Non-Compliance Our Key to Resisting Tyranny | Gerald Celente Trends Blog: Non-Compliance Our Key to Resisting Tyranny
Just say NO : Mass Non-Compliance as a Means to Ending Tyranny ,People just don't seem to be getting it. If you're not in the family tree you might just end up hanging from it. No matter who you vote for or where you vote the government always gets in. The same government that's kept us all as debt slaves, imprisoned us with it's laws and brainwashed us with it's diverse propaganda about history, religion and fear of each other I always come back to: Compass & Square Divide & Conquer Keep divided keep conquered They shoot heroes don't they JFK MX MLK RFK...in the coming year we all will be faced with the same dilemma. that dilemma will force us all to either comply all the way to the grave, or make some extreme sacrifices.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Discover Is Refunding $200 Million To Credit Card Customers
Discover Is Refunding $200 Million To Credit Card Customers: A federal investigation spelled bad news for consumers and Discover alike when it determined the bank had duped people into signing up for payment protection plans and other add-on services they probably didn't need.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. have ordered Discover to cough up $200 million in refunds to more than 3.5 million customers.
The alleged deception was carried out between December 2007 and August 2011, and the services cost about $3 to $10 a month.
"The FDIC and CFPB have determined that Discover has engaged in deceptive acts and practices in or affecting commerce," said the government filing. "The FDIC further has determined that Discover has engaged in unsafe or unsound banking practices."
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. have ordered Discover to cough up $200 million in refunds to more than 3.5 million customers.
The alleged deception was carried out between December 2007 and August 2011, and the services cost about $3 to $10 a month.
"The FDIC and CFPB have determined that Discover has engaged in deceptive acts and practices in or affecting commerce," said the government filing. "The FDIC further has determined that Discover has engaged in unsafe or unsound banking practices."
B’Man’s Guest Post: DCDave’s “Was Katharine Graham Killed for 9/11?” « BuelahMan's Revolt
B’Man’s Guest Post: DCDave’s “Was Katharine Graham Killed for 9/11?” « BuelahMan's Revolt: Surviving operatives of the old Soviet bloc propaganda apparatus have to be impressed with how complete and thoroughgoing in case after important case in the United States is the suppression of important news by what still manages to call itself a “free press.” When this writer was able to obtain the long-secret official report on the violent death of Secretary of Defense James Forrestal and the Seeley Mudd Manuscript Library of Princeton University even sent out a press release dramatically announcing its availability, not a single newspaper, magazine, radio, or television station in the country reported it. The same thing happened when Kenneth Starr issued his long-delayed report on the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster. It contained an addendum, ordered attached over Starr’s strenuous objections by the same 3-judge panel that appointed him, that thoroughly undermined his suicide conclusion. I have called the press silence about that addendum “The Great Suppression of ’97.” The press was similarly silent when Starr’s lead investigator, Miguel Rodriguez, resigned in disgust and when we published his resignation letter.
Napolitano Says Cybersecurity Executive Order Almost Ready
Napolitano Says Cybersecurity Executive Order Almost Ready
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano revealed September 19 that an executive order granting the president sweeping power over the Internet is “close to completion.”
Testifying before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Napolitano said that the order is still “being drafted” and vetted by various high-level bureaucrats. But she also indicated that it would be issued as soon as a “few issues” were resolved. Assuming control of the nation’s Internet infrastructure is a DHS responsibility, Napolitano added.
“DHS is the Federal government’s lead agency for securing civilian government computer systems and works with our industry and Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government partners to secure critical infrastructure and information systems,” she informed senators.
Precisely which clause in the Constitution grants to the president specifically or the executive branch (of which DHS is a part) generally authority to exercise any sort of oversight of such matters was not cited by Secretary Napolitano.
Naturally, a document written 225 years ago would not include a reference to cybersecurity, but the principles of enumerated powers and limited government apply to any program or project of the federal government. According to the contract that created the three branches of the federal government, none of those departments may do anything unless specifically granted that authority in the Constitution.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano revealed September 19 that an executive order granting the president sweeping power over the Internet is “close to completion.”
Testifying before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Napolitano said that the order is still “being drafted” and vetted by various high-level bureaucrats. But she also indicated that it would be issued as soon as a “few issues” were resolved. Assuming control of the nation’s Internet infrastructure is a DHS responsibility, Napolitano added.
“DHS is the Federal government’s lead agency for securing civilian government computer systems and works with our industry and Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government partners to secure critical infrastructure and information systems,” she informed senators.
Precisely which clause in the Constitution grants to the president specifically or the executive branch (of which DHS is a part) generally authority to exercise any sort of oversight of such matters was not cited by Secretary Napolitano.
Naturally, a document written 225 years ago would not include a reference to cybersecurity, but the principles of enumerated powers and limited government apply to any program or project of the federal government. According to the contract that created the three branches of the federal government, none of those departments may do anything unless specifically granted that authority in the Constitution.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Governor Romney Is Correct by Andrew P. Napolitano
Governor Romney Is Correct by Andrew P. Napolitano
As readers of this column and viewers of Fox News Channel may know, I have not hesitated to criticize Gov. Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and the governor himself. I have argued that his message is muddled and his values are unknown beyond his ardent wish to improve economic conditions through the use of free market mechanisms rather than central economic planning, a position with which I agree entirely.
I have also maintained that his willingness to abandon, or not to accept, first principles has made these questions reasonable: If Romney is elected president, which Romney will show up for work on Jan. 20, 2013? Will it be the Romney who ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in 1994, the Romney who governed Massachusetts as Mario Cuomo governed New York, or the Romney who now claims to be a "severe" (his word) conservative? Will it be the Romney who spent the entire presidential primary season assuring conservative Republican primary voters that he’ll dismantle Obamacare on "Day One" (his phrase), or the Romney who told reporters last week that he approves of a limited federal role in managing health care? Or will it be the Romney who, when caught by the press saying something not intended for public consumption but demonstrably true, sticks to his guns?
A few months ago, at a private fundraiser, Romney spoke to supporters and contributors and observed that 47 percent of Americans do not pay any income tax, and thus his call for not raising taxes (though he wants to eliminate some familiar deductions, which is the functional equivalent of raising some folks’ taxes) will not resonate with the voters in that group. Then he went on to say that this is roughly the same 47 percent who are dependent upon the government for part or all of their subsistence; and to that subsistence of food, shelter, education and clothing, the feds have now added health care. Then he referred to those dependent upon the government as "victims" (his word). Then, among my leftish colleagues in the press, all hell broke loose.
The reason hell broke loose among most of the media is that Romney spoke a painful truth, and often a painful truth is difficult to accept. I have argued that FDR deliberately set out to create dependence upon the federal government – and hence upon virtually all Democrats in Congress and Republicans afraid to resist them – by establishing entitlement programs and inducing reliance upon them. FDR went so far as to lie to Americans when he stated that the federal government will "hold" (his word) your Social Security contributions for you until you retire, and then you’ll receive your nest egg of cash. We know he lied about this, because at the same time he was saying that the money deducted from your pay is yours, he dispatched Justice Department lawyers to argue in a constitutional challenge of Social Security before the Supreme Court that the money deducted from your pay is the government’s money, and the government can spend it as it wishes. The Supreme Court agreed with that argument.
As readers of this column and viewers of Fox News Channel may know, I have not hesitated to criticize Gov. Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and the governor himself. I have argued that his message is muddled and his values are unknown beyond his ardent wish to improve economic conditions through the use of free market mechanisms rather than central economic planning, a position with which I agree entirely.
I have also maintained that his willingness to abandon, or not to accept, first principles has made these questions reasonable: If Romney is elected president, which Romney will show up for work on Jan. 20, 2013? Will it be the Romney who ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in 1994, the Romney who governed Massachusetts as Mario Cuomo governed New York, or the Romney who now claims to be a "severe" (his word) conservative? Will it be the Romney who spent the entire presidential primary season assuring conservative Republican primary voters that he’ll dismantle Obamacare on "Day One" (his phrase), or the Romney who told reporters last week that he approves of a limited federal role in managing health care? Or will it be the Romney who, when caught by the press saying something not intended for public consumption but demonstrably true, sticks to his guns?
Monday, September 17, 2012
To President Obama: The 2nd Amendment Is About Fighting Tyranny, Not Hunting Deer by Michael Scheuer
To President Obama: The 2nd Amendment Is About Fighting Tyranny, Not Hunting Deer by Michael Hersch
Soon after the Denver shootings, President Obama said it was time to put stricter gun-control measures in place. With the failure of Attorney General Holder’s “Fast and Furious” ploy to void the 2nd Amendment, it seems Obama thought he might capitalize on the Denver shootings to further damage the Constitution. The negative public reaction to his words, however, sent Obama backtracking, and senior Democrats like Senator Reid and Representative Pelosi quickly made public remarks to bury the issue – for now.
Before moving on, it is worth noting that Obama said gun laws must be changed but only in a way that protected Americans’ cherished tradition of hunting. Well, hunting game is not the central concern of the 2nd Amendment. What is central is that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of Americans to be armed in case they decide there is a need, in Jefferson’s words, “to alter or to abolish [the government]” and “to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
In creating the 2nd Amendment, the Founders – through James Madison‘s pen – took their cue from the British Bill of Rights (1689) which recognized that an unarmed populace could not protect its rights, liberty, and economic welfare against a king backed by a standing army, and so it allowed for an armed populace. The Founders also recalled that when London cracked down on New England’s resistance to the Crown, one of British General Thomas Gates’ first moves was to try to seize the munitions and ordnance the colonists had stockpiled around Boston. One reason for the British Army’s ill-fated expedition to Lexington and Concord in April, 1775, for example, was to capture the colonists’ stores of cannon, muskets, and munitions.
Even before Jefferson’s declaration, therefore, what in today’s parlance is called “gun control” was seen by Americans for what it was and is, a policy instituted by an oppressive government that fears its population and therefore aims at ensuring that citizens cannot arm to resist its will. The 2nd Amendment is meant, in part, to make sure that if the federal government created by the Constitution turns oppressive, Americans will have arms with which to defend their liberties and welfare.
And this right is much more important today than it was when the 2nd Amendment was drafted because the federal government has over time deliberately and probably unconstitutionally eradicated the 2nd Amendment’s other anti-oppression provision, the one that made sure the several state governments had well-regulated – that is, well-trained – militias at their command. The state militias were of course meant to assist the U.S. government’s standing army in case of foreign attack or domestic insurrection, but they also were meant to defend the states and their populations if the federal government used its standing army to willfully violate the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, or acted in a manner harmful to the peoples’ security, economic welfare, and/or their society’s social cohesion.
Except for Alexander Hamilton and a few other of the Founders, both Federalists and Anti-Federalists were very wary of – indeed, many hated – the idea of maintaining a strong standing army in time of peace, seeing it as an all-too-easy-to-use tool of would-be tyrants. The 2nd Amendment took cognizance of this historically genuine danger and established two hedges against it, an armed citizenry and effective state militias. The much stronger hedge – state militias – is long gone, and only the weaker hedge of an armed citizenry remains. And there seems nothing outrageous about the idea that, as the 2nd Amendment allowed citizens to be ready to resist federal-government oppression by matching it musket-for-musket in the 1790s, today’s citizens ought to be free to face the same potential threat of tyranny assault rifle-for-assault rifle.
Soon after the Denver shootings, President Obama said it was time to put stricter gun-control measures in place. With the failure of Attorney General Holder’s “Fast and Furious” ploy to void the 2nd Amendment, it seems Obama thought he might capitalize on the Denver shootings to further damage the Constitution. The negative public reaction to his words, however, sent Obama backtracking, and senior Democrats like Senator Reid and Representative Pelosi quickly made public remarks to bury the issue – for now.
Before moving on, it is worth noting that Obama said gun laws must be changed but only in a way that protected Americans’ cherished tradition of hunting. Well, hunting game is not the central concern of the 2nd Amendment. What is central is that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of Americans to be armed in case they decide there is a need, in Jefferson’s words, “to alter or to abolish [the government]” and “to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
In creating the 2nd Amendment, the Founders – through James Madison‘s pen – took their cue from the British Bill of Rights (1689) which recognized that an unarmed populace could not protect its rights, liberty, and economic welfare against a king backed by a standing army, and so it allowed for an armed populace. The Founders also recalled that when London cracked down on New England’s resistance to the Crown, one of British General Thomas Gates’ first moves was to try to seize the munitions and ordnance the colonists had stockpiled around Boston. One reason for the British Army’s ill-fated expedition to Lexington and Concord in April, 1775, for example, was to capture the colonists’ stores of cannon, muskets, and munitions.
Even before Jefferson’s declaration, therefore, what in today’s parlance is called “gun control” was seen by Americans for what it was and is, a policy instituted by an oppressive government that fears its population and therefore aims at ensuring that citizens cannot arm to resist its will. The 2nd Amendment is meant, in part, to make sure that if the federal government created by the Constitution turns oppressive, Americans will have arms with which to defend their liberties and welfare.
| |
Except for Alexander Hamilton and a few other of the Founders, both Federalists and Anti-Federalists were very wary of – indeed, many hated – the idea of maintaining a strong standing army in time of peace, seeing it as an all-too-easy-to-use tool of would-be tyrants. The 2nd Amendment took cognizance of this historically genuine danger and established two hedges against it, an armed citizenry and effective state militias. The much stronger hedge – state militias – is long gone, and only the weaker hedge of an armed citizenry remains. And there seems nothing outrageous about the idea that, as the 2nd Amendment allowed citizens to be ready to resist federal-government oppression by matching it musket-for-musket in the 1790s, today’s citizens ought to be free to face the same potential threat of tyranny assault rifle-for-assault rifle.
An Interview With Jimmy Israel (Producer Involved With Mohammed Film) by Robert Wenzel
An Interview With Jimmy Israel (Producer Involved With Mohammed Film) by Robert Wenzel: VICE has done some excellent work tracking down other players in the "Mohammed" film. If this was a CIA or Mossad operation using cutouts to distance themselves from the film, they have done an excellent job. You want cutouts to be so flaky that you really can't know for sure why they did anything. This sure fits this crew.
Of course, we all know Nakoula Bassely Nakoula (possibly using the alias Sam Bacile) is a former fraudster. Now VICE introduces us to Robert Alan Brown, who possibly uses the aliases Robert Brownell and Alan B. Robert. And then VICE manages to get an interview with another person involved with the film, Jimmy Israel, who was born Jewish and states that he is now "mostly" Buddhist.
If you are really bored with your life, this article will give you a reason to live another day.
Make your choice, A. the CIA/Mossad is getting good at what they do, or B. these guys are just real fruitcakes. That it gets dubbed into Arabic on 9-11 suggests choice A.
Reprinted with permission from Economic Policy Journal.
Of course, we all know Nakoula Bassely Nakoula (possibly using the alias Sam Bacile) is a former fraudster. Now VICE introduces us to Robert Alan Brown, who possibly uses the aliases Robert Brownell and Alan B. Robert. And then VICE manages to get an interview with another person involved with the film, Jimmy Israel, who was born Jewish and states that he is now "mostly" Buddhist.
If you are really bored with your life, this article will give you a reason to live another day.
Make your choice, A. the CIA/Mossad is getting good at what they do, or B. these guys are just real fruitcakes. That it gets dubbed into Arabic on 9-11 suggests choice A.
Reprinted with permission from Economic Policy Journal.
Get Ready for an Epic Fiat Currency Avalanche by Brandon Smith
Get Ready for an Epic Fiat Currency Avalanche by Brandon Smith
What is it that makes Keynesians so insanely self destructive? Is it their mindless blind faith in the power of government? Their unfortunate ignorance of the mechanics of monetary stimulus? Their pompous self-righteousness derived from years of intellectual idiocy? Actually, I suspect all of these factors play a role. Needless to say, many of them truly believe that the strategy of fiat injection is viable, even though years of application have proven absolutely fruitless. Anyone with any sense would begin to question what kind of madness it takes to pursue or champion the mindset of the private Federal Reserve bank…
Quantitative easing has shown itself to be impotent in the improvement of America’s economic situation. Despite four years of free reign in central banking, employment remains dismal in the U.S., the housing market continues its freefall, and, our national debt swirls like a vortex at the heart of the Bermuda Triangle. Despite this abject failure of Keynesian theory, the Federal Reserve is attempting once again to convince you, the happy-go-lucky American citizen, that somehow, this time around, everything will be “different”.
Sadly, as I discussed in August of this year, not only has the Fed announced a new and UNLIMITED round of stimulus measures, but the European Central Bank has also devised its own bond buying free for all.
I predicted simultaneous QE programs by the two central banks because it made perfect sense, at least, for those with diabolical intentions. With engineered currency devaluation in full swing in the EU and the U.S., the implosion of both currencies, especially the dollar, will be masked. That is to say, the dollar index is measured in large part by comparison to the relative strength of the Euro. If the Euro falls through overt printing, the dollar will appear stronger than it really is, duping the general public and giving bankers more time to inflate.
Germany’s top constitutional court, only a day before QE3, announced its decision to support a Euro-area rescue fund, which the German people and a large part of its government are vehemently opposed to. This action was preceded by “warnings” from various banking insiders, including Nosferatu himself (George Soros), that the EU would be sent into perdition and total economic chaos if the nation did not bow down to the ECB and hand over its GDP engine for the “good of the union” and the world.
What is it that makes Keynesians so insanely self destructive? Is it their mindless blind faith in the power of government? Their unfortunate ignorance of the mechanics of monetary stimulus? Their pompous self-righteousness derived from years of intellectual idiocy? Actually, I suspect all of these factors play a role. Needless to say, many of them truly believe that the strategy of fiat injection is viable, even though years of application have proven absolutely fruitless. Anyone with any sense would begin to question what kind of madness it takes to pursue or champion the mindset of the private Federal Reserve bank…
Quantitative easing has shown itself to be impotent in the improvement of America’s economic situation. Despite four years of free reign in central banking, employment remains dismal in the U.S., the housing market continues its freefall, and, our national debt swirls like a vortex at the heart of the Bermuda Triangle. Despite this abject failure of Keynesian theory, the Federal Reserve is attempting once again to convince you, the happy-go-lucky American citizen, that somehow, this time around, everything will be “different”.
Sadly, as I discussed in August of this year, not only has the Fed announced a new and UNLIMITED round of stimulus measures, but the European Central Bank has also devised its own bond buying free for all.
I predicted simultaneous QE programs by the two central banks because it made perfect sense, at least, for those with diabolical intentions. With engineered currency devaluation in full swing in the EU and the U.S., the implosion of both currencies, especially the dollar, will be masked. That is to say, the dollar index is measured in large part by comparison to the relative strength of the Euro. If the Euro falls through overt printing, the dollar will appear stronger than it really is, duping the general public and giving bankers more time to inflate.
| |
Get Ready for the Cold and Flu Season With These All-Natural Recipes by Lisa Bedford
Get Ready for the Cold and Flu Season With These All-Natural Recipes by Lisa Bedford
Before we know it, the season of colds and sniffles and coughs will be upon us. One of my readers shared with me these three recipes, and I wanted to pass them along to you before you’re faced with a sick family and have no choice but to make a mad dash to the drugstore.
These recipes require natural ingredients such as essential oils, coconut oil, and herbs. They’re very simple to make and will provide an all-natural alternative to whatever the drugstore sells, and I’m a big fan of Nyquil! Another reason to make these is just to learn how to make your own salves and oil mixtures – a great skill for any Survival Mom.
By the way, I tried to track down the original source of the first two recipes but couldn’t find them online. If you know of the source, please let me know so I can give proper credit.
Homemade Liquid Vapor Rub
1 oz. coconut oil
1 oz. olive oil
6 drops tea tree essential oil
4 drops eucalyptus essential oil
4 drops lavender essential oil
Warm the coconut oil until liquid. Combine all ingredients. Let sit at room temperature or in the refrigerator until solidified.
Essential Oil Vapor Rub
10 drops eucalyptus essential oil
10 drops peppermint essential oil
3 drops thyme essential oil
1/8 c. olive oil
Combine all the oils and mix well. To use, rub oil mixture over the throat and chest, then cover up to help increase the warming effect. This is very effective when done right at bedtime as it helps relieve congestion and helps you fall asleep more easily.
Before we know it, the season of colds and sniffles and coughs will be upon us. One of my readers shared with me these three recipes, and I wanted to pass them along to you before you’re faced with a sick family and have no choice but to make a mad dash to the drugstore.
These recipes require natural ingredients such as essential oils, coconut oil, and herbs. They’re very simple to make and will provide an all-natural alternative to whatever the drugstore sells, and I’m a big fan of Nyquil! Another reason to make these is just to learn how to make your own salves and oil mixtures – a great skill for any Survival Mom.
By the way, I tried to track down the original source of the first two recipes but couldn’t find them online. If you know of the source, please let me know so I can give proper credit.
Homemade Liquid Vapor Rub
1 oz. coconut oil
1 oz. olive oil
6 drops tea tree essential oil
4 drops eucalyptus essential oil
4 drops lavender essential oil
Warm the coconut oil until liquid. Combine all ingredients. Let sit at room temperature or in the refrigerator until solidified.
Essential Oil Vapor Rub
10 drops eucalyptus essential oil
10 drops peppermint essential oil
3 drops thyme essential oil
1/8 c. olive oil
Combine all the oils and mix well. To use, rub oil mixture over the throat and chest, then cover up to help increase the warming effect. This is very effective when done right at bedtime as it helps relieve congestion and helps you fall asleep more easily.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Spinning Bad Financial News Into Good by Paul Craig Roberts
Spinning Bad Financial News Into Good by Paul Craig Roberts
Friday’s payroll jobs report says that 96,000 new jobs were created in August and that the unemployment rate (U.3) fell from 8.3% to 8.1%. As 96,000 new jobs are not enough to keep up with population growth, the decline in the U.3 unemployment rate was caused by 368,000 discouraged job seekers giving up on finding employment and dropping out of the work force as measured by U.3. Discouraged workers are not included in the U.3 measure of unemployment, which makes the measure useless. The only purpose of U.3 is to keep bad news out of the news. the U.3 unemployment rate only measures those who have not been discouraged by the inability to find a job and are still actively seeking employment.
The government produces another unemployment measure, U.6, which includes people who have been discouraged by the inability to find a job and have been out of the work force for less than a year. This measure of unemployment is 14.7%, a number that would get attention if reported.
When the long-term (more than one year) discouraged workers are included, the US unemployment rate is about 22%. In other words, the real US rate of unemployment is almost three times higher than the reported–headline rate–of 8.1%.
What is the purpose of reporting an unemployment rate that is about one-third the real unemployment rate? The only answer is deception through Happy News.
Let’s have a look at those 96,000 jobs. What kind of high-tech, high-income super jobs is “the world’s only superpower, the indispensable nation, the world’s greatest economy and capitalist heaven” creating? The answer is lowly paid third world jobs, which is why there is not and cannot be an economic recovery. All the good jobs have been moved offshore in order to maximize the incomes of the rich.
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 28,300 of the 96,000 jobs or 29% are waitresses and bartenders.
Health care and social services, primarily ambulatory health care services and home health care services, provided 21,700 jobs or 22.6% of the jobs.
So, 52% of the new jobs created by the American superpower are lowly paid waitresses, bartenders, practical nurses, and hospital orderlies.
Highly paid manufacturing jobs declined by 15,000. The incomes lost by these jobs most likely exceed the income gains from the waitresses, bartenders, and hospital orderlies jobs.
Where did the other 46,000 jobs come from?
Friday’s payroll jobs report says that 96,000 new jobs were created in August and that the unemployment rate (U.3) fell from 8.3% to 8.1%. As 96,000 new jobs are not enough to keep up with population growth, the decline in the U.3 unemployment rate was caused by 368,000 discouraged job seekers giving up on finding employment and dropping out of the work force as measured by U.3. Discouraged workers are not included in the U.3 measure of unemployment, which makes the measure useless. The only purpose of U.3 is to keep bad news out of the news. the U.3 unemployment rate only measures those who have not been discouraged by the inability to find a job and are still actively seeking employment.
The government produces another unemployment measure, U.6, which includes people who have been discouraged by the inability to find a job and have been out of the work force for less than a year. This measure of unemployment is 14.7%, a number that would get attention if reported.
When the long-term (more than one year) discouraged workers are included, the US unemployment rate is about 22%. In other words, the real US rate of unemployment is almost three times higher than the reported–headline rate–of 8.1%.
What is the purpose of reporting an unemployment rate that is about one-third the real unemployment rate? The only answer is deception through Happy News.
Let’s have a look at those 96,000 jobs. What kind of high-tech, high-income super jobs is “the world’s only superpower, the indispensable nation, the world’s greatest economy and capitalist heaven” creating? The answer is lowly paid third world jobs, which is why there is not and cannot be an economic recovery. All the good jobs have been moved offshore in order to maximize the incomes of the rich.
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 28,300 of the 96,000 jobs or 29% are waitresses and bartenders.
Health care and social services, primarily ambulatory health care services and home health care services, provided 21,700 jobs or 22.6% of the jobs.
So, 52% of the new jobs created by the American superpower are lowly paid waitresses, bartenders, practical nurses, and hospital orderlies.
Highly paid manufacturing jobs declined by 15,000. The incomes lost by these jobs most likely exceed the income gains from the waitresses, bartenders, and hospital orderlies jobs.
Vote, If... by Michael S. Rozeff
ote in the upcoming U.S. elections if you want to endorse, approve of, and support a power beyond your control and over which you have no control whatsoever, a power that can
...tax you to any extent it wants to and by any means it chooses to,
...take any amount of your wealth and transfer it to whomever it pleases or use it for any purpose it pleases,
...draft you into a fighting force if it decides to,
...tell you what to eat,
...control who appears on ballots,
...borrow any amount of money,
...itself decide what is legal for it to do,
...enter warfare with anyone it chooses whenever and wherever it chooses,
...interpret the Constitution as it sees fit,
...regulate any product in any way it chooses,
...regulate commerce no matter how insignificant,
...take property for any use it wants to,
...search you at its pleasure,
...restrict your ability to own weapons,
...restrict your ability to defend yourself,
...make it a crime to own weapons and defend yourself,
...make it a crime to use a wide range of drugs,
...make it a crime to buy many goods or produce them,
...control all communications,
...control all transportation,
...arrest you without warrant,
...spy on you by any means it chooses,
...postpone elections and declare martial law if it chooses,
...hold you in prison without trial,
...kill you,
...in short, pass any law it pleases and enforce it on you and against you.
Vote in the elections if you wish to stand up for, confirm, subscribe to and sustain a power that holds you in its grasp and can hold you totally in its grasp if it so decides.
A vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans is a vote for this power, which is the power of either party and both parties together.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking your vote makes a difference.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking a vote for a given party makes a difference.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking that this is your duty, or that this is a patriotic act.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking that you have no right to complain unless you vote.
Vote in this election if you think you are voting for the lesser of two evils, rather than thinking you are endorsing evil and have another option, which is not to endorse evil.
Vote in the elections as a statement that you kneel before, acknowledge and accept a power that controls your life, your liberty, your property, and your pursuit of happiness.
Vote in the elections as a sign and confirmation that you place little or no value on your life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness, and that a power beyond your control may do as it wishes with you.
Vote in the elections if you want to endorse and confirm your own status as a slave who is subject to this power.
Vote in the elections if you want to acknowledge that you are little more than a trained dog whose freedom is limited and controlled by its master.
...tax you to any extent it wants to and by any means it chooses to,
...take any amount of your wealth and transfer it to whomever it pleases or use it for any purpose it pleases,
...draft you into a fighting force if it decides to,
...tell you what to eat,
...control who appears on ballots,
...borrow any amount of money,
...itself decide what is legal for it to do,
...enter warfare with anyone it chooses whenever and wherever it chooses,
...interpret the Constitution as it sees fit,
...regulate any product in any way it chooses,
...regulate commerce no matter how insignificant,
...take property for any use it wants to,
...search you at its pleasure,
...restrict your ability to own weapons,
...restrict your ability to defend yourself,
...make it a crime to own weapons and defend yourself,
...make it a crime to use a wide range of drugs,
...make it a crime to buy many goods or produce them,
...control all communications,
...control all transportation,
...arrest you without warrant,
...spy on you by any means it chooses,
...postpone elections and declare martial law if it chooses,
...hold you in prison without trial,
...kill you,
...in short, pass any law it pleases and enforce it on you and against you.
Vote in the elections if you wish to stand up for, confirm, subscribe to and sustain a power that holds you in its grasp and can hold you totally in its grasp if it so decides.
A vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans is a vote for this power, which is the power of either party and both parties together.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking your vote makes a difference.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking a vote for a given party makes a difference.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking that this is your duty, or that this is a patriotic act.
Vote in the elections if you have been brainwashed into thinking that you have no right to complain unless you vote.
Vote in this election if you think you are voting for the lesser of two evils, rather than thinking you are endorsing evil and have another option, which is not to endorse evil.
Vote in the elections as a statement that you kneel before, acknowledge and accept a power that controls your life, your liberty, your property, and your pursuit of happiness.Vote in the elections as a sign and confirmation that you place little or no value on your life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness, and that a power beyond your control may do as it wishes with you.
Vote in the elections if you want to endorse and confirm your own status as a slave who is subject to this power.
Vote in the elections if you want to acknowledge that you are little more than a trained dog whose freedom is limited and controlled by its master.
September 14, 2012
Michael S. Rozeff [send him mail] is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York. He is the author of the free e-book Essays on American Empire: Liberty vs. Domination and the free e-book The U.S. Constitution and Money: Corruption and Decline.
Copyright © 2012 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Vote, If... by Michael S. Rozeff
Action Item #1: Eliminate SAD Foods by Mark Sisson
Action Item #1: Eliminate SAD Foods by Mark Sisson
he fundamental key to success with any lifestyle modification is removal, elimination, and avoidance of the agents of opposition to your desired lifestyle. If you’re trying to read more books and stop watching reality television, you’re going to want to cancel your scheduled recordings of Jersey Shore. If you’re trying not to drink alcohol for a month, you’ll want to get rid of the beer, booze, and wine in your house. Heck, if you’re going vegan, you’ll want to toss all the animal products from your fridge, pantry, and freezer. And if you’re going Primal, whether if it’s for a 21-Day Challenge or just to get healthier in general, you need to eliminate the Standard American Diet foods that promise to thwart you at every twist and turn. It’s a pretty simple concept to understand, right?
It can be tough to put into practice, though, since these foods are staples for many. Some are even health darlings of Conventional Wisdom. Others are obviously junk, but junk often tastes good and lures you in to its sweet, salty, crispy embrace. Best to get rid of it altogether.
So, how do we do it? What are the foods we’re eliminating and why are we getting rid of them? You want the specific foods within the various categories to eliminate, and I’ve got ‘em for you:
Most drinks are just sugar water masquerading as health beverages. They represent a massive, highly-dense source of insulin-spiking sugar without the vitamins, antioxidants, and fiber that normally come with the sugar found in nature (fruits and vegetables). Plus, sweet drinks don’t satiate as much as solid food, leading to overeating and weight gain without you even knowing it or feeling “full.” Anyone who’s ever had a large Coke disappear throughout their meal without its gradually developing absence impacting their ability to finish the meal knows this.
Common beverages to avoid:
When you pulverize a grain to make flour, you are creating an acellular carbohydrate. How this differs from a cellular carbohydrate is primarily its digestibility and the rate by which our bodies absorb its carbohydrate load. Whereas with a cellular carbohydrate, as found in fruits and tubers, we must break down the cellular walls to access the glucose, with an acellular carbohydrate that work has already been done. This sudden bolus of dense carbohydrate overwhelms our digestive tract, promoting an inflammatory gut flora and an impaired metabolism. That issue, plus all the other downsides that come along with grains (which I’ll be discussing later), make baking ingredients some of the first things you should be discarding. Besides, just what are you going to be baking?
Common baking ingredients to avoid:
Most condiments and salad dressings are simply another way to make bad food taste good by heaping sugar and/or bad fat all over it. If you get a low-fat dressing or condiment, it’s undoubtedly loaded with sugar to make up for the missing fat. If you get a store-bought full-fat dressing or condiment, it’s undoubtedly loaded with rancid omega-6 PUFAs that contribute to systemic inflammation. You can’t win, so it’s best to just get rid of the stuff altogether.
Common condiments to avoid:
he fundamental key to success with any lifestyle modification is removal, elimination, and avoidance of the agents of opposition to your desired lifestyle. If you’re trying to read more books and stop watching reality television, you’re going to want to cancel your scheduled recordings of Jersey Shore. If you’re trying not to drink alcohol for a month, you’ll want to get rid of the beer, booze, and wine in your house. Heck, if you’re going vegan, you’ll want to toss all the animal products from your fridge, pantry, and freezer. And if you’re going Primal, whether if it’s for a 21-Day Challenge or just to get healthier in general, you need to eliminate the Standard American Diet foods that promise to thwart you at every twist and turn. It’s a pretty simple concept to understand, right?
It can be tough to put into practice, though, since these foods are staples for many. Some are even health darlings of Conventional Wisdom. Others are obviously junk, but junk often tastes good and lures you in to its sweet, salty, crispy embrace. Best to get rid of it altogether.
So, how do we do it? What are the foods we’re eliminating and why are we getting rid of them? You want the specific foods within the various categories to eliminate, and I’ve got ‘em for you:
Beverages
Why:Most drinks are just sugar water masquerading as health beverages. They represent a massive, highly-dense source of insulin-spiking sugar without the vitamins, antioxidants, and fiber that normally come with the sugar found in nature (fruits and vegetables). Plus, sweet drinks don’t satiate as much as solid food, leading to overeating and weight gain without you even knowing it or feeling “full.” Anyone who’s ever had a large Coke disappear throughout their meal without its gradually developing absence impacting their ability to finish the meal knows this.
Common beverages to avoid:
- Juices – Orange, apple, acai, pomegranate, grape, V8, Ocean Spray, etc.
- “Juices” – Nectars, punches, fruit cocktail, grape drink, Sunny Delight, purple stuff
- Designer coffees – blended iced coffees (Frappucinos and their ilk), mochas
- Soda/soft drinks – diet and regular (even stuff with real sugar!)
- Energy drinks – Red Bull, Rock Star, Monster
- Sports drinks – Gatorade, Powerade, Vitamin Water
| |
Baking Ingredients
Why:When you pulverize a grain to make flour, you are creating an acellular carbohydrate. How this differs from a cellular carbohydrate is primarily its digestibility and the rate by which our bodies absorb its carbohydrate load. Whereas with a cellular carbohydrate, as found in fruits and tubers, we must break down the cellular walls to access the glucose, with an acellular carbohydrate that work has already been done. This sudden bolus of dense carbohydrate overwhelms our digestive tract, promoting an inflammatory gut flora and an impaired metabolism. That issue, plus all the other downsides that come along with grains (which I’ll be discussing later), make baking ingredients some of the first things you should be discarding. Besides, just what are you going to be baking?
Common baking ingredients to avoid:
- Corn meal, starch, and syrup
- All other starches and syrups
- Flours (primarily wheat flour)
- Certain edible powders – gluten, maltodextrin, powdered milk
- Yeast
- Dear Mark: Are Roasted Nuts and Nut-Based Baked Good Healthy?
- Top 8 Most Common Reactions to Your Grain-Free Diet (and How to Respond)
- How to Quit Grains
Condiments and Salad Dressings
Why:Most condiments and salad dressings are simply another way to make bad food taste good by heaping sugar and/or bad fat all over it. If you get a low-fat dressing or condiment, it’s undoubtedly loaded with sugar to make up for the missing fat. If you get a store-bought full-fat dressing or condiment, it’s undoubtedly loaded with rancid omega-6 PUFAs that contribute to systemic inflammation. You can’t win, so it’s best to just get rid of the stuff altogether.
| |
- Honey mustard
- Ketchup
- Jam/jelly/preserves
- Mayo, lite mayo
- Low-fat salad dressings
- Salad dressings made from soybean, corn, canola, sunflower, or safflower oil
- Anything containing lots of sugar, HFCS, and/or PUFA oils
Germany Extracts Stealth Victory Over the ECB | Euro Pacific Capital
Germany Extracts Stealth Victory Over the ECB | Euro Pacific Capital
Last week the European Central Bank (ECB) announced what many around the world had hoped it would: A plan that would allow the Bank to “do all it takes” to support the euro. Not surprisingly, stock markets in the EU and U.S. rose strongly based on the feeling that the ECB has now joined the Fed in a massive drive to reflate their respective economies by means of money creation. Many mainline observers and commentators heralded the new ECB position as a fundamental defeat for the Bundesbank, Germany’s central bank and a strong believer in sound money. Reality, however, appears to be a little different.
The deal actually contains many concessions to the German point of view. Perhaps the most important of these was the dropping of the ECB’s previous aim to ‘cap’ the bond yields of Eurozone members. Instead, the previously openended ‘buyer of last resort’ commitment, to keep bond yields low of troubled Eurozone member nations, was replaced by greater selectivity and far stricter conditions—German style. There were other major concessions as well.
By:
John Browne Tuesday, September 11, 2012
The deal actually contains many concessions to the German point of view. Perhaps the most important of these was the dropping of the ECB’s previous aim to ‘cap’ the bond yields of Eurozone members. Instead, the previously openended ‘buyer of last resort’ commitment, to keep bond yields low of troubled Eurozone member nations, was replaced by greater selectivity and far stricter conditions—German style. There were other major concessions as well.
- First, any Eurozone member nation that seeks ECB support for its bonds in the secondary market will have to make a formal application. Naturally, such a public application will likely come with political costs, embarrassment and even stigma. Given that asset prices, for stocks and bonds for instance, are so influenced by perception, these pressures will dissuade many member states from going down this road.
- Second, any applicant country will have to agree to Germanic-style deficit reduction and economic restructuring programs,which likely come with huge political costs and short term economic pain.
- Third, ECB secondary market support will be granted only if the somewhat underfunded European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and European Stability Mechanism (ESM) commit their funds in parallel. The Bundesbank has long held that the ECB should not be permitted to abuse its power to create synthetic money without spreading the cost to the rest of Europe and internationally, via the IMF.
- Fourth, the ECB’s support is limited to bonds with a maximum of three-year maturities. Eurozone members in trouble will never overcome their excessive debt problems by solely borrowing short-term.
- Finally, all ECB bond purchases will be executed exclusively in the secondary market, thereby achieving the German aim to preserve the ECB that forbids direct financing of any Eurozone member by other members.
The Intermittent Fasting Dilemma: How Many Meals Per Day Should You Eat? by Ori Hofmekler
The Intermittent Fasting Dilemma: How Many Meals Per Day Should You Eat? by Ori Hofmekler
When I introduced The Warrior Diet concept about 12 years ago, it was highly criticized by mainstream fitness authorities as an "extreme and dangerous" approach to dieting. Telling people to skip breakfast and lunch was like committing dietary heresy.
The Warrior Diet book was the first to offer a diet plan based on intermittent fasting. Yes, at that time, it felt like I was the only person in the world arguing for substituting the frequent feeding approach of several meals per day with one meal per day.
tory at-a-glance
- There is an emerging consensus that narrowing the window of time that you consume food may have enormous health benefits and also help you reduce the percentage of body fat.
- Benefits of intermittent fasting include reduced oxidative stress; increased insulin sensitivity; increased mitochondrial energy efficiency; and increased capacity to resist stress, disease, and aging
- Most intermittent fasting programs, including alternate day fasting, once or twice a week fasting, and once every other week fasting are, in the best case, only partially beneficial as they do not accommodate your circadian rhythm
- Your body is programmed for nocturnal feeding, and the one meal a day regimen is the only intermittent fasting (IF) program that accommodates your innate circadian clock and maximize the beneficial effects you get from IF on a daily basis
- Most foods negate the effects of fasting, but there are some exceptions. Foods that can be safely eaten without compromising your fast include fast-assimilating nutrient-dense foods such as quality whey protein, green vegetables and berries
When I introduced The Warrior Diet concept about 12 years ago, it was highly criticized by mainstream fitness authorities as an "extreme and dangerous" approach to dieting. Telling people to skip breakfast and lunch was like committing dietary heresy.
The Warrior Diet book was the first to offer a diet plan based on intermittent fasting. Yes, at that time, it felt like I was the only person in the world arguing for substituting the frequent feeding approach of several meals per day with one meal per day.
Operation Screw by Peter Schiff
Operation Screw by Peter Schiff
With yesterday's Fed decision and press conference, Chairman Ben Bernanke finally and decisively laid his cards on the table. And confirming what I have been saying for many years, all he was holding was more of the same snake oil and bluster. Going further than he has ever gone before, he made it clear that he will be permanently binding the American economy to a losing strategy. As a result, September 13, 2012 may one day be regarded as the day America finally threw in the economic towel.
Here is the outline of the Fed's plan: buy hundreds of billions of home mortgages annually in order to push down mortgage rates and push up home prices, thereby encouraging people to build and buy homes and spend the extracted equity on consumer goods. Furthermore, the Fed hopes that ultra-cheap money will push up stock prices so that Wall Street and stock investors feel wealthier and begin to spend more freely. He won't admit this directly, but rather than building an economy on increased productivity, production, and wealth accumulation, he is trying to build one on confidence, increased leverage, and rising asset prices. In other words, the Fed prefers the illusion of growth to the restructuring needed to allow for real growth.
The problem that went unnoticed by the reporters at the Fed's press conference (and those who have written about it subsequently) is that we already tried this strategy and it ended in disaster. Loose monetary policy created the housing and stock bubbles of the last decade, the bursting of which almost blew up the economy. Apparently for Bernanke and his cohorts, almost isn't good enough. They are coming back to finish the job. But this time, they are packing weaponry of a much higher caliber. Not only are they pushing mortgage rates down to historical lows but now they are buying all the loans!
Last year, the Fed launched the so-called "Operation Twist," which was designed to lower long-term interest rates and flatten the yield curve. Without creating any real benefits for the economy, the move exposed US taxpayers and holders of dollar-based assets to the dangers of shortening the maturity on $16 trillion of outstanding government debt. Such a repositioning exposes the Treasury to much faster and more painful consequences if interest rates rise. Still, the set of policies announced yesterday will do so much more damage than "Operation Twist," they should be dubbed "Operation Screw." Because make no mistake, anyone holding US dollars, Treasury bonds, or living on a fixed income will have their purchasing power stolen by these actions.
Prior injections of quantitative easing have done little to revive our economy or set us on a path for real recovery. We are now in more debt, have more people out of work, and have deeper fiscal problems than we had before the Fed began down this path. All the supporters can say is things would have been worse absent the stimulus. While counterfactual arguments are hard to prove, I do not doubt that things would have been worse in the short-term if we had simply allowed the imbalances of the old economy to work themselves out. But in exchange for that pain, I believe that we would be on the road to a real recovery. Instead, we have artificially sustained a borrow-and-spend model that puts us farther away from solid ground.
With yesterday's Fed decision and press conference, Chairman Ben Bernanke finally and decisively laid his cards on the table. And confirming what I have been saying for many years, all he was holding was more of the same snake oil and bluster. Going further than he has ever gone before, he made it clear that he will be permanently binding the American economy to a losing strategy. As a result, September 13, 2012 may one day be regarded as the day America finally threw in the economic towel.
Here is the outline of the Fed's plan: buy hundreds of billions of home mortgages annually in order to push down mortgage rates and push up home prices, thereby encouraging people to build and buy homes and spend the extracted equity on consumer goods. Furthermore, the Fed hopes that ultra-cheap money will push up stock prices so that Wall Street and stock investors feel wealthier and begin to spend more freely. He won't admit this directly, but rather than building an economy on increased productivity, production, and wealth accumulation, he is trying to build one on confidence, increased leverage, and rising asset prices. In other words, the Fed prefers the illusion of growth to the restructuring needed to allow for real growth.
The problem that went unnoticed by the reporters at the Fed's press conference (and those who have written about it subsequently) is that we already tried this strategy and it ended in disaster. Loose monetary policy created the housing and stock bubbles of the last decade, the bursting of which almost blew up the economy. Apparently for Bernanke and his cohorts, almost isn't good enough. They are coming back to finish the job. But this time, they are packing weaponry of a much higher caliber. Not only are they pushing mortgage rates down to historical lows but now they are buying all the loans!
| |
Prior injections of quantitative easing have done little to revive our economy or set us on a path for real recovery. We are now in more debt, have more people out of work, and have deeper fiscal problems than we had before the Fed began down this path. All the supporters can say is things would have been worse absent the stimulus. While counterfactual arguments are hard to prove, I do not doubt that things would have been worse in the short-term if we had simply allowed the imbalances of the old economy to work themselves out. But in exchange for that pain, I believe that we would be on the road to a real recovery. Instead, we have artificially sustained a borrow-and-spend model that puts us farther away from solid ground.
Operation Screw by Peter Schiff
Operation Screw by Peter Schiff
With yesterday's Fed decision and press conference, Chairman Ben Bernanke finally and decisively laid his cards on the table. And confirming what I have been saying for many years, all he was holding was more of the same snake oil and bluster. Going further than he has ever gone before, he made it clear that he will be permanently binding the American economy to a losing strategy. As a result, September 13, 2012 may one day be regarded as the day America finally threw in the economic towel.
Here is the outline of the Fed's plan: buy hundreds of billions of home mortgages annually in order to push down mortgage rates and push up home prices, thereby encouraging people to build and buy homes and spend the extracted equity on consumer goods. Furthermore, the Fed hopes that ultra-cheap money will push up stock prices so that Wall Street and stock investors feel wealthier and begin to spend more freely. He won't admit this directly, but rather than building an economy on increased productivity, production, and wealth accumulation, he is trying to build one on confidence, increased leverage, and rising asset prices. In other words, the Fed prefers the illusion of growth to the restructuring needed to allow for real growth.
The problem that went unnoticed by the reporters at the Fed's press conference (and those who have written about it subsequently) is that we already tried this strategy and it ended in disaster. Loose monetary policy created the housing and stock bubbles of the last decade, the bursting of which almost blew up the economy. Apparently for Bernanke and his cohorts, almost isn't good enough. They are coming back to finish the job. But this time, they are packing weaponry of a much higher caliber. Not only are they pushing mortgage rates down to historical lows but now they are buying all the loans!
Last year, the Fed launched the so-called "Operation Twist," which was designed to lower long-term interest rates and flatten the yield curve. Without creating any real benefits for the economy, the move exposed US taxpayers and holders of dollar-based assets to the dangers of shortening the maturity on $16 trillion of outstanding government debt. Such a repositioning exposes the Treasury to much faster and more painful consequences if interest rates rise. Still, the set of policies announced yesterday will do so much more damage than "Operation Twist," they should be dubbed "Operation Screw." Because make no mistake, anyone holding US dollars, Treasury bonds, or living on a fixed income will have their purchasing power stolen by these actions.
Prior injections of quantitative easing have done little to revive our economy or set us on a path for real recovery. We are now in more debt, have more people out of work, and have deeper fiscal problems than we had before the Fed began down this path. All the supporters can say is things would have been worse absent the stimulus. While counterfactual arguments are hard to prove, I do not doubt that things would have been worse in the short-term if we had simply allowed the imbalances of the old economy to work themselves out. But in exchange for that pain, I believe that we would be on the road to a real recovery. Instead, we have artificially sustained a borrow-and-spend model that puts us farther away from solid ground.
With yesterday's Fed decision and press conference, Chairman Ben Bernanke finally and decisively laid his cards on the table. And confirming what I have been saying for many years, all he was holding was more of the same snake oil and bluster. Going further than he has ever gone before, he made it clear that he will be permanently binding the American economy to a losing strategy. As a result, September 13, 2012 may one day be regarded as the day America finally threw in the economic towel.
Here is the outline of the Fed's plan: buy hundreds of billions of home mortgages annually in order to push down mortgage rates and push up home prices, thereby encouraging people to build and buy homes and spend the extracted equity on consumer goods. Furthermore, the Fed hopes that ultra-cheap money will push up stock prices so that Wall Street and stock investors feel wealthier and begin to spend more freely. He won't admit this directly, but rather than building an economy on increased productivity, production, and wealth accumulation, he is trying to build one on confidence, increased leverage, and rising asset prices. In other words, the Fed prefers the illusion of growth to the restructuring needed to allow for real growth.
The problem that went unnoticed by the reporters at the Fed's press conference (and those who have written about it subsequently) is that we already tried this strategy and it ended in disaster. Loose monetary policy created the housing and stock bubbles of the last decade, the bursting of which almost blew up the economy. Apparently for Bernanke and his cohorts, almost isn't good enough. They are coming back to finish the job. But this time, they are packing weaponry of a much higher caliber. Not only are they pushing mortgage rates down to historical lows but now they are buying all the loans!
| |
Prior injections of quantitative easing have done little to revive our economy or set us on a path for real recovery. We are now in more debt, have more people out of work, and have deeper fiscal problems than we had before the Fed began down this path. All the supporters can say is things would have been worse absent the stimulus. While counterfactual arguments are hard to prove, I do not doubt that things would have been worse in the short-term if we had simply allowed the imbalances of the old economy to work themselves out. But in exchange for that pain, I believe that we would be on the road to a real recovery. Instead, we have artificially sustained a borrow-and-spend model that puts us farther away from solid ground.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
9/11 Blueprint for Truth full Movie
I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:
"Statement For 9/11 Justice"
http://www.ipetitions.com/
I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes just a few seconds of your time.
Thanks!
------------------------------
New 9/11 truth documentary among 'most watched' on PBS this week
New 9/11 truth documentary among 'most watched' on PBS this week
"9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out" is getting public attention and casting doubt on the scientific validity of the U.S. government's investigation into the WTC tragedy. PBS is the first major network to air the program.
Just days away from the 11th anniversary of the World Trade Center tragedy and months away from the U.S. presidential election, a game-changing 9/11 documentary is ranking number three among "most watched" documentaries on PBS and number one among "most shared." Available for free online August 18th - September 4th, the documentary could have a significant effect on public opinion. [Update: PBS has extended viewing indefinitely.] Both the Republicans and Democrats, as equally staunch defenders of the official story, stand to be affected if the public's suspicion of government corruption grows deeper.
An earlier report on Digital Journal found that the claims made in the documentary can be verified by reading the government reports themselves. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the government agency charged with the investigation, did not provide any data -- no measurements or estimates -- of the mass or energy that would be required to bring down the buildings in about ten seconds. Normally a scientific report would present all the data that is used to construct a theory. The omission of data is a red flag to anyone familiar with scientific procedure. It appears that the investigators may have intentionally produced reports that the scientific community would reject.
According to the experts appearing in Explosive Evidence, the scientific community did reject the reports immediately, but it has taken a very long time for this message to reach the public. Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the producers of the documentary, have been trying to educate the public for a number of years. The PBS broadcast of their work represents a major step forward for them.
See full article at http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/332051 >>
Next >
"9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out" is getting public attention and casting doubt on the scientific validity of the U.S. government's investigation into the WTC tragedy. PBS is the first major network to air the program.
Just days away from the 11th anniversary of the World Trade Center tragedy and months away from the U.S. presidential election, a game-changing 9/11 documentary is ranking number three among "most watched" documentaries on PBS and number one among "most shared." Available for free online August 18th - September 4th, the documentary could have a significant effect on public opinion. [Update: PBS has extended viewing indefinitely.] Both the Republicans and Democrats, as equally staunch defenders of the official story, stand to be affected if the public's suspicion of government corruption grows deeper.
An earlier report on Digital Journal found that the claims made in the documentary can be verified by reading the government reports themselves. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the government agency charged with the investigation, did not provide any data -- no measurements or estimates -- of the mass or energy that would be required to bring down the buildings in about ten seconds. Normally a scientific report would present all the data that is used to construct a theory. The omission of data is a red flag to anyone familiar with scientific procedure. It appears that the investigators may have intentionally produced reports that the scientific community would reject.
According to the experts appearing in Explosive Evidence, the scientific community did reject the reports immediately, but it has taken a very long time for this message to reach the public. Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the producers of the documentary, have been trying to educate the public for a number of years. The PBS broadcast of their work represents a major step forward for them.
See full article at http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/332051 >>
Next >
The Corbett Report | Corbett Report Radio 217 – Forcing Change with Carl Teichrib
The Corbett Report | Corbett Report Radio 217 – Forcing Change with Carl Teichrib: 13
Carl Teichrib of ForcingChange.org has researched and written over 125 reports on various aspects of the globalization agenda, from the World Federalist Association to the International Criminal Court to the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Tonight he joins us to discuss the globalist ideology and the people who are promoting it.
Sep
2012
Corbett Report Radio 217 – Forcing Change with Carl Teichrib
Posted by Corbett
Carl Teichrib of ForcingChange.org has researched and written over 125 reports on various aspects of the globalization agenda, from the World Federalist Association to the International Criminal Court to the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Tonight he joins us to discuss the globalist ideology and the people who are promoting it.
Sep
2012
Corbett Report Radio 217 – Forcing Change with Carl Teichrib
Posted by Corbett
The Student Loan Debt Bubble Is Creating Millions of Modern Day Serfs
The Student Loan Debt Bubble Is Creating Millions of Modern Day Serfs
Every single year, millions of young adults head off to colleges and universities all over America full of hopes and dreams. But what most of those fresh-faced youngsters do not realize is that by taking on student loan debt they are signing up for a life of debt slavery. Student loan debt has become a trillion dollar bubble which has shattered the financial lives of tens of millions of young college graduates. When you are just starting out and you are not making a lot of money, having to make payments on tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt can be absolutely crippling. The total amount of student loan debt in the United States has now surpassed the total amount of credit card debt, and student loan debt is much harder to get rid of. Many young people view college as a "five year party", but when the party is over millions of those young people basically end up as modern day serfs as they struggle to pay off all of the debt that they have accumulated during their party years. Bankruptcy laws have been changed to make it incredibly difficult to get rid of student loan debt, so once you have it you are basically faced with two choices: either you are going to pay it or you are going to die with it.
But we don't warn kids about this before they go to school. We just endlessly preach to them that they need a college degree in order to get a "good job", and that after they graduate they will easily be able to pay off their student loans with the "good job" that they will certainly be able to find.
Sadly, tens of millions of young Americans have left college in recent years only to find out that they were lied to all along.
As I have written about previously, college has become a giant money making scam and the victims of the scam are our young people.
Back in 1952, a full year of tuition at Harvard was only $600.
Today, it is over $35,000.
Why does college have to cost so much?
At every turn our young people are being ripped off.
For example, the cost of college textbooks has tripled over the past decade.
Has it suddenly become a lot more expensive to print books?
Of course not.
The truth is that an entire industry saw an opportunity to gouge students and they went for it.
The amount of money being spent on higher education in this country is absolutely outrageous. One father down in Texas says that he will end up spending about 1.5 million dollars on college expenses for his five daughters before it is all said and done.
Unfortunately, most young adults in America don't have wealthy fathers so they have to take out large student loans to pay for their educations.
Average student loan debt at graduation is estimated to be about $28,720 right now.
That is a crazy figure and it has absolutely soared in recent years. In fact, student loan debt in America has grown by 511 percent since 1999.
And student loan debt will follow you wherever you go.
If you do not pay your loans when you graduate, you could end up having your wages, your tax refunds and even your Social Security benefits garnished.
In addition, your account could be turned over to the debt collectors and they can be absolutely brutal.
The student loan debt bubble is the best thing to happen to debt collectors in ages. The following is what one professional who works in the industry said in a recent article that he wrote for a debt collection industry publication....
There is no way that our young people can afford to take on those kinds of debt loads, and that is one reason why student loan delinquency rates continue to surge.
In fact, the student loan default rate in the United States has nearly doubled since 2005.
Today, one out of every six Americans that owes money on a student loan is in default.
One out of every six.
And it is going to get a whole lot worse.
At this point there are about 5.9 million Americans that are at least 12 months behind on their student loan payments.
So could the bursting of the student loan bubble do tremendous damage to our financial system?
Don't worry – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is promising that the student loan debt bubble won't cause a crisis.
And you can trust him, right?
For those living with the burden of unpaid student loan debt, life can be really tough. Some try to avoid the debt collectors, but it is easier said than done. The following is from a recent article in the New York Times....
The biggest problem, of course, is that there are not nearly enough jobs for the hordes of college graduates that our system produces each year.
During 2011, 53 percent of all Americans with a bachelor's degree under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.
So without a good job, how are those young people supposed to service their student loans?
Once upon a time, a college degree was a guaranteed ticket to the middle class.
Sadly, those days are long gone. Today, millions upon millions of college graduates have taken jobs that do not even require a college education. The following is from a recent CNBC article....
It is not easy out there.
And this can be extremely disappointing for parents as well. How would you feel if your daughter got very high grades all of the way through college and ended up working as a waitress because she couldn't find anything else?
Even those that pursue advanced degrees are having an extremely challenging time finding work in this economy.
For example, a Business Insider article from a while back profiled a law school graduate named Erin that is actually on food stamps....
Going to college really has become a ticket to party for four or five or six years with a little bit of "education" thrown in.
But our society has put a very high value on those little pieces of paper called "diplomas" so we all continue to play along with the charade.
Some college students are finding other "creative" ways to pay for their educations other than going into tremendous amounts of debt. For example, an increasing number of young women are seeking out "sugar daddies" who will "sponsor" their educations. The following is from a Huffington Post article about this disturbing trend....
Of course that young woman will probably deeply regret doing that later on in her life.
Once graduation comes, millions upon millions of our young people are discovering that it is really hard to be financially independent if you are drowning in student loan debt and you can't find a good job.
So what are they doing?
They are moving back in with Mom and Dad.
One poll discovered that 29 percent of all Americans in the 25- to 34-year-old age bracket are still living with their parents.
Ouch.
Reprinted with permission from the Economic Collapse Blog.
Every single year, millions of young adults head off to colleges and universities all over America full of hopes and dreams. But what most of those fresh-faced youngsters do not realize is that by taking on student loan debt they are signing up for a life of debt slavery. Student loan debt has become a trillion dollar bubble which has shattered the financial lives of tens of millions of young college graduates. When you are just starting out and you are not making a lot of money, having to make payments on tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt can be absolutely crippling. The total amount of student loan debt in the United States has now surpassed the total amount of credit card debt, and student loan debt is much harder to get rid of. Many young people view college as a "five year party", but when the party is over millions of those young people basically end up as modern day serfs as they struggle to pay off all of the debt that they have accumulated during their party years. Bankruptcy laws have been changed to make it incredibly difficult to get rid of student loan debt, so once you have it you are basically faced with two choices: either you are going to pay it or you are going to die with it.
But we don't warn kids about this before they go to school. We just endlessly preach to them that they need a college degree in order to get a "good job", and that after they graduate they will easily be able to pay off their student loans with the "good job" that they will certainly be able to find.
Sadly, tens of millions of young Americans have left college in recent years only to find out that they were lied to all along.
As I have written about previously, college has become a giant money making scam and the victims of the scam are our young people.
Back in 1952, a full year of tuition at Harvard was only $600.
Today, it is over $35,000.
| |
At every turn our young people are being ripped off.
For example, the cost of college textbooks has tripled over the past decade.
Has it suddenly become a lot more expensive to print books?
Of course not.
The truth is that an entire industry saw an opportunity to gouge students and they went for it.
The amount of money being spent on higher education in this country is absolutely outrageous. One father down in Texas says that he will end up spending about 1.5 million dollars on college expenses for his five daughters before it is all said and done.
Unfortunately, most young adults in America don't have wealthy fathers so they have to take out large student loans to pay for their educations.
Average student loan debt at graduation is estimated to be about $28,720 right now.
That is a crazy figure and it has absolutely soared in recent years. In fact, student loan debt in America has grown by 511 percent since 1999.
And student loan debt will follow you wherever you go.
If you do not pay your loans when you graduate, you could end up having your wages, your tax refunds and even your Social Security benefits garnished.
In addition, your account could be turned over to the debt collectors and they can be absolutely brutal.
The student loan debt bubble is the best thing to happen to debt collectors in ages. The following is what one professional who works in the industry said in a recent article that he wrote for a debt collection industry publication....
As I wandered around the crowd of NYU students at their rally protesting student debt at the end of February, I couldn’t believe the accumulated wealth they represented – for our industry.
It was lip-smacking.
At my right, to graphically display how she was debt-burdened, was a girl wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the fine sum of $90,000, another with $65,000, a third with $20,000 and over there a really attractive $120,000 was printed on another shirt. Guys were shouldering their share, with t-shirts of $20,000, $15,000, $27,000, $33,000 and $75,000.
| |
In fact, the student loan default rate in the United States has nearly doubled since 2005.
Today, one out of every six Americans that owes money on a student loan is in default.
One out of every six.
And it is going to get a whole lot worse.
At this point there are about 5.9 million Americans that are at least 12 months behind on their student loan payments.
So could the bursting of the student loan bubble do tremendous damage to our financial system?
Don't worry – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is promising that the student loan debt bubble won't cause a crisis.
And you can trust him, right?
For those living with the burden of unpaid student loan debt, life can be really tough. Some try to avoid the debt collectors, but it is easier said than done. The following is from a recent article in the New York Times....
Hiding from the government is not easy.
“I keep changing my phone number,” said Amanda Cordeiro, 29, from Clermont, Fla., who dropped out of college in 2010 and has fielded as many as seven calls a day from debt collectors trying to recover her $55,000 in overdue loans. “In a year, this is probably my fourth phone number.”
Unlike private lenders, the federal government has extraordinary tools for collection that it has extended to the collection firms. Ms. Cordeiro has already had two tax refunds seized, and other debtors have had their paychecks or Social Security payments garnisheed.
| |
During 2011, 53 percent of all Americans with a bachelor's degree under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.
So without a good job, how are those young people supposed to service their student loans?
Once upon a time, a college degree was a guaranteed ticket to the middle class.
Sadly, those days are long gone. Today, millions upon millions of college graduates have taken jobs that do not even require a college education. The following is from a recent CNBC article....
In the last year, they were more likely to be employed as waiters, waitresses, bartenders and food-service helpers than as engineers, physicists, chemists and mathematicians combined (100,000 versus 90,000). There were more working in office-related jobs such as receptionist or payroll clerk than in all computer professional jobs (163,000 versus 100,000). More also were employed as cashiers, retail clerks and customer representatives than engineers (125,000 versus 80,000).You probably know young people who have experienced the "wake up call" that comes as a result of entering the "real world" in this horrible economic environment.
It is not easy out there.
And this can be extremely disappointing for parents as well. How would you feel if your daughter got very high grades all of the way through college and ended up working as a waitress because she couldn't find anything else?
Even those that pursue advanced degrees are having an extremely challenging time finding work in this economy.
For example, a Business Insider article from a while back profiled a law school graduate named Erin that is actually on food stamps....
She remains on food stamps so her social life suffers. She can't afford a car, so she has to rely on the bus to get around Austin, Texas, where she lives. And currently unable to pay back her growing pile of law school debt, Gilmer says she wonders if she will ever be able to pay it back.And the really sad thing is that the quality of the education that our young people are receiving is very poor. I spent eight years attending U.S. universities, and most parents would be absolutely shocked at how little our college students are actually learning.
"That has been really hard for me," she says. "I have absolutely no credit anymore. I haven't been able to pay loans. It's scary, and it's a hard thing to think you’re a lawyer but you’re impoverished. People don’t understand that most lawyers actually aren’t making the big money."
Going to college really has become a ticket to party for four or five or six years with a little bit of "education" thrown in.
But our society has put a very high value on those little pieces of paper called "diplomas" so we all continue to play along with the charade.
Some college students are finding other "creative" ways to pay for their educations other than going into tremendous amounts of debt. For example, an increasing number of young women are seeking out "sugar daddies" who will "sponsor" their educations. The following is from a Huffington Post article about this disturbing trend....
On a Sunday morning in late May, Taylor left her Harlem apartment and boarded a train for Greenwich, Conn. She planned on spending the day with a man she had met online, but not in person.
Taylor, a 22-year-old student at Hunter College, had confided in her roommate about the trip and they agreed to swap text messages during the day to make sure she was safe.
Once in Greenwich, a man who appeared significantly older than his advertised age of 42 greeted Taylor at the train station and then drove her to the largest house she had ever seen. He changed into his swimming trunks, she put on a skimpy bathing suit, and then, by the side of his pool, she rubbed sunscreen into the folds of his sagging back -- bracing herself to endure an afternoon of sex with someone she suspected was actually about 30 years her senior.
Of course that young woman will probably deeply regret doing that later on in her life.Once graduation comes, millions upon millions of our young people are discovering that it is really hard to be financially independent if you are drowning in student loan debt and you can't find a good job.
So what are they doing?
They are moving back in with Mom and Dad.
One poll discovered that 29 percent of all Americans in the 25- to 34-year-old age bracket are still living with their parents.
Ouch.
Reprinted with permission from the Economic Collapse Blog.
September 13, 2012
Copyright © 2012 Economic Collapse Blog
Four Star General Wesley Clark: America's Foreign Policy Coup After 9/11 - Destroy 7 Countries in 5 years | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution
Retired four-star general Wesley Clark analyzes the course of U.S. foreign policy in the wake of September 11, 2001. The 'policy coup' meant that seven countries were to be invaded and blessed with regime change by the United States. The countries were (are): Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and the big prize they're still after, Iran. Iran, with its wealth of resources and potential market of over 70 million persons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)