in open court two years ago -- commented: "Two years ago, I remarked in open court to a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge, as well as to legislators including Senator Dianne Feinstein's office during a multitude of in-person meetings, that the ongoing violations of the Patriot Act by these financial institutions was outrageous and a breach of the public trust of unprecedented proportions," said Stein.
"The size and scope of this misconduct -- stretching to far-away islands never before having standing as approved United States Bank affiliates -- is remarkable and emblematic of what we have seen," he continued. "The bank crisis represents the height of corruption and brazen behavior where our historically trusted financial institutions have no qualms about breaking the law, because they have the Administration behind them. Banks do well enough when they operate lawfully without needing to be permitted to operate as criminal enterprises that steal money from United States citizens."
Additional plaintiffs' counsel Nicholas M. Moccia commented: "Having been in the trenches of the bank crisis for years, I always knew that the misconduct was being conducted by a network. When I started litigating against banks, however, I could have never imagined that it would be this extensive. I look forward to taking discovery of these thousands of obscure foreign entities and to obtaining for homeowners their constitutionally entitled injuries for this international ring of theft and deception."
Comments were requested from the Attorney Generals' offices in NY, CA, NV, and MA and the White House, but no comment was provided.
About Spire Law Group
Spire Law Group, LLP is a national law firm whose motto is "the public should be protected -- at all costs -- from corruption in whatever form it presents itself." The Firm is comprised of lawyers nationally with more than 250-years of experience in a span of matters ranging from representing large corporations and wealthy individuals, to also representing the masses. The Firm is at the front lines litigating against government officials, banks, defunct loan pools, and now the very offshore entities where the corruption was enabled and perpetrated.
Contact:
James N. Fiedler, Esq.
Managing Partner
Spire Law Group, LLP
877-475-2448
Email Contact
SOURCE: Spire Law Group, LLP
One Thing Maine, Virginia and Arizona Have in Common: Opposition to the NDAA
One Thing Maine, Virginia and Arizona Have in Common: Opposition to the NDAA
On Wednesday, Arizona's state legislature sent a bill opposing the detention provisions in the NDAA to their governor. And, last week, a similar bill became law in Virginia, about a month after Maine passed a joint resolution to the same effect. Add to that list the cities and counties that have passed resolutions urging Congress to repeal the problematic provisions in the NDAA — Fairfax, Calif.; Santa Cruz, Calif.; El Paso County, Colo.; Fremont County, Colo.; Moffat County, Colo.; Weld County, Colo.; Cherokee County, Kan.; Northampton, Mass.; Alleghany County, N.C.; Macomb, N.Y.; Elk County, Pa.; and New Shoreham, R.I. — and the map starts looking awfully full. This is not a red state issue or a blue state issue or a purple state issue. A few of the resolutions are under-inclusive, but their message is still clear: across social and political lines, no one likes the idea of indefinite detention or mandatory military detention far from any battlefield. (Okay, except maybe Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and a few other misguided members of Congress.)
Will your town, city, county, or state be the next to speak up? You can make that happen. Check out our model legislation and activist toolkit for legislative language, talking points, and tips to help you get started. Our bill sends a message from your local legislative body to Congress that the indefinite military detention provisions of the NDAA should be repealed. The model legislation prohibits state and local employees from aiding the federal armed forces in the investigation, arrest, detention, or trial of any person within the United States under the NDAA. It also sends a message from your legislative body to Congress that the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force should expire at the end of the war in Afghanistan so that the government cannot continue to use the AUMF as justification for its claims that war is everywhere and anywhere and that the president can order the American military to imprison without charge or trial people picked up far from any battlefield.
One Thing Maine, Virginia and Arizona Have in Common: Opposition to the NDAA
This week, the House Armed Services Committee has turned its attention back to the National Defense Authorization Act and began working on this year's bill. You remember last year's perversion that, for the first time in American history, codified indefinite military detention without charge or trial far from any battlefield? State legislators and activists and concerned citizens on the right and the left — and everyone in between — haven't forgotten.On Wednesday, Arizona's state legislature sent a bill opposing the detention provisions in the NDAA to their governor. And, last week, a similar bill became law in Virginia, about a month after Maine passed a joint resolution to the same effect. Add to that list the cities and counties that have passed resolutions urging Congress to repeal the problematic provisions in the NDAA — Fairfax, Calif.; Santa Cruz, Calif.; El Paso County, Colo.; Fremont County, Colo.; Moffat County, Colo.; Weld County, Colo.; Cherokee County, Kan.; Northampton, Mass.; Alleghany County, N.C.; Macomb, N.Y.; Elk County, Pa.; and New Shoreham, R.I. — and the map starts looking awfully full. This is not a red state issue or a blue state issue or a purple state issue. A few of the resolutions are under-inclusive, but their message is still clear: across social and political lines, no one likes the idea of indefinite detention or mandatory military detention far from any battlefield. (Okay, except maybe Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and a few other misguided members of Congress.)
Will your town, city, county, or state be the next to speak up? You can make that happen. Check out our model legislation and activist toolkit for legislative language, talking points, and tips to help you get started. Our bill sends a message from your local legislative body to Congress that the indefinite military detention provisions of the NDAA should be repealed. The model legislation prohibits state and local employees from aiding the federal armed forces in the investigation, arrest, detention, or trial of any person within the United States under the NDAA. It also sends a message from your legislative body to Congress that the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force should expire at the end of the war in Afghanistan so that the government cannot continue to use the AUMF as justification for its claims that war is everywhere and anywhere and that the president can order the American military to imprison without charge or trial people picked up far from any battlefield.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
THE ECONOMICS OF ZERO INTEREST RATES
THE ECONOMICS OF ZERO INTEREST RATES
Zero interest rates certainly limits what the elitists can do in that end of the market. It is becoming more and more evident that the Fed is not making the final decisions, they are being made by JPM and Goldman Sachs, as we touched on negative rates not all that long ago. The Fed was forced into the market. We fear that negative rates are on the way unless the Fed wants to buy all the Treasury issuance, not just 61%, which they admit too. This really would force all bonds higher and yields lower. Of course, there is always the possibility of the issue of floating rate bonds. Those bonds would tend to give higher yields overall. Europe is reentering the spotlight and it is not an auspicious entry. The EU officials still believe Spain will not need financial support. This, the 5th largest economy in the euro zone and presently has public debt of GP OF 68%. Experts believe that that number will be 120% in 2013. Their property bubble ended in 2007 and since then prices have fallen 38%. Spain borrowed $225 billion about 50% what everyone else was borrowing. This past week it did 2 and 10-year paper for about $333 trillion. The bid to cover was 3.3% (2 to 1 is normal), so there was plenty of demand for the bonds. We might add a good part of the buying came from banks that borrowed LTRO funds to do so. Rumors of recapitalization are in the works, but we do not see that happening. It would force the opening of Spain’s domestic banking to industry and foreign ownership. The banks in turn lose the subsidies and we are sure the Rothschild’s and Europe’s royalty would not like it very much. The IMF raised $420 billion in new capital to be thrown into the pot and is looking for an additional $262 billion. At the same time Spain for the 10th time says we do not need rescue funds for their banks – we will see. It could be a difficult affair inasmuch as Holland will have a new government in the fall. Lending free funds is one thing, but borrowing to lend and creating debt to lend is another. The Dutch are going to have to go into austerity just to financially help others and that be over. Worse yet, Fitch is now going to probably lower their debt rating. Spain’s answer looks to be two sets of books which so many banks, sovereigns and corporations used in the US and UK. One for good assets, one for bad, the latter to be written off over 50 years. Even after $200 billion or so was borrowed to purchase it was not enough for Spanish banks, 10-year bonds to keep the yield from rising to almost record levels. We do not think Spain will be rescued. $1.5 trillion is a lot of money and even if it is, how long will it last? The world has to recognize monetization problems but the major problem is a global system that is out of control. Global credit has been expanded, unchecked and each day it worsens, particularly among banks and sovereigns. As we wrote in 1991, the euro was going to be a disaster and essentially it has been. As we wrote long ago one interest rate cannot fit all, because of different stages of development. This caused more then 10 years of prolonged mispricing of pricing in credit and bonds. What we have as a result is a dysfunctional global monetary apparatus. Leveraged speculation is what is going on and it hasn’t stopped. Use of derivatives has gone exponential, which makes it even worse. This past week was not a good one for bonds, particularly that of Greece, Spain and Italy. The Europeans keep talking recovery and none has appeared as yet. The ECB has to sort this mess out and it is impossible for them to do. There are not going to be any soft landings. Everyone is going to be touched by this disaster. China will be touched as well. The Fed, and other central banks will continue to inject massive amounts of funds into their monetary systems. They have no choice. We have a long way to go. These conditions could last for five years, who knows? What we do know is hyperinflation is on its way. Accumulate your gold and silver shares, coins and bullion while they are still inexpensive. You have no other choice. Go long and stay long. | |
Bank CEOs Gain as Millions Lose Dreams, Retirement to Foreclosure | Common Dreams
Bank CEOs Gain as Millions Lose Dreams, Retirement to Foreclosure | Common Dreams
Inside and outside of Wells Fargo’s annual meeting in San Francisco yesterday, thousands of angry protesters decried the bank’s leading role in the loss of millions of American homes to foreclosure.
Demonstrators march and block a side entrance to the Wells Fargo shareholders meeting in San Francisco, Tuesday, April 24, 2012. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)
If you want to know why the protesters are so angry, consider this double standard. For most Americans, retirement security lies in the value of their homes. Millions of these people have been losing that security as the nation’s largest banks have foreclosed on them. Yet the CEOs of these banks are reaping giant pay packages and padding their own retirement security with profits squeezed from ordinary people.
For many American families, a paid-off home is part of the dream of a secure retirement. The roof over their heads has long comprised the largest element of most families’ net worth. The housing crisis brought to us by the country’s biggest bankers has stolen the dreams of the nearly 4 million families who have lost their homes to foreclosure since the housing crisis began in 2007.
Of those who continue to live in their homes, more than a quarter have lost so much equity that they now owe more on their mortgage than their residence is worth. Even those who have never missed a payment on these underwater mortgages have found it all but impossible to refinance their loans to take advantage of record low rates that would cut hundreds of dollars from their monthly payments.
As American families struggle with their shrinking equity, Wells Fargo is enjoying record profits. Its earnings clocked in at more than $4 billion during the first quarter of 2012.
Wells Fargo and Bank of America are the country’s two largest mortgage servicers. Over the past three years, the number of homes foreclosed upon by the two giant banks has steadily grown. At the end of 2011, they reported to federal banking regulators that they held $22.5 billion and $19 billion worth of foreclosed houses, respectively.
While foreclosures have devastated the financial security of millions of American families, the CEOs of Wells Fargo and Bank of America have seen their retirement packages balloon
Bank CEOs Gain as Millions Lose Dreams, Retirement to Foreclosure
Demonstrators march and block a side entrance to the Wells Fargo shareholders meeting in San Francisco, Tuesday, April 24, 2012. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)If you want to know why the protesters are so angry, consider this double standard. For most Americans, retirement security lies in the value of their homes. Millions of these people have been losing that security as the nation’s largest banks have foreclosed on them. Yet the CEOs of these banks are reaping giant pay packages and padding their own retirement security with profits squeezed from ordinary people.
For many American families, a paid-off home is part of the dream of a secure retirement. The roof over their heads has long comprised the largest element of most families’ net worth. The housing crisis brought to us by the country’s biggest bankers has stolen the dreams of the nearly 4 million families who have lost their homes to foreclosure since the housing crisis began in 2007.
Of those who continue to live in their homes, more than a quarter have lost so much equity that they now owe more on their mortgage than their residence is worth. Even those who have never missed a payment on these underwater mortgages have found it all but impossible to refinance their loans to take advantage of record low rates that would cut hundreds of dollars from their monthly payments.
As American families struggle with their shrinking equity, Wells Fargo is enjoying record profits. Its earnings clocked in at more than $4 billion during the first quarter of 2012.
Wells Fargo and Bank of America are the country’s two largest mortgage servicers. Over the past three years, the number of homes foreclosed upon by the two giant banks has steadily grown. At the end of 2011, they reported to federal banking regulators that they held $22.5 billion and $19 billion worth of foreclosed houses, respectively.
While foreclosures have devastated the financial security of millions of American families, the CEOs of Wells Fargo and Bank of America have seen their retirement packages balloon
Frog in the Boiling Pot of Government: CISPA Spies, Drone Zone, Space Mining - New World ...
Frog in the Boiling Pot of Government: CISPA Spies, Drone Zone, Space Mining - New World ...: CISPA Spies, Drone Zone, Space Mining - New World Next Week - YouTube
Frog in the Boiling Pot of Government: Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passe...
Frog in the Boiling Pot of Government: Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passe...: Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote from the this-is-crazy dept Up until this afternoon, the final vote...
MBA Reports Decrease in Mortgage Applications Despite Low Interest Rates | LoanSafe
(Source: MBA) — Mortgage applications decreased 3.8 percent from one week earlier, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ending April 20, 2012.
The Market Composite Index, a measure of mortgage loan application volume, decreased 3.8 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis from one week earlier. On an unadjusted basis, the Index decreased 3.3 percent compared with the previous week. The Refinance Index decreased 5.6 percent from the previous week, with the Conventional Refinance Index decreasing by 6.1 percent and the Government Refinance Index decreasing by 2.1 percent. The seasonally adjusted Purchase Index increased 2.7 percent from one week earlier. The unadjusted Purchase Index increased 3.6 percent compared with the previous week and was essentially unchanged from the same week one year ago.
The four week moving average for the seasonally adjusted Market Index is up 1.23 percent. The four week moving average is down 0.67 percent for the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index, while this average is up 1.92 percent for the Refinance Index.
The refinance share of mortgage activity decreased to 73.4 percent of total applications from 75.2 percent the previous week. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity increased to 5.6 percent from 5.3 percent of total applications from the previous week.
Within refinance applications taken in March 2012, 58.8 percent were for fixed-rate 30-year loans, 23.1 percent for 15-year fixed loans and 5.2 percent for ARMs. The share of refinance applications for “other” fixed-rate mortgages with amortization schedules other than 15 and 30-year terms was 12.8 percent of all refinance applications.
The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with conforming loan balances ($417,500 or less) decreased to 4.04 percent from 4.05 percent, with points decreasing to 0.40 from 0.45 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent loan-to-value ratio (LTV) loans. This is the lowest 30-year fixed interest rate recorded in the history of the survey. The effective rate decreased from last week.
read full article here MBA Reports Decrease in Mortgage Applications Despite Low Interest Rates | LoanSafe
The Market Composite Index, a measure of mortgage loan application volume, decreased 3.8 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis from one week earlier. On an unadjusted basis, the Index decreased 3.3 percent compared with the previous week. The Refinance Index decreased 5.6 percent from the previous week, with the Conventional Refinance Index decreasing by 6.1 percent and the Government Refinance Index decreasing by 2.1 percent. The seasonally adjusted Purchase Index increased 2.7 percent from one week earlier. The unadjusted Purchase Index increased 3.6 percent compared with the previous week and was essentially unchanged from the same week one year ago.
The four week moving average for the seasonally adjusted Market Index is up 1.23 percent. The four week moving average is down 0.67 percent for the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index, while this average is up 1.92 percent for the Refinance Index.
The refinance share of mortgage activity decreased to 73.4 percent of total applications from 75.2 percent the previous week. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity increased to 5.6 percent from 5.3 percent of total applications from the previous week.
Within refinance applications taken in March 2012, 58.8 percent were for fixed-rate 30-year loans, 23.1 percent for 15-year fixed loans and 5.2 percent for ARMs. The share of refinance applications for “other” fixed-rate mortgages with amortization schedules other than 15 and 30-year terms was 12.8 percent of all refinance applications.
The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with conforming loan balances ($417,500 or less) decreased to 4.04 percent from 4.05 percent, with points decreasing to 0.40 from 0.45 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent loan-to-value ratio (LTV) loans. This is the lowest 30-year fixed interest rate recorded in the history of the survey. The effective rate decreased from last week.
read full article here MBA Reports Decrease in Mortgage Applications Despite Low Interest Rates | LoanSafe
International Forecaster April 2012 (#7) - Gold, Silver, Economy + More
The following are some snippets from the most recent issue of the International Forecaster. For the full 24 page issue, please see subscription information below.
read full article here International Forecaster April 2012 (#7) - Gold, Silver, Economy + More
US MARKETS
Zero interest rates certainly limits what the elitists can do in that end of the market. It is becoming more and more evident that the Fed is not making the final decisions, they are being made by JPM and Goldman Sachs, as we touched on negative rates not all that long ago. The Fed was forced into the market. We fear that negative rates are on the way unless the Fed wants to buy all the Treasury issuance, not just 61%, which they admit too. This really would force all bonds higher and yields lower. Of course, there is always the possibility of the issue of floating rate bonds. Those bonds would tend to give higher yields overall.
Europe is reentering the spotlight and it is not an auspicious entry. The EU officials still believe Spain will not need financial support. This, the 5th largest economy in the euro zone and presently has public debt of GP OF 68%. Experts believe that that number will be 120% in 2013. Their property bubble ended in 2007 and since then prices have fallen 38%. Spain borrowed $225 billion about 50% what everyone else was borrowing. This past week it did 2 and 10-year paper for about $333 trillion. The bid to cover was 3.3% (2 to 1 is normal), so there was plenty of demand for the bonds. We might add a good part of the buying came from banks that borrowed LTRO funds to do so. Rumors of recapitalization are in the works, but we do not see that happening. It would force the opening of Spain’s domestic banking to industry and foreign ownership. The banks in turn lose the subsidies and we are sure the Rothschild’s and Europe’s royalty would not like it very much.
The IMF raised $420 billion in new capital to be thrown into the pot and is looking for an additional $262 billion. At the same time Spain for the 10th time says we do not need rescue funds for their banks – we will see. It could be a difficult affair inasmuch as Holland will have a new government in the fall. Lending free funds is one thing, but borrowing to lend and creating debt to lend is another. The Dutch are going to have to go into austerity just to financially help others and that be over. Worse yet, Fitch is now going to probably lower their debt rating.
Spain’s answer looks to be two sets of books which so many banks, sovereigns and corporations used in the US and UK. One for good assets, one for bad, the latter to be written off over 50 years. Even after $200 billion or so was borrowed to purchase it was not enough for Spanish banks, 10-year bonds to keep the yield from rising to almost record levels.
MAP-21 Targets Gun Rights and More
.1813, also known as the “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” (MAP-21), has been approved by the U.S. Senate and is now enroute to the House for a vote. The 1,676-page measure has been considered controversial for a variety of its provisions, including some that impact Second Amendment rights.
The first of two specific attacks on gun ownership, on page 1323, states:
MAP-21's second attack on gun rights is subtle and involves several steps. It begins with a provision permitting the IRS to confiscate the passports of any persons believed to owe more than $50,000 in taxes. In order for the government to enforce that mandate, those citizens would be placed in a national database as “prohibited persons,” who would then be automatically flagged if they applied for a passport.
As noted by The Examiner:
Defenders of the Constitution and the rights it protects are wary of the unnatural progression that can cause a tax delinquent individual to be added to databases created to monitor terrorists and then having this categorization be used as a pretext for infringing upon these persons' right the keep and bear arms — and all without due process.
It’s worth noting that this has become a routine occurrence.
Sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), and David Vitter (R-La), MAP-21 includes a variety of other provisions that inspire fear in liberty-minded individuals.
Section 31406 of S. 1813 calls for “Mandatory Event Data Recorders” (or so-called black boxes) to be installed in new vehicles and mandates penalties for individuals who fail to comply.
“Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall revise part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to require, beginning with model year 2015, that new passenger motor vehicles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder that meets the requirements under that part,” states the bill.
But some contend that the presence of the presence of the black boxes can be a slippery slope, permitting the government to have total access to one's transportation habits and whereabouts. The National Motorists Association asserts that “there is no rational or scientific need nor justification to equip tens of millions of vehicles on a perpetual basis with black boxes.”
The company states:
read full article here MAP-21 Targets Gun Rights and More
The first of two specific attacks on gun ownership, on page 1323, states:
The Secretary [of Transportation] may modify, suspend, or terminate a special permit or approval if the Secretary determines that — (1) the person who was granted the special permit or approval has violated the special permit or approval or the regulations issued under this chapter in a manner that demonstrates that the person is not fit to conduct the activity authorized by the special permit or approval; or (2) the special permit or approval is unsafe.
The broad language found within this provision has raised concerns among those who believe the Secretary could use the interpretive powers defined here to revoke permits to transport guns and ammunition in all realms of transportation.MAP-21's second attack on gun rights is subtle and involves several steps. It begins with a provision permitting the IRS to confiscate the passports of any persons believed to owe more than $50,000 in taxes. In order for the government to enforce that mandate, those citizens would be placed in a national database as “prohibited persons,” who would then be automatically flagged if they applied for a passport.
As noted by The Examiner:
This is the thing that has citizens’ rights groups up in arms. The government already has "no fly" lists that prohibit certain persons from air travel. Critics say that the government could easily use such lists to deny Second Amendment rights to those who find themselves on the lists.
For example, those who are placed on the “no-fly list” are also added to another list, as potential domestic terrorists. Once on that list, those individuals are no longer allowed to have any guns. President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, admitted as much when he stated, “If you are known as may be a possible terrorist, you cannot buy a handgun in America.”Defenders of the Constitution and the rights it protects are wary of the unnatural progression that can cause a tax delinquent individual to be added to databases created to monitor terrorists and then having this categorization be used as a pretext for infringing upon these persons' right the keep and bear arms — and all without due process.
It’s worth noting that this has become a routine occurrence.
Sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), and David Vitter (R-La), MAP-21 includes a variety of other provisions that inspire fear in liberty-minded individuals.
Section 31406 of S. 1813 calls for “Mandatory Event Data Recorders” (or so-called black boxes) to be installed in new vehicles and mandates penalties for individuals who fail to comply.
“Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall revise part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to require, beginning with model year 2015, that new passenger motor vehicles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder that meets the requirements under that part,” states the bill.
But some contend that the presence of the presence of the black boxes can be a slippery slope, permitting the government to have total access to one's transportation habits and whereabouts. The National Motorists Association asserts that “there is no rational or scientific need nor justification to equip tens of millions of vehicles on a perpetual basis with black boxes.”
The company states:
While denials abound there is good reason to believe that the promotion of universal black box installation in new vehicles has more to do with regulatory, enforcement, judicial, and corporate economic interests; all at the expense of vehicle owners who are forced to pay for and retain this form of self-surveillance.
The NMA does not object to safety research that involves the use of black boxes, as long as the participants are informed and willing and they are allowed to opt out of research project without negative consequences. As noted, such research can be reliably conducted with thousands of willing participants, versus millions of uninformed conscripts.
In an April 19 interview on Fox News, Judge Andrew Napolitano addressed the unconstitutionality of the black box provision.read full article here MAP-21 Targets Gun Rights and More
Tennessee Passes Resolution Slamming “Socialist” UN Agenda 21
Even as the United Nations prepares to massively expand its “sustainable development” agenda at the upcoming sustainability summit in Rio de Janeiro, lawmakers in Tennessee approved a joint resolution blasting the global body’s controversial Agenda 21 — adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit — as an “insidious” socialist plot. All across America, opposition to the UN schemes is building quickly.
The popular measure (HJR 587) in Tennessee was passed by a bipartisan 72-to-23 landslide in the state House of Representatives last month. And on Tuesday, it was overwhelmingly approved in the Senate with 19 in favor and 11 against.
A broad coalition of activists from across the political spectrum came together to support the resolution, urging lawmakers to stand firm in the face of attacks to protect the people of Tennessee. And the efforts paid off: Supporters celebrated its passage Wednesday as another small victory for liberty, private-property rights, and national sovereignty.
Despite being non-binding, analysts said legislators in Tennessee sent a powerful message by recognizing the “destructive and insidious nature” of the controversial UN scheme. The resolution, among other points, urges the public and policymakers to reject Agenda 21, which it describes as “a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control.”
Echoing a similar measure adopted earlier this year by the Republican National Committee (RNC), the resolution approved in Tennessee cites the UN’s own documents to expose the global plan. Agenda 21 policy describes “social justice,” for example, as “the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment,” lawmakers observed.
Such a “radical” vision would have to be accomplished by what the resolution describes as “socialist” and “communist” means — “redistribution of wealth” from U.S. taxpayers to governments around the world. Meanwhile, the legislation points out, Agenda 21 considers national sovereignty to be a “social injustice.”
In other words, if the UN has its way, Americans would be forced to submit to global authorities as opposed to governing themselves under the framework established by the Constitution. And everything would have to change — education, the economy, policies, taxes, consumption, production, and more.
“This United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called ‘sustainable development’ views the American way of life of private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms all as destructive to the environment,” the resolution explains. “We hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it.”
While the 20-year-old global plan has never been formally adopted by the U.S. Senate — which must ratify all treaties — it is still being implemented across the nation by stealth. “The United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America,” the measure notes.
Aside from the federal executive branch, one of the main forces working to foist the scheme on Americans is a global organization named ICLEI (formerly known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives). And it uses a variety of innocent-sounding terms — “Smart Growth” and “Green,” for example — to advance the controversial agenda, the resolution states. As such, the legislature of Tennessee resolved to warn America about the “dangerous intent” of the plan.
Facing a tidal wave of anti-Agenda 21 activism, an assortment of extremist pro-UN groups and tax-funded propagandists have attempted to downplay the significance of the global agenda, portraying it as a harmless environmental initiative. But experts and lawmakers were not convinced, and opposition to the schemes continues to grow.
State Sen. Mike Bell, a Republican who sponsored the Senate resolution in Tennessee, held up the UN’s Agenda 21 in a thick folder for all to see. “There is over 300 pages, like I said, contained in this document,” he explained, noting that the state resolution would send a “message” to Congress. “I can best describe this as zoning rules on steroids.”
Some Democrats, however, did not see it that way. “It seems to me that planning and forethought and trying to preserve our Tennessee way of life is exactly what we should be doing,” State Sen. Andy Berke was quoted as saying. It was not immediately clear why he opposed the resolution because it merely condemns Agenda 21 and UN schemes — not planning, forethought, or the preservation of the state’s way of life.
Still, despite support from some pro-UN Democrats, opposition to the global organization and its “sustainable development” schemes largely transcends party lines. In the Tennessee House, for example, at least half-a-dozen Democratic lawmakers joined with the GOP majority to approve the anti-Agenda 21 resolution.
read full article hereTennessee Passes Resolution Slamming “Socialist” UN Agenda 21
The popular measure (HJR 587) in Tennessee was passed by a bipartisan 72-to-23 landslide in the state House of Representatives last month. And on Tuesday, it was overwhelmingly approved in the Senate with 19 in favor and 11 against.
A broad coalition of activists from across the political spectrum came together to support the resolution, urging lawmakers to stand firm in the face of attacks to protect the people of Tennessee. And the efforts paid off: Supporters celebrated its passage Wednesday as another small victory for liberty, private-property rights, and national sovereignty.
Despite being non-binding, analysts said legislators in Tennessee sent a powerful message by recognizing the “destructive and insidious nature” of the controversial UN scheme. The resolution, among other points, urges the public and policymakers to reject Agenda 21, which it describes as “a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control.”
Echoing a similar measure adopted earlier this year by the Republican National Committee (RNC), the resolution approved in Tennessee cites the UN’s own documents to expose the global plan. Agenda 21 policy describes “social justice,” for example, as “the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment,” lawmakers observed.
Such a “radical” vision would have to be accomplished by what the resolution describes as “socialist” and “communist” means — “redistribution of wealth” from U.S. taxpayers to governments around the world. Meanwhile, the legislation points out, Agenda 21 considers national sovereignty to be a “social injustice.”
In other words, if the UN has its way, Americans would be forced to submit to global authorities as opposed to governing themselves under the framework established by the Constitution. And everything would have to change — education, the economy, policies, taxes, consumption, production, and more.
“This United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called ‘sustainable development’ views the American way of life of private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms all as destructive to the environment,” the resolution explains. “We hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it.”
While the 20-year-old global plan has never been formally adopted by the U.S. Senate — which must ratify all treaties — it is still being implemented across the nation by stealth. “The United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America,” the measure notes.
Aside from the federal executive branch, one of the main forces working to foist the scheme on Americans is a global organization named ICLEI (formerly known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives). And it uses a variety of innocent-sounding terms — “Smart Growth” and “Green,” for example — to advance the controversial agenda, the resolution states. As such, the legislature of Tennessee resolved to warn America about the “dangerous intent” of the plan.
Facing a tidal wave of anti-Agenda 21 activism, an assortment of extremist pro-UN groups and tax-funded propagandists have attempted to downplay the significance of the global agenda, portraying it as a harmless environmental initiative. But experts and lawmakers were not convinced, and opposition to the schemes continues to grow.
State Sen. Mike Bell, a Republican who sponsored the Senate resolution in Tennessee, held up the UN’s Agenda 21 in a thick folder for all to see. “There is over 300 pages, like I said, contained in this document,” he explained, noting that the state resolution would send a “message” to Congress. “I can best describe this as zoning rules on steroids.”
Some Democrats, however, did not see it that way. “It seems to me that planning and forethought and trying to preserve our Tennessee way of life is exactly what we should be doing,” State Sen. Andy Berke was quoted as saying. It was not immediately clear why he opposed the resolution because it merely condemns Agenda 21 and UN schemes — not planning, forethought, or the preservation of the state’s way of life.
Still, despite support from some pro-UN Democrats, opposition to the global organization and its “sustainable development” schemes largely transcends party lines. In the Tennessee House, for example, at least half-a-dozen Democratic lawmakers joined with the GOP majority to approve the anti-Agenda 21 resolution.
read full article hereTennessee Passes Resolution Slamming “Socialist” UN Agenda 21
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Bernanke's Race Against Time by Gary North
Ben Bernanke's position as Chairman of the Board of Governors will end on January 31, 2014. He is now in a race against time.
ACADEMIC ECONOMISTS AT THE HELM
One was Arthur Burns, who served under Nixon, and therefore presided over the destruction of the gold exchange standard, and who launched the worst phase of price inflation in the history of peacetime America.
The second was Alan Greenspan. He was not known as Dr. Greenspan, which is good, because the conditions under which he received his PhD have been under a cloud for years. There has never been a release of his PhD dissertation. A purloined version has circulated, and the thing is little more than a series of articles. It does not have anything like the academic character of a standard PhD dissertation.
Ben Bernanke is the third. He was a professor of economics at Princeton University. This is a major university. There is no question that he has strong academic credentials. His academic credentials are greater than the credentials held by any previous Federal Reserve Chairman. This is why he is a sitting duck.
Bernanke's problem is that academic economists are protected by tenure from the realities of the capital markets. Nobody can fire them. They are not held accountable for anything they say. They are in control over the grading process. Students do not give them any back talk. If another economist challenges them, the other economist is writing in some obscure journal, and the public has no interest in the debate. So, the debates among economists take place in a rarefied world in which economic reality rarely intrudes. When it does intrude, it usually does so at the expense of the theories that are offered in the standard academic journals.
Greenspan never taught at a university. He was not strictly an academic. This helped him. He covered himself with his famous "Greenspeak." He admitted this on national TV while he was in office. The public thought this was amusing. Obviously, so did he. Congress, officially in charge of the Federal Reserve, never challenged him. He got a free ride.
Bernanke tries to escape criticism by three methods when he speaks publicly: (1) reviewing recent financial history at great length even though everyone in the audience already knows this history; (2) adding footnotes to bog down his critics in academic bilge; (3) mildly blaming Congress for its deficits, on the assumption that Congress will do nothing to balance the budget, and therefore the FED (and Bernanke) will escape blame when the house of credit cards finally collapses.
Academic economists should not be allowed anywhere near policy-making power. Yet there is no policy-making in the field of economics that is more crucial to an economy than the policy-making at the nation's central bank. Of all places where you do not want a man with a PhD to preside over the institution, the central bank is that institution.
BERNANKE"S HANDICAPS
Bernanke came into power in February 2006, following the tenure of the most famous Federal Reserve Chairman ever. Not even Paul Volcker was as famous as Greenspan, because Volcker served a shorter term. He left before cable news had become dominant. There were no financial news channels. There was no YouTube.
I said from the beginning of his term that the recession crisis would hit under Bernanke's administration, and so it did. In late April 2006, I wrote this:
Bernanke is the first Federal Reserve Chairman to receive widespread criticism by the public. The main reason for this has been Ron Paul. The other reason has been YouTube videos produced by people with an Austrian school economic perspective. Peter Schiff has been very successful in this regard.
The Federal Reserve is now under assault. It is not a direct assault on the government. It is more like guerrilla warfare. The Federal Reserve is the target of snipers who are well informed about economic theory and policy. It is also the target of snipers who are not well informed, but who are really angry at the state of the economy. The Federal Reserve likes to promote itself as being the center of economic policy-making, so it takes the blame for this economy.
Bernanke is a Keynesian. This means that he really does not understand how the economy works. Worse than this, he made his reputation as an expert on the Great Depression. This means that he is a pro-Roosevelt, pro-inflation, pro-government, pro-regulation economist. I think there is zero possibility that he will recognize the imminence of the next crisis. He did not recognize the last one, so there is no reason to believe he is going to recognize the next one.
Being an academic economist, he does not know how to conduct himself verbally in the highly competitive world of political rhetoric. He has had a free ride all of his career. He has never been forced to interact with either the market or Austrian economists.
He cannot communicate his ideas, because Keynesianism is incoherent. I am not exaggerating. If you read John Maynard Keynes's famous book, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936), you will see the extent to which he was utterly incoherent in that book. This is in contrast to most of his other books. He was a very clear writer when he wanted to be, so you can be sure that whenever you read incoherent statements in anything written by Keynes, it was because he was trying to cover up the fact that he did not understand economic cause and effect.
His disciple an acolyte, Paul Samuelson, was equally incoherent in his Foundations of Economic Analysis. Samuelson hid behind mathematical formulas, so that the average reader did not expect to understand. Neither did most of his academic peers. The book began with these words:
read full article here Bernanke's Race Against Time by Gary North
(1) Will the American economy fall back into recession before then, thereby negating the tripling of the monetary base under his chairmanship? Will he get out before mass inflation rears its ugly head? (2) Will he be able to pass on the Old Maid of price inflation, the way that Alan Greenspan passed on the Old Maid of the Great Recession to him?He suffers from a major liability: he is an academic. In the history of the Federal Reserve, only three men who have held the position of Chairman of the Board of Governors have had a PhD in economics.
ACADEMIC ECONOMISTS AT THE HELM
One was Arthur Burns, who served under Nixon, and therefore presided over the destruction of the gold exchange standard, and who launched the worst phase of price inflation in the history of peacetime America.
The second was Alan Greenspan. He was not known as Dr. Greenspan, which is good, because the conditions under which he received his PhD have been under a cloud for years. There has never been a release of his PhD dissertation. A purloined version has circulated, and the thing is little more than a series of articles. It does not have anything like the academic character of a standard PhD dissertation.
Ben Bernanke is the third. He was a professor of economics at Princeton University. This is a major university. There is no question that he has strong academic credentials. His academic credentials are greater than the credentials held by any previous Federal Reserve Chairman. This is why he is a sitting duck.
Bernanke's problem is that academic economists are protected by tenure from the realities of the capital markets. Nobody can fire them. They are not held accountable for anything they say. They are in control over the grading process. Students do not give them any back talk. If another economist challenges them, the other economist is writing in some obscure journal, and the public has no interest in the debate. So, the debates among economists take place in a rarefied world in which economic reality rarely intrudes. When it does intrude, it usually does so at the expense of the theories that are offered in the standard academic journals.
Greenspan never taught at a university. He was not strictly an academic. This helped him. He covered himself with his famous "Greenspeak." He admitted this on national TV while he was in office. The public thought this was amusing. Obviously, so did he. Congress, officially in charge of the Federal Reserve, never challenged him. He got a free ride.
Bernanke tries to escape criticism by three methods when he speaks publicly: (1) reviewing recent financial history at great length even though everyone in the audience already knows this history; (2) adding footnotes to bog down his critics in academic bilge; (3) mildly blaming Congress for its deficits, on the assumption that Congress will do nothing to balance the budget, and therefore the FED (and Bernanke) will escape blame when the house of credit cards finally collapses.
Academic economists should not be allowed anywhere near policy-making power. Yet there is no policy-making in the field of economics that is more crucial to an economy than the policy-making at the nation's central bank. Of all places where you do not want a man with a PhD to preside over the institution, the central bank is that institution.
BERNANKE"S HANDICAPS
Bernanke came into power in February 2006, following the tenure of the most famous Federal Reserve Chairman ever. Not even Paul Volcker was as famous as Greenspan, because Volcker served a shorter term. He left before cable news had become dominant. There were no financial news channels. There was no YouTube.
I said from the beginning of his term that the recession crisis would hit under Bernanke's administration, and so it did. In late April 2006, I wrote this:
The Federal Reserve must walk the tightrope between price inflation on the one side, which will raise long-term interest rates and mortgage rates, threatening to pop the housing bubble, and a recession on the other side. The yield curve almost inverted in early April, 2006. This is the traditional harbinger of a recession. That would also threaten the housing bubble. . . .Austrian School economics told me that the attempt by Greenspan to reduce the expansion of the money supply would eventually produce a recession. He got out in time. He was replaced by an academic who did not understand Austrian economics, and who did not have a clue as to what was about to hit the economy. No Federal Reserve Chairman has been as completely blindsided by the economy as Ben Bernanke was in 2008.
The expansion of the U.S. money supply, beginning in late 2000, created the bubble condition of the housing market. The way to keep gold from going up, other than selling large quantities, is to stabilize the money supply. The FED actually began to follow this policy in January, 2006. But if this policy is extended, the fiat money-induced boom that began in 2001 will bust. Bernanke must find a way to escape from the trap Alan Greenspan set for his successor. This can be done, but only at the expense of a major recession. In a Congressional election year, there is pressure on the FED not to let this happen. . . .
THE FED DARES NOT STABILIZE MONEY
The FED will not stabilize the money supply for long. Bernanke is famous for his speech in which he compared the FED to a helicopter full of paper money. He is attempting to overcome that blunder with tight money. But the result of tight money will be a recession. Then it will be a depression. He knows this. He has hailed Milton Friedman for having told the economists in 1963 that it was the FED's deflationary policies that produced the great depression.
Bernanke is the first Federal Reserve Chairman to receive widespread criticism by the public. The main reason for this has been Ron Paul. The other reason has been YouTube videos produced by people with an Austrian school economic perspective. Peter Schiff has been very successful in this regard.
The Federal Reserve is now under assault. It is not a direct assault on the government. It is more like guerrilla warfare. The Federal Reserve is the target of snipers who are well informed about economic theory and policy. It is also the target of snipers who are not well informed, but who are really angry at the state of the economy. The Federal Reserve likes to promote itself as being the center of economic policy-making, so it takes the blame for this economy.
Bernanke is a Keynesian. This means that he really does not understand how the economy works. Worse than this, he made his reputation as an expert on the Great Depression. This means that he is a pro-Roosevelt, pro-inflation, pro-government, pro-regulation economist. I think there is zero possibility that he will recognize the imminence of the next crisis. He did not recognize the last one, so there is no reason to believe he is going to recognize the next one.
Being an academic economist, he does not know how to conduct himself verbally in the highly competitive world of political rhetoric. He has had a free ride all of his career. He has never been forced to interact with either the market or Austrian economists.
He cannot communicate his ideas, because Keynesianism is incoherent. I am not exaggerating. If you read John Maynard Keynes's famous book, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936), you will see the extent to which he was utterly incoherent in that book. This is in contrast to most of his other books. He was a very clear writer when he wanted to be, so you can be sure that whenever you read incoherent statements in anything written by Keynes, it was because he was trying to cover up the fact that he did not understand economic cause and effect.
His disciple an acolyte, Paul Samuelson, was equally incoherent in his Foundations of Economic Analysis. Samuelson hid behind mathematical formulas, so that the average reader did not expect to understand. Neither did most of his academic peers. The book began with these words:
read full article here Bernanke's Race Against Time by Gary North
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)