Friday, September 30, 2011

Don't tax the gang on Wall Street....

Better rob the geezers, the sick, the working stiff and vets because they don't bribe the politicians. Of course, too many don't vote to stop it so I guess we deserve it.

Why Don’t the Deficit Hawks Want to Tax Wall Street? | Op-Eds & Columns
What is most remarkable in this picture is the complete failure of the media to identify Wall Street’s role in pushing this deficit reduction agenda. For example, Erskine Bowles, who was a co-chair of President Obama’s deficit commission, is never identified as a director of Morgan Stanley.

It is entirely possible that this role has no influence on Bowles’ views on the deficit, but it still seems that public should know about it. If a commission member were receiving $350,000 a year from the United Auto Workers or AFSCME, it is difficult to imagine that the media would not include this fact as part of the commissioner’s standard identification.

The media also see little reason to balance the Wall Street influence with people presenting an alternative perspective. For example, the Post ran a news article on the budget last week featuring the views of two people who headed Peter Peterson-funded organizations. These views were complimented by the views of an unnamed Republican staffer and a long-time corporate lobbyist. This was Fair and Balanced reporting at the Post.

In short, it is hard to understand why taxing financial speculation never appears on the agenda of the deficit hawks or gets mentioned in budget reporting, if the issue really is deficit reduction. On the other hand, if this is all about using an economic crisis to push a longstanding agenda to cut Social Security and Medicare, then everything suddenly makes sense.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

What good is American citizenship?.......

And you wonder why I don't support any of these gangsters any more.

Oba mama has continued all of Bush's unconstitutional programs and refuses to do anything to solve our economic problems.

Assassinating American citizens is a crime against his own constituents. I don't care if the citizen is a traitor only that the constitution guarantees us a fair trial.

Where does this policy end? Do we allow the murder of Tea Party members? How about protestors in the street? Liberal voters?

How about killing you?

Confirmed: Obama authorizes assassination of U.S. citizen - Glenn Greenwald -
No due process is accorded. No charges or trials are necessary. No evidence is offered, nor any opportunity for him to deny these accusations (which he has done vehemently through his family). None of that.

Instead, in Barack Obama's America, the way guilt is determined for American citizens -- and a death penalty imposed -- is that the President, like the King he thinks he is, secretly decrees someone's guilt as a Terrorist. He then dispatches his aides to run to America's newspapers -- cowardly hiding behind the shield of anonymity which they're granted -- to proclaim that the Guilty One shall be killed on sight because the Leader has decreed him to be a Terrorist. It is simply asserted that Awlaki has converted from a cleric who expresses anti-American views and advocates attacks on American military targets (advocacy which happens to be Constitutionally protected) to Actual Terrorist "involved in plots." These newspapers then print this Executive Verdict with no questioning, no opposition, no investigation, no refutation as to its truth. And the punishment is thus decreed: this American citizen will now be murdered by the CIA because Barack Obama has ordered that it be done. What kind of person could possibly justify this or think that this is a legitimate government power?

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Can't win?......

Didn't the Republicans get their asses handed to them in 2008 by a black guy? Maybe they should fight back with their own.

Be a lot of fun. The Dem's could call him a racists and he could call them crackers.

Or everybody could bitch about lack of choices in the election..LOL! 

By the way, it won't make any difference if one party or the other doesn't get veto proof or filibuster proof majorities in Congress.

Thankfully grid lock will keep the bastards busy and out of our pockets. By the way, does anyone think raising taxes on the "rich" won't come out of our pockets?

Or will they just bribe their guys in Congress and get a handout to pay those evil taxes!

Cain's message resonates with rank-and-file Republicans - Politics Wires -
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON -- Long-shot Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain calls his surprise victory in a Florida straw poll over the weekend a victory of message over media, and he may well be right.

The Atlanta business executive and two-time campaign loser has long been overshadowed by news media attention to rivals such as Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. He doesn't have their campaign money. He doesn't have their resumes in politics - he lost the only two times he ran for office before. And he doesn't get asked many questions in media-sponsored debates.

But he appeals to many rank-and-file Republicans with a deep voice and direct message that's based on his record as a successful businessman, a can-do delivery that doesn't knock other Republicans and a proposal for a flat tax that touches deep in the Republican DNA of loathing for the Internal Revenue Service.

These assets helped him surge past his more prominent rivals in the Florida poll Saturday, winning 37 percent of the vote, more than Perry's 15 percent and Romney's 14 percent combined.

"People are listening to the message and not just, with all due respect, to the media," Cain said on NBC, finding himself suddenly in demand for TV appearances.

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Why is my future Social Security check so small......


Want to make the deficit look smaller? Screw the old geezers out of their cost of living increases! Oh don't worry, the gang in Washington will keep their big retirement and health benefits. And, let's not forget, Wall Street will get multimillion paychecks from our taxes.

We need more than a tea party who mean well but are simply out of touch on how are system works to put an end to the corruption. Maybe simply firing everybody in D.C is the ticket?

Sign me up!!!!

Monday, September 26, 2011

Another member of the gang runs his big mouth....

This guy has been part of the problem because he wants our Social Security funds put into Wall Street. He, and many others that I call main stream con artists, have been lying about Social Security for years.

Let me state this for everyone's benefit: As long as this country exists our government which owns the system of money creation can never go broke, bankrupt, out of business, no longer able to afford to keep it's promises in American dollars, or unwillingly or unknowingly take away our benefits.

If the Feds do so it means that YOU VOTED FOR IT!!!!!

I also consider it a political attack on the Republicans which they deserve for scaring old people with all this cut the federal budget and throw millions of people out of work so we can beat Obama!!

Here is my response I've posted to this guys bullshit let me know what you think:

Gary Causer



Sep 26, 3:29 AM


SS is the return that I earned for working for
almost 50 years which is a contract between me and my government. It
doesn't matter how long I live, how much I have put into it, or how I
use it.

For all the con-artist trying to steal it:

 It's my money and you
will have Hell to pay to steal it.

My immediate family, 9 total, are
voters and will never vote for any criminals touching our insurance that
we will depend on in our old age.

Remember, every penny of these checks will be spent and every penny will
eventually enter your paychecks from that spending and be taxed and returned to the
Treasury. If you are serious about this so called problem then simply
have the general fund pay any short fall. Better yet, give everybody a
job, whether they want one or not, and the issue becomes self correcting.

P.s my family are almost all Republicans to the core!

Yes, Social Security Is A Ponzi Scheme—And The Government Is Again Giving People Houses With No Money Down
In the U.S., Texas Governor Perry touched the third rail of Social Security and called it a Ponzi scheme, which of course immediately made him the leading candidate in the "shoot the messenger" category.

Behind the rhetoric, we look at some actual numbers. No, not the unfunded liabilities, that's too easy. Let's look at what a heartless, un-compassionate man President Roosevelt was when he started Social Security (and that's what many will call me after reading this!).

Behind the tongue-in-cheek, there are some very real issues that do not get addressed when we talk about Social Security, but that need to be part of the discussion. And of course, we must start off with the results of the FOMC meeting, which has me feeling not at all amused. What are they thinking? Apparently, they are seeing the results from another, alternative universe. There is a lot to cover as I head off to London, where I will finish this letter.

Saturday, September 24, 2011

This guy definately gets it...

The consumer is broke. So cut him a check and get on with our lives. This is not an economic problem but a political problem. The gang that owns our government are screwing us big time!!

We gave them all that stimulus and they banked the money and bought and speculated in oil, food and currencies. Give us the money and we will pick the winners in the corporate world with our spending and take the power away from these crooks.

interfluidity » Monetary policy for the 21st century
Here’s my proposal. We should try to arrange things so that the marginal unit of CPI is purchased with “helicopter drop” money. That is, rather than trying to fine-tune wages, asset prices, or credit, central banks should be in the business of fine tuning a rate of transfers from the bank to the public. During depressions and disinflations, the Fed should be depositing funds directly in bank accounts at a fast clip. During booms, the rate of transfers should slow to a trickle. We could reach the “zero bound”, but a different zero bound than today’s zero interest rate bugaboo. At the point at which the Fed is making no transfers yet inflation still threatens, the central bank would have to coordinate with Congress to do “fiscal policy” in the form of negative transfers, a.k.a. taxes. However, this zero bound would be reached quite rarely if we allow transfers to displace credit expansion as the driver of money growth in the economy. In other words, at the same time as we expand the use of “helicopter money” in monetary policy, we should regulate and simplify banks, impose steep capital requirements, and relish complaints that this will “reduce credit availability”. The idea is to replace the macroeconomic role of bank credit with freshly issued cash.

Of course we will still need investors. But all that transfered money will become somebody’s savings, and having reduced the profitability of leveraged financial intermediaries, much of that will find its way to some form of equity investing.

There are details to consider. Won’t this proposal render central banks almost immediately insolvent? After all, conventionally, currency is a liability of a central bank that must be offset by some asset, or the balance sheet will show a gigantic hole where the bank’s equity ought to be. But that’s easy to remedy. Central banks can just adopt an old accounting fudge and claim that policy-motivated transfers purchase an intangible asset called “goodwill”. But, you may object, fudging the accounts doesn’t alter economic realities. Quite so! But what are the economic realities here? Balance sheet insolvency is nothing more or less than a predictor of illiquidity. No firm goes out of business because it’s shareholder equity goes negative. Firms die when they are presented with a bill that they cannot cover. But a central bank with liabilities in its own notes can never be illiquid, since it can produce cash at will to satisfy any obligation. It is book insolvency, not intangible goodwill, that would misrepresent the economic condition of the bank. If the central bank does not pay interest on reserves (which it should not), currency’s status as a “liability” is entirely formal. Central bank accounts should be defined by economic substance, not by blind analogy to the accounts of other firms. The purpose of a central bank’s balance sheet is to present a snapshot of its cumulative interventions, not to measure solvency. Consistent with that objective, a placeholder asset that offsets the formal liability incurred from past transfers would render transparent the cumulative stock and net flow of policy-motivated transfers. [1]

Then there are more interesting problems, like how routinizing transfers from the central bank to citizens might reshape society. “Free money” would certainly carry consequences, both good and bad, foreseeable and unforeseeable. My suggestion would be that the central banks should make equal transfers to all adult citizens irrespective of income, job, or tax status. That would be simple to understand and administer, and it is “fair” on face. It has other good points. To the degree that transfers are motivated by wasteful idleness of real resources (e.g. unemployment), flat transfers are guaranteed to put money in the hands of cash-constrained people who will spend it. Flat transfers are much more effective stimulus than income tax

Friday, September 23, 2011

When you try to kill a king.....

You better succeed or you get it right in the ass! Makes you wonder why these guys  are rounded up after giving millions in campaign contributions  but they went after Oba mama by embarrassing him by downgrading the countries credit rating after the President kissed the Republicans ass to fix the problem and so  now they suffer.

First the CEO is fired and now the investigations begin and I wouldn't be surprised if a whole bunch of these scum aren't sent to prison or at least, ruined financially because of the cost of lawyers.

We needed more but that's what you get in "democracy" where all government offices are for sale!

SEC Launches Major Investigation Into S&P Downgrade | The Nation
he SEC is examining specific trades that bet against the stock market and were made right before Standard & Poor’s issued the downgrade. The market lost 634.76 points after the announcement, a 5.5 percent drop—this would have produced an enormous windfall for those traders.

Sources told the Journal that “unusually broad” subpoenas have been issued to some hedge funds, trading shops, and other Wall Street outfits asking for information about certain trades. The SEC wants to know who made the trades, who was the first to hear about the Standard & Poor’s downgrade, and whom they heard it from.

In addition, it’s possible that Standard & Poor’s itself has been subpoenaed. Any leaks would logically have come from either the company or the Treasury Department, which was alerted to the move. Sources told the Journal that, at the very least, the SEC has asked Standard & Poor’s to disclose which employees knew about the looming downgrade—and a spokesperson for Standard & Poor’s would not comment on whether they received a subpoena.

While it’s conceivable a Treasury Department official tipped off some Wall Street traders about the downgrade, Standard & Poor’s has a well-known and comfy relationship with Wall Street—which pays the company’s fees—and this might make it a more likely suspect.

The Journal notes that Standard & Poor’s met with large bond investors in the weeks leading up to the downgrade, and some of those investors are not commenting on whether they’ve received subpoenas:

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Which party are you supprting....

Never mind!

The Center of the Universe » Blog Archive » Senator Warner, Democrat, announces bipartisan group of 38 senators to encourage super committee to “go big” on deficit reduction
beowulf Says:
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:38 pm

“IN AMERICA, WE have a two-party system,” a congressional staffer is supposed to have told a visiting group of Russian legislators some years ago.
“There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called…bipartisanship. Peter Brimelow

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Governments run deficits and the economy grows....

But the problem with deficit spending is not pay back the deficit but the government giving money to people who support the politicians.

Are we ever in favor of corruption? Just look at  Solyndra ,

Oba mama giving 500 million for solar power and the company 2 years later filing for bankruptcy. How's that for stimulus?

What should government do to boost jobs?

Send me and you a check!!!

A negative income tax would work but the gangsters in Washington would probably have to get honest jobs. Instead, they will threaten social Security, Medicare or Defense spending and you will vote for this gang again!

After all, that's why they let you vote!!!

Here's how a modern fiat system works if you are curious:
3 essential features in Modern Money | Modern Money Mechanics
Within a modern monetary economy, as a matter of national accounting, the sovereign government deficit (or surplus) equals the non-government surplus (or deficit), also known as the private sector (and here includes the international sector). The failure to recognise this relationship is the major oversight of the current orthodox analysis.

In aggregate, there can be no net savings of financial assets of the non-government sector (private sector) without cumulative government deficit spending. The sovereign government via net spending (deficits) is the only entity that can provide the non-government sector (private sector) with net financial assets (net savings) and thereby simultaneously accommodate any net desire to save and hence eliminate unemployment.

Additionally, and contrary to current orthodox rhetoric, the systematic pursuit of government budget surpluses is necessarily manifested as systematic declines in private sector savings.

The decreasing levels of net private savings which are manifest in the public surpluses increasingly leverage the private sector. Adopting a growth strategy that relies on increasingly leveraging the private sector is unsustainable. So you have to trace the private indebtedness back to the conduct of the government sector.

Monday, September 19, 2011

back to cost cutting....

Patti's doctor bills adding up. Even with insurance so debating my options. One is to get rid of the Direct TV account which I'm going to do as soon as Dexter season is over and save 68 bucks a month. Another is sell my f250 pickup and pay off Patti's car and just quit using credit cards for cash back purchases.

One way we save is by buying our groceries at Christmas time and stock up on coffee, flour, sugar and especially can goods. We get a 10% discount for the holidays and I will spend $500 or so.

Winter coming so the electric bill triples and I would rather squirrel the money away on my 401k than give it to the electric company. But the worse thing about winter is the inevitable cut in hours at work.

So, plan now and avoid surprises because the economy is going to suck for a long time to come with the coming election and the politicians blaming: Bush, global warming, evil rich guys, old geezers not dying fast enough, Fox news, illegal Mexicans taking jobs from lazy white people,

and don't forget poor people ripping off food stamps instead of starving like good people with class would!!!


Saturday, September 17, 2011

Where does the money come from?.....

Nowhere. Read this explanation and see what you think.

The Center of the Universe » Blog Archive » from prof Andrea Terzi
This is an excellent question. Where does the money that the Government borrows come form? And the answer is: It comes from the Treasury and the Fed! And it cannot come from any other source. This is what so few people realize, perhaps because economists are too reluctant to explain.

When the Government ‘borrows’, it sells Treasury securities and receives reserves from banks. Bank reserves are deposits at the Fed owned by banks. Deposits at the Fed can only come into existence through two channels:
1. Government spending (e.g., when the Treasury buys output from business or pays federal employees); and
2. Fed lending (e.g., when the Fed makes loans to banks).
This means that the money that government borrows (bank reserves) ultimately comes from the Treasury or from the Fed.

This simple statement has significant consequences:
-The Government does not borrow money created by others,
-The Government does not borrow anything it cannot create itself,
-The Government has no functional need to borrow,
-The Government issues securities because if it did not, the banks would have an excessive amount of reserves and the interest rate would go to zero,
-When the Government borrows, it functionally makes monetary policy (in the same way as the Fed doing open market operations),
-Governments self inflict deficit and debt rules onto themselves that are causing the world economy to collapse
-Rules for governments that aim to promote jobs and prosperity should be:
1. Do not overtax the economy for any desired size of the government sector;
2. Let deficits grow until we reach full employment;
3. Do ‘quality spending’ to create jobs and control prices.

Friday, September 16, 2011

I think Krugman is starting to get it...

A sovereign nation can never go broke in it's own currency. It can simply create it. Only desperate  governments like Zimbabwe's will print notes and flood their economy because their banks have collapsed after robbing the white guys who knew what the fuck they were doing.

After all is said and done inflation and small budget deficits are  a sign that the economy is working, and hyperinflation can only occur if the sovereign nation's central bank refuses to stop the inflation with increasing interest rates, government corruption is rampant, no effective tax collection, (as in Greece) or if the sovereign nation gives up it's money to foreign bankers, ala Europe today and last but not least if the officials start printing currency and  give it to their favorites!

An Impeccable Disaster -
Now, a country with its own currency, like Britain, can short-circuit this process: if necessary, the Bank of England can step in to buy government debt with newly created money. This might lead to inflation (although even that is doubtful when the economy is depressed), but inflation poses a much smaller threat to investors than outright default. Spain and Italy, however, have adopted the euro and no longer have their own currencies. As a result, the threat of a self-fulfilling crisis is very real — and interest rates on Spanish and Italian debt are more than twice the rate on British debt

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Gee. who would have thought this....

Give Oba mama a campaign contribution and he gives you a 500 million loan. then you go bankrupt and just wear did the 500 million go?

Good thing the Supreme Court ruled this stuff as legal, ain't it?

You see supply side stimulus doesn't work! Send me and you the money and we will spend every fucking dime and revive demand in the economy instead of financing criminal gangs in Washington and Wall Street.

Oh yea, Perry took bribes from Merck and gave them a fortune in state funds to immunize little girls.

You can't make this shit up!!

Before Collapse and Goverment Investigations, Solar Company Solyndra Was a Rising Star - OpenSecrets Blog | OpenSecrets
President Barack Obama, the No. 1 beneficiary of campaign cash from Solyndra's employees, received $2,800. Of this amount, $2,300 came from Ben Bierman, Solyndra's executive vice president of engineering, with $1,300 coming during Obama's 2008 presidential bid and $1,000 being given to Obama in June.

Here is a table showing all of the beneficiaries of Solyndra's employee's political giving since 2006:

Recipient Party Total
Barack Obama D $2,800
Peter Schiff R $2,400
Democratic National Committee D $2,150
Barbara Boxer D $2,000
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee D $1,450
Gabrielle Giffords D $1,250
Dave Camp R $1,000
Dianne Feinstein D $1,000
Mike Haridopolos R $1,000
Alan Khazei D $1,000
Lisa Murkowski R $1,000
Harry Reid D $1,000
David Sanders D $1,000
Mike Thompson D $1,000
Mary Bono Mack R $500
Steve Israel D $500
Priorities USA Action D $500
Hector Balderas D $250
Kevin Brady R $250
Jack Conway D $250
Libertarian National Committee L $250
EMILY's List Women Vote! D $250
Total: $22,800

Now, however, few politicians want to be seen as close to Solyndra, as questions are being raised about whether the company improperly secured a stimulus loan thanks to help from the Obama administration.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Why were taxes invented....

Why not just steal what the government wants?

Works the first time it's done, then fuck you king we quit!

What is Debt? – An Interview with Economic Anthropologist David Graeber « naked capitalism
Taxes are also key to creating the first markets that operate on cash, since coinage seems to be invented or at least widely popularized to pay soldiers – more or less simultaneously in China, India, and the Mediterranean, where governments find the easiest way to provision the troops is to issue them standard-issue bits of gold or silver and then demand everyone else in the kingdom give them one of those coins back again. Thus we find that the language of debt and the language of morality start to merge.

In Sanskrit, Hebrew, Aramaic, ‘debt,’ ‘guilt,’ and ‘sin’ are actually the same word. Much of the language of the great religious movements – reckoning, redemption, karmic accounting and the like – are drawn from the language of ancient finance. But that language is always found wanting and inadequate and twisted around into something completely different. It’s as if the great prophets and religious teachers had no choice but to start with that kind of language because it’s the language that existed at the time, but they only adopted it so as to turn it into its opposite: as a way of saying debts are not sacred, but forgiveness of debt, or the ability to wipe out debt, or to realize that debts aren’t real – these are the acts that are truly sacred.

How did this happen? Well, remember I said that the big question in the origins of money is how a sense of obligation – an ‘I owe you one’ – turns into something that can be precisely quantified? Well, the answer seems to be: when there is a potential for violence. If you give someone a pig and they give you a few chickens back you might think they’re a cheapskate, and mock them, but you’re unlikely to come up with a mathematical formula for exactly how cheap you think they are. If someone pokes out your eye in a fight, or kills your brother, that’s when you start saying, “traditional compensation is exactly twenty-seven heifers of the finest quality and if they’re not of the finest quality, this means war!”

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Watched a few minutes of the GOP debate....

Not only are they pygmies but whiny pygmies. More like a high school debating team if you ask me.

All Oba mama has to do is give pretty speeches while these guys rub their hands together and threaten our Social Security checks and he's in.

Lucky for the Repubs that Oba mama doesn't have a record of success or they lose Congress too!

For the first time in my life I'm not picking a winner this early because of budget cutting nonsense coming out of Washington even from Oba mama. As I've said before, not a nickels difference between the Dems and Repubs any more other than rhetoric!

And it's obvious the gang in government doesn't have a clue how to revive the dying system. All we hear is "don't raise taxes on the rich because they won't fund our campaigns." Or we need to make sure poor people pay taxes. Also, we need to soak the rich to pay for all our fun.

And most of all we need to put the Social Security trust fund into the stock market!

We know how well that worked out this century, right?

Monday, September 12, 2011

All government spending is someone's income..

And all government income is someone's taxes.

Read the above again.

Am I saying every dollar the government spends ends up as someone's paycheck?

Absolutely! The Federal government has no savings. Hell, it doesn't even have own any money! Remember there's no appropriation for the U.S government because it spends and get's it all back from taxes and doesn't need to own, keep or save money.

Now it takes awhile for this to happen but payments made and checks created in our economy by government spending becomes part our national income. 

Therefor when we pay taxes on this income (even the rich pay personal taxes to the Federal government tax authorities) it all goes back to the treasury where it came from in the first place.

Notice that the government has to "spend" the money before we get any of it. And it has to take it back in taxes for the system to work .

In accounting it's known as income-outgo. In our system, the government's outgo is called spending. It goes through the banking system and becomes part of our income (Social Security, government payroll, contractual payments, welfare, VA, etc. etc.)

And government income is our taxes coming back to the Treasury.

How does that work? Can we create money out of nothing?

We have been doing it for years. It's just no one ever explained how it's done because most everyone has been taught economics as if  we are still on a gold standard.

But we have been a pure fiat system since 1971 when Nixon told the French you can't have our gold.

Anyways, when the Congress passes a budget and the President signs the "appropriations" the authorization to spend sent to the treasury. The treasury authorizes the payments by crediting all the bank accounts that are legally authorized to have payments to. Then everybody authorized spends the money.

In due time all that money spent by the government comes back as taxes (read above again for an explanation) and the "appropriations" are paid thereby correcting any deficit.

How can the Federal government get away with it?

They create the money as stipulated under the constitution and can borrow from within it's bank accounts to float the transaction by borrowing from one account to another. This is accounted as deficits.

By the way, as alluded to above, deficits are the lag time between the Fed's spending and collecting the taxes and have nothing to do with destroying the economy, bankrupting the Fed, screwing our children over, giving the country away to the Chinese or any other nonsense the gangsters who own us can think of!

And another point, the only printing of money done is to replace worn out or torn and defaced bills not to spend us into the poor house.

But it sounds better to scare you if your told that the government is printing trillions to bankrupt us and vote for me and I'll stop the dirty bastards !!!

So, briefly, what is money?

First of all, in our fiat system, we have bank money which is a set of bank accounts in the Treasury, The Fed and our regular banks.

Second, we have currency: Bonds, bank drafts, money orders, credit cards, and good old cash. (Our currency is almost all created by borrowing from banks and credit unions).

But it's bank money that finances our federal system. It's simply when the government spends it pushes key strokes on Treasury computers
and authorizes checks and credits into these bank accounts.

How can they do that?

The full faith and credit of our economy which they control guarantees the system working. They always have the means to pay because they can type into computer terminals any amount authorized by Congress and signed by the President and the I.R.S can and will get it back.

Yes, they create the money from nowhere! It also goes back to nowhere! It's computing blips, electrons, and that's where they go when they click those keys.

It simply comes back as taxes and the "deficit" is paid off.

Got big deficits? Quit cutting taxes during booms! Create a few million jobs! Or quit worrying about it and problem solved.

What about hyperinflation?

If the economy over expands it creates too much money (stopping this is the job of the Congress by raising taxes and the Fed by raising interest rates slowing the economy) because our banks also create money out of nowhere and the tax mechanism doesn't work here. This leads to too much money in our hands and we borrow and spend just to keep up with price increases generated by people buying stuff in competition with each other.

In short, Speculating on price increases is big business and millions of people love to gamble and make the market for it. This leads to over bidding on assets and everybody ends up with a surplus of cash and no place to put it to keep up with mild inflation created by our Federal Reserve banking transactions  except in a few selected commodities: gold, real estate, foreign money, etc.

This activity leads to bidding wars on assets called inflation.

If corrective action isn't taken early the system explodes. (it's cure is mainly raising interest rates and taxes to remove extra money from the consumer).

What about Zimbabwe the only fiat nation to suffer hyperinflation? If you'll click on the link and you will see how corrupt governments work and end up printing currency to save their asses.

Our system doesn't need to print cash. It has the banking system to create all the money Congress authorizes.

Reread the above! All money problems, shortages, printing, borrowing, etc. etc. comes from our Congress. Not from the Gods, not from evil Jews, not from drunken Democrats unless they are in Congress, not from cheating on taxes, and especially because we don't have a gold standard .

We have a criminal problem and stupid, ignorant voter problem paying for and voting for the gangsters who are screwing us over!

For a more detailed explanation because I'm not an economist or a very good writer, go here.

Sunday, September 11, 2011

I don't normally agree with leftists....

But messing with Social Security is political suicide. If we really need to fund Social Security (we don't because we could print the bonds and sell them outright) all we do is make "all" income taxable and the problem goes away.

Also, it's only a matter of time til I, and most of my generation, gets a check that we will be depending on. This means an extra 60 million voters.

Or rioters.

Anyone remember the "catastrophic health care" bill passed by Congress 25 years ago? This was the copay plan for Medicare and seniors would be required to pay a couple of bucks for hospital stays. Boy, did the shit hit the fan!

The geezers invaded Washington by the thousands and Congress killed the bill immediately!

Remember that  politicians are not very brave and definitely not that smart to screw with that kind of power. And it doesn't hurt if they know my generation has  a 100 million guns out here!

Get the picture?

In the meantime, I still think that the Republicans have nothing but pygmies for the coming election and scaring grandpa by threatening to take away his hard earned SS check is not going to be very productive on the electoral front, do you?

And what about the liar in chief, Oba mama?

Big deal as long as he talks pretty and leaves their checks alone! After all, they're all liars and voters will feel we might as well settle down keep the one we got who can't get any new programs through Congress  blowing the budget.

And guys like me can simply bitch about both sides destroying what's left of our economy.

But eventually, the voters will throw them all out and hire some adults with a brain and solve the depression just like in the 30's.

Of course, that presupposes the guy wont be Hitler!!

P.s I'm going to have to write out how our "fiat" money system works but I don't like arguing with people who are convinced that governments can spend us into the poor house. They can't. What government spending does is create a system that controls everything you do and makes it impossible to live without government permission!

And that is much worse.

My pet theme is governments own us and are owned by the rich groups, who get together to stay rich, who bribe the politicians who control the government that controls us.

They use the budget deficit scare tactic to keep us on the run instead of rounding them up and prosecuting them for their crimes and screw ups.

You don't think our credit collapse fell out of the sky and bit us in the ass because it seemed like a good idea, do you?

Anyways, read what Perry, an immigration amnesty enthusiast, has to say about taking our checks:

  Rick Perry's Social Security Extremism: Why It Will Sink Him | Rolling Stone Politics | Taibblog | Matt Taibbi on Politics and the Economy
In politics, it's the same. Once a candidate like Perry comes out of the gate threatening Social Security, the game is up. All you have to do from there is make him say it, over and over again. Romney and Hunstman will obviously do just that. They have the next six months to make sure every elderly and soon-to-be elderly person in America knows that Rick Perry wants to take their checks away.

The other candidates ganged up on Perry last night and attacked him, in essence, from the left, trying to paint him as someone who will take away popular programs. The situation reminded me a little of 2004, when other Democrats suddenly started attacking a surging Howard Dean, calling him a wimp and a socialist who was "too liberal" to win a general election. Hackish grinders like Kerry turned Dean's antiwar stance (which happened to be morally right) into a political albatross, forcing him to own it in every public appearance while highlighting his own army cred.

The move succeeded in part, among other things because the press signed on to Kerry's logic and relentlessly portrayed Dean as a candidate with no chance to beat Bush. But the strategy also deflated the party's base, which violently opposed the war, and left the Dems with comparatively little energy and enthusiasm heading into the general election.

Saturday, September 10, 2011

We need the money to get the depression behind us....

Millions of broke, unemployed, and desperate people are not good for any country. We are not immune to the 100 million guns or more going off in this country.

However, giving us 30 bucks a week or so in payroll tax reduction is retarded at best. Wont even pay your electric bill!

The Center of the Universe » Blog Archive » Dallas address
I believe that the surest engine for full economic recovery is a full payroll tax holiday. Payroll taxes take away over 15% of everyone’s paycheck, from the very first dollar earned. This is big money- about $1 trillion per year. Half comes from the employee and half from the employer. A payroll tax holiday does not give anyone anything. What it does is stop taking away $1 trillion a year from working people struggling to make their payments and stay in their homes, and businesses struggling to survive. A full payroll tax holiday means a husband and wife earning $50,000 a year each will see their combined take home pay go up by over $650 a month, so they can make their mortgage payments and their car payments and maybe even do a little shopping.

This fixes the banks and fixes the economy, from what I call the bottom up. It fixes the banks without giving them anything more than people who can afford to make their payments. That’s all they need to remain viable.

And what all businesses need most to expand output and employment is people with spending money who can buy their products. Without people to buy goods and services, nothing happens. The payroll tax holiday also means there is also a big reduction in expenses for business. With competitive markets this means lower prices, which also helps consumers, helps keep inflation down, helps businesses compete domestically and in world markets to help optimize our real terms of trade, and helps keep the currency stable as the dollar is ultimately worth what it can buy. So with the payroll tax holiday we get a dramatic increase in economic activity, rising employment in good jobs, and better prices. And we’ll see millions of new jobs, because, again, what business needs most is people with money to buy their products. Then they hire and expand.

Friday, September 09, 2011

Not much chance of doing this.....

But why we don't is simply politics not economics. Everyone in Washington in any position of power are paid to maintain the status quo. We must protect the insurance industry, military-industrial complex banks, and especially Wall Street.

Read this guy and you'll see most of my idea on using health savings accounts like the plan we have at WalMart:

Universal Health Care Coverage
My proposal regarding health care is to give everyone over
the age of 18 a bank account that has, perhaps, $5,000 in it,
to be used for medical purposes. $1,000 is for preventative
measures and $4,000 for all other medical expenses. At the
end of each year, any unspent funds remaining of the $4,000
portion are paid to that individual as a “cash rebate.” Anything
above $5,000 would be covered by a form of Medicare. There
would be no restrictions on purchasing private insurance
This proposal provides for universal health care,
maximizes choice, employs competitive market forces to
minimize costs, frees up physician time previously spent
in discussion with insurance companies, rewards “good
behavior” and reduces insurance company participation.
This will greatly reduce demands on the medical system,
substantially increasing the supply of available doctor/patient
time and makes sure all Americans have health care. To
ensure preventative measures are taken, the year-end rebate More here

Thursday, September 08, 2011

Why would politicians of either party punish these guys....

If they did who would buy the elections for them, Hmm?

Washington's Blog
Market Watch senior columnist Brett Arends writes:

No one has been punished. Executives like Dick Fuld at Lehman Brothers and Angelo Mozilo at Countrywide, along with many others, cashed out hundreds of millions of dollars before the ship crashed into the rocks. Predatory lenders and crooked mortgage lenders walked away with millions in ill-gotten gains. But they aren’t in jail. They aren’t even under criminal prosecution. They got away scot-free. As a general rule, the worse you behaved from 2000 to 2008, the better you’ve been treated. And so the next crowd will do it again. Guaranteed.

Gretchen Morgenson and Louise Story point out in the New York Times that:

As the financial storm brewed in the summer of 2008 ... Federal prosecutors officially adopted new guidelines about charging corporations with crimes — a softer approach that, longtime white-collar lawyers and former federal prosecutors say, helps explain the dearth of criminal cases despite a raft of inquiries into the financial crisis.

Though little noticed outside legal circles, the guidelines were welcomed by firms representing banks. The Justice Department’s directive, involving a process known as deferred prosecutions, signaled “an important step away from the more aggressive prosecutorial practices seen in some cases under their predecessors,” Sullivan & Cromwell, a prominent Wall Street law firm, told clients in a memo that September.

Wednesday, September 07, 2011

Robbed them blind......

I love it when these crooks get took, LOL.

Veep robbed Citigroup blind -
A legally blind, exCitigroup exec yesterday copped to embezzling more than $22 million from the New York banking giant and splurging on posh pads with gold-leaf ceilings -- and fancy cars he couldn’t even see well enough to drive.

Disgraced business honcho Gary Foster, 35, pleaded guilty in Brooklyn federal court to bank- fraud charges. He faces up to 10 years in prison as part of a plea deal.

While his impaired sight prevented him from sitting behind the steering wheel, Foster didn’t let that stop him from shelling out hundreds of thousands for a Ferrari, a Maserati GranTurismo and a BMW 550i, authorities said.

Monday, September 05, 2011

Another big shot economist who doesn't have a clue....

At least he admits he has been wrong. But his worrying over budget deficits spooking the markets and somehow effecting interest rates simply means he still doesn't have a clue.

During depressions history shows us that no one has money or credit so someone has to create it. Either forgive a large amount of debt, (in bible times it was called Jubilee, even they got it!) pay down the debts, or give everybody the money to get back on their feet.

Until we figure a way to get money into the citizens hands we are in a DEPRESSION because we are broke and can't recover if we don't have a job.


What To Do About Jobs?
What To Do About Jobs?

My talk from August 31, 2011:

It is hard to talk about macro right now. It is hard, in large part, because virtually all of us macroeconomists have been wrong over the past four years. Thus the past four years is that it’s been a great process of unlearning. And, distressingly, we have not been unlearning old things and learning true new things. We have, instead, been unlearning relatively new things but not replacing them with new new things. Instead, we have been going back to still older things. And these older things now appear to be more true than we imagined a decade ago, or indeed more true--at least for our economy right now--than economists have thought them at any time since 1950.

One way to look at the 60 years before 2007 in macroeconomics is as a long intellectual twlight struggle in which Milton Freedman in the end beat John Maynard Keynes, and beat him decisively. There were three major questions in macroeconomics on which Friedman and Keynes differed, and by 2007 an overwhelming majority of macroeconomists agreed with Friedman.

The first question was: Could central banks technocratically and apolitically do the macroeconomic stabilization jobs by themselves, or did they require help and assistance from the more political branches of government? Could central banks all by themselves make Say's Law that supply creates its own demand true in practice even if it wasn’t true in theory?

Sunday, September 04, 2011

It must be no golf game day.....

Oba mama tours the flooded area. Nothing but excitement from this guy, right?

Saturday, September 03, 2011

Color me sceptical.....

Take years and then the government will give them more money.

Isn't that where these crooks got the money in the first place?

Friday Night Fights: The FHFA Sues Everyone | The Reformed Broker
This was a doozy, dropped on the markets at the end of the day Friday...

The Federal Government (via the Federal Housing Finance Agency) is suing 17 financial institutions for like tens of billions of dollars over mortgage fraud and the credit crash. All your favorite dirtbags are named, even the ones that are now hiding under different brands (hello GMAC aka Ally Bank!).

Expect a ten-year dogfight followed by a massive catch-all deal a la the Global Settlement we saw stemming from the dot com boom/bust cycle not so long ago. No one will have learned anything when all is said and done but there will definitely be some clawbacks and redistribution of ill-gotten gains...finally.

The effect on the stock market will also not be pretty, but sometimes you gotta burn out the town to drive the bad guys out from their hiding holes.

Friday, September 02, 2011

Get ready for the "job crisis"...

yeah, Obama came back from vacation and went to the golf course and decided we must have a job crisis because too many people were on the course getting in his way.

Of course, a couple of years ago he could have fixed the problem because he and the Dems controlled Congress completely.

Then he lied to everybody who voted for him and gave all of our money to the crooks on Wall Street and the banks who got us into this mess.

Well, after another vacation he snuck into Washington and played golf with Boner and Boner stuck it up his ass. And the economy tanked even further and he had to take some time off.

After that vacation he announced he had a job program and it would be a cure for our problem as soon as he could swindle the Repubs who now own the House out of the money.

So he called up Boner and dingy Harry and ordered them to a summit to fix his fuck up. But boner said, ''no more Mulligans you s.o.b. I want to get reelected".

So that's why he'll get reelected because it's all (Bush's) Congress' fault and he worked reeeeaaaally hard to save our economy but couldn't get any of the bastard Republicans, who are stupid enough to obey their voters and tell him to go to Hell, to help him save our jobs!

Of course, I expect Congress to be big time Republican and then it will be an "interesting " time, don't you think?

P.s It's almost time for the President to go on vacation so expect another "Bush did it and it's not my fault" rant!!!Technorati Tags: ,

Thursday, September 01, 2011

Hey, these banks are doing you a favor...

That's why the fed's bailed them out. We can't live without the slimy bastards.

Do yourself a favor and open an account with a credit union and become part owner in an honest lending institution, you won't be sorry!

"We Have Accepted Your Deposit" as Opposed to "We Have Borrowed Your Money"
August 30, 2011
"We Have Accepted Your Deposit" as Opposed to "We Have Borrowed Your Money"

I have always found the rhetoric of banking very interesting, in a perverted sort of way...