This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Debt Ceiling Farce Is Ending... Or Is It?
It may be time to rebrand Congress as the new CTU, although when it comes to who in D.C. should play agent Jack Bauer we are still unsure. The reason is that this morning we get two diametrically opposing fictions about the latest reality on the debt ceiling. On the one hand we read in the LA Times that, "Republican leaders in the House have begun to prepare their troops for politically painful votes to raise the nation's debt limit, offering warnings and concessions to move the hard-line majority toward a compromise that would avert a federal default. For weeks, GOP conservatives, particularly in the House, have issued demands about what they would require in exchange for their votes to increase the debt limit... Unwilling to risk the economic and political consequences of a federal default, which could come as early as Aug. 2, they have started the difficult process of standing down."
That, however is not what The Hill heard: "House Republican leaders have missed a 36-hour deadline President Obama set during a Thursday meeting for lawmakers to give him a plan to avert a national default. The deadline came and went Saturday morning without a response from House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). Instead, Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) plan to move the Cut, Cap and Balance Act on the floor next week, which would require passage of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution before the debt limit is raised. A House GOP leadership aide said at noontime Saturday that Boehner and Cantor did not send Obama a revised proposal to raise the debt-limit, as the president requested." So which is it? And has M. Night Shyamalan been retained to write the surprise twist ending to this nail-biter? We doubt it. Unfortunately, we are still convinced the republicans, under the "wise" defection of Mitch McConnell will fold, Obama will get what he wants, and the republican tough stance will go up in a puff of smoke leading to an even great loss of credibility for the GOP. There is less than 168 hours in which we can be proven wrong. We hope we are, but we doubt it.
Version one of events from the LA Times, in which yet another movie, Star Wars, is invoked:
At a closed-door meeting Friday morning, GOP leaders turned to their most trusted budget expert, Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, to explain to rank-and-file members what many others have come to understand: A fiscal meltdown could occur if Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling.
House Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio underscored the point to dispel the notion that failure to allow more borrowing is an option.
"He said if we pass Aug. 2, it would be like 'Star Wars,'" said Rep. Scott DesJarlais, a freshman from Tennessee. "I don't think the people who are railing against raising the debt ceiling fully understand that."
The warnings appeared to have softened the views of at least some House members who, until now, were inclined to dismiss statements by administration officials, business leaders and outside economists that the economic impact would be dire if the federal government were suddenly unable to pay its bills.
Freshman Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) said the presentation about skyrocketing interest rates that could result from downgraded bond ratings was "sobering."
"It illustrates to us that doing nothing is unacceptable," he said. "I think the conference understands this is a defining moment for us. It's time to put the next election aside."
Granted the LA Times does realize this spin of events is missing one key thing: the fact that conservatives will scream bloody murder at being betrayed by their own party:
At the same time, Republican leaders orchestrated a series of public moves intended to soften the blow for conservatives. They agreed to give the House an opportunity to vote on two top conservative priorities: a so-called cut-cap-and-balance bill, which would order $111 billion in cuts in federal programs for 2012 and impose a cap on future spending, and a constitutional amendment that would require a balanced federal budget.
The Democratic leadership in the Senate is also expected to allow votes on one, and perhaps both, measures. Neither is expected to become law — the constitutional amendment would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers — but the chance to vote could appeal to the "tea party" conservatives in the House, who are most skeptical of any deal with the White House to raise the debt limit.
"We're in the fourth quarter here," Boehner said. "Let's get through that vote, and we'll make decisions about what will come after."
As for the "other side", here is The Hill:
At a meeting late Thursday afternoon, Obama gave congressional leaders 24 to 36 hours to meet with their colleagues to figure out a plan that could pass both chambers.
“It’s decision time,” Obama said.
Ignoring Obama’s directive, Republican leaders are coalescing around the Cut, Cap and Balance bill that is expected to pass the House but has virtually no chance in the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is pushing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to schedule votes on the Cut, Cap and Balance bill and a balanced budget amendment in the upper chamber next week.
A Senate Democratic aide said it’s likely that at least one of those Republican priorities will receive floor time next week because it would clear the way for passage of a last-ditch contingency plan later this month.
The contingency plan, proposed by McConnell, has become more politically viable as negotiations between Obama and congressional leaders have broken down.
We stand by our prediction that there will be no budget cuts (and $1 trillion over the next decade amounts to less than $100 billion per year: this is less than 8% of the total amount of debt issued each year by Time Geithner: i.e., a farce, and a precondition to a downgrade by S&P, of course, until they too are shut down by the latest and greatest bribe out of wherever). There will also beno tax hikes, and the US Titanic will continue on its merry way to the iceberg without a change in course, even as the two-party scam in DC congratulates itself for a "grand compromise" well done.
Next up: total US debt/GDP at 120% in under a year, with a primary deficit at 10% of GDP, i.e. far, far worse than Italy.
»
- 15060 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
+1861
Two junkers have already targeted you. Unbelievable. You must have hit a nerve. I think all of your groupings seem to make sense.
Do we still have to think that Lincoln was the greatest American president? I know that is what we are supposed to think. "The great emancipator". Bwahahaha.
Lincoln was half the man our Founders be; and half again of him are we.
Yep, the availability of natural resources like water and arable land will be the harbinger of events leading up to this. The city of Atlanta already talking about making it "illegal" to capture the rainwater falling on your property. Idiotic fuckers, this party is just getting started people.
By contrast, the city of Austin will subsidize your purchase of rain barrels.
My guess is there would be a military coup if the country were about to break up, or more likely various false flag terror attacks, to "unite the nation". The industrial-military-financial complex simply wouldn't allow it to happen.
Why not? The MIC is in the business of selling weapons systems and funding the sale of those systems. As things stand right now, the US is entering a period of significant economic contraction, where it becomes less able to project its military might. This means fewer sales of jets and avionics, high tech armored suits, tanks, etc. A military coup (which isn't the same as the MIC, though there's obviously a lot of overlap) wouldn't last more than a few years in the US (though we will almost certainly go through one) before the cost of keeping break away republics under control becomes prohibitive. The MIC would love a breakup, however, because they can end up selling weapon systems to the various combatants. The FIRE complex is already broken (and broke), and like the MIC, should the country break up, then they can effectively fund the combatants at punitive interest rates.
Don't assume that the various business complexes are interested in being patriotic. Many of the power movers and shakers feel that they could run countries more efficiently than democratically elected governments could, and of course could become far more wealthy if they did. If it's in their interest to see the country break apart, you can be assured that they will do everything in their power to make it happen.
False flag attacks would be the more likely scenario -- unite the country. Works like a charm.
I've felt that we're heading this way for awhile, though I'd quibble some on boundaries - SoCal will be annexed by Mexico, AZ and NM will likely as well (especially if dust bowl conditions dry up the Colorado River, making Phoenix and Scottsdale uninhabitable). Canada will likely disintegrate as well - they're too much in the US orbit not to be. Cascadia will be SF north to Vancouver, BC and possibly up to Alaska. Florida splits into Cuban Miami through Orlando. Texarklahoma. New England (including upper NY State) merges with the Canadian Maritimes. The Rockies states extend all the way north to the Arctic Ocean. Utah and South Carolina become theocracies, possibly extending through North Carolina, East Tennessee and Kentucky, perhaps West Virginia and south Virginia. Given the demographic, I see a predominantly African American "country" emerging from Alabama, Mississippi and Western Tennessee and Kentucky, possibly also including New Orleans, but not the bayous or points west in Louisiana. The "new" US would thus consist of the midAtlantic states and the Midwest, and would include New York City, Boston, Chicago and Washington DC.
This won't happen all at once, but that's how I see it working out after about thirty years of low level (and periodically high level) civil war. State lines will tend to be guiding principles for division, but those boundaries will change as you get population movements and as loyalty to the old United States fades over time.
One thing I don't see is the union holding for another 100 years. The United States has been built upon the principle of expansion - growth of the economy, ability to project presence outward and so forth. When the US physically ran out of exploitable room, it expanded outwards with its military to create vassal states. If we are entering a period of contraction (which I feel we are) then as the US becomes increasingly starved for new resources, it will become politically unstable (which is evidently happening now). The US Govt's ability to distribute money dries up, and the regions that are most self-sufficient will realize that it makes more sense to go independent than depend upon a sinking ship. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen, probably within my lifetime.
In total agreement, except texas will be on its own. No way they join any union
Well the whole point of a constitutional republic is that the USA consisted of 50 parts. Each called a state. They agreed to join the union, and to give specific (not general) powers to the central government for common causes such as defense (not foreign occupation) and regulating interstate commerce. Any power not enumerate in the constitution is reserved tonthe states or to the people.
This is why things like Obamacare, marijuana prohibition, federal gun laws and a whole host of owe bureaucracies such as TSA, DEA, HS, FDA, EPA etc are not constitutional. None of these organisations' power is enumerated in the constitution, and no referendum of the 50 states were taken to vote on these powers to be given to the fed.
And no, the supreme court got it wrong. General welfare means that everyone in the country is affected. If only certain groups are affected by a law, it is specific welfare, and the Feds have no power.
I think it was wickard v filburn that started the supreme court on the slippery slope of 'general welfare' everything.
Thank you for your post, Libertarian777.
Many of our problems today can be laid at the feet of our judiciary system, specifically the Supreme Court.
I believe the "slippery slope" began with Marbury vs Madison, 1803. Whereby CJ John Marshall of the SupCourt decided that they themselves, the courts, should have the power to decide whether a law abides the Constitution or not. A self-created power we now call Judicial Review.
Downhill, the snowball of judicial review added to itself Case Law, a Progressive notion that application of a law today need only stand the Constitutional rigor of the most recent court decision of a similar case.
Solution? Impeach Federal judges---a check against Executive and Judicial branches provided to us by our Founders in our Constitution.
What would be a nice effect of a US default would be the municipalities bond market blowing up... that would mean cities would go bankrupt and would be forced to fire cops.
Less cops = good.
Less authority=good
no power=bingo
No power=cut the grid by doing nothing----stay home and take your vacation pay, paid sickleave let the power and the powerful die----they sure as hell can't do anything without "We the Serfs"
do-nothing, dudes
Less cops = good if you're in the suburbs or nice part of town. Try living in the bad part of town with less cops. It will be mayhem. Cities that don't allow citizens to arm themselves will fall apart.
Move or arm. That choice has been kicking around for a few centuries.
Isn't it great that places like NYC strip you of your 2nd Amdendment rights and then the cops say, "you'll be glad we are here when you need us". When I walk by mos NYPDers nowadays I think I would be better off being protected by the Taliban. You really have to see them in action at the subway bag checkpoints to get a full appreciation for how good a job their union has done. The people meant to protect you are often your biggest oppressors. Welcome to The Big Apple.
sun,
Leave that fear in the back of your mind
come on down with your own kind
there are too many of us
do want to die of heart disease, cancer, or
do you want to live not knowing
and take what the universe offers?
I don't know what is on that dark road,
but it is time to take chance
or risk dying of boredom
do-nothing dudes
there are a fair number of cities where it would be good for them to fall apart.
And in some it would be virtually impossible to tell they had fallen-apart, actually. I mean, how would it be any different in a city like Camden, for example?
Assuming the stats from the FBI and NJ are accurate, there were about 2400 violent crimes per 100,000 residents in Camden, NJ in 2009, and in the 1st quarter of 2011 in Newark, violent crime rate was up 21% after all the cop layoffs. So total violent crimes in Camden should've been roughly in the area of 12,500 for '09.
Now if Newark is a decent predictor for stats in Camden, a reasonable expection would be that Camden will see a TOTAL of about 2500 more violent crimes in 2011 after they laid off most of the police force.
I don't think the increase from 12,500 violent crimes to 15,000 violent crimes per year is exactly a transition from a stable and secure society to mayhem. Pretty much seems like mayhem either way to me, but obviously that's how we like things.
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/167506/20110622/camden-irvington-trenton...
So the Republicans can't figure out how to put forth a budget, so the plan is to pass a law that tells them they need to balance the budget? They can't figure out how to raise the debt ceiling, so they propose to give the responsibility to the President until after the election. Why do they even bother showing up, just tranfer the rest of their responsibilities and go home.
We have entered the phase of the game where everyone knows it is over. The key is to maintain your legacy by not having it crash on your watch.
They passed one, it died in the Senate without a vote.
They passed the budget a few months ago. This is about the debt ceiling.
So the Republicans can't figure out how to put forth a budget
??? That's the President's job. Learn about how the US works before you open your mouth.
Who's gonna tell Congress?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/paul-ryans-budget-proposal-passes-house-democrats-medicare/story?id=13384520
Too stupid to respond to
The demodumbs did not pass a budget for two fucking years, MSM gave them a total pass. smarten up guy, both parties spent money like drunken sailors for the last 40+ years, and now the bill is coming due.
"Dreams Come Due, Government and Economics as if Freedom Mattered", ISBN: 0-671-61159-3, by John Galt
The book is dated, but many of the things it talks about are still valid today.
"What do you give a Govt that's taken everything?"
Thank god we get one of the "smartest men in any room" to weigh in on the the the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling:MAD. Of which, he is of course an expert given that most of his policies were necessary preconditions to invoke MAD.
Summers said a potential default makes him worry about“runs on banks, runs on money market funds,” exchanges facing“the prospect of collapse, institutions that had been built over decades” being “swept away.”
“The ability to carry on routine financial business -- to clear checks, to pay bills, to meet obligations would be lost,”he said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-16/summers-says-default-would-cause-more-panic-than-lehman-brothers.html
One wonders at what point we can invoke chicken little?
Btw, the $100b cut in the budget every year for 10 years, it less than half of the amount that S&P said they were looking for in order for the US to maintain their AAA rating.
I watched John Chambers (chairman of S&P's sovereign rating committee) last night on Charlie Rose defend his action on the US to none other than Bill Gross (it is not online yet). Mr. Gross was very amusing in lecturing Mr. Chambers on the seriousness of downgrading the US credit rating. Mr. Chambers laid out the math behind his decision and stood strong. It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next 6 weeks, as regards the debt ceiling, the debt talks and the response thereto.
LOL, no shit lizzy. Summers is a fucking pathological liar. The only things that will be "swept away" are organizations and institutions that were fraudulent to begin with. I continue to be amazed by "modern professionals" who continue to support this fucknut. Especially women, who I then proceed to direct to Summer's comments amount women being inferior to men in the math, science, and engineering professions.
http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2005/01/19/harvard_...
You mean he told the truth. Nearly every mathematician, engineer, and scientist of note has been a man. Men still dominate those fields. When I took engineering classes in college, nearly every student was a male. Nobody ever discouraged females from taking those classes. None of the females I knew were interested.
Men are also better mechanics. They're better at carpentry, electrical work and plumbing. Women beat the hell out of men when it comes to giving birth, taking care of children, multitasking etc.
Why is it that some people refuse to admit that men and women are different?
Yes, but it still just gets those liberal women's pantie's in a knot, and I love to stir the pot.
they make really bitchin' lawyers, though (pun intended - kinda)
That is because, while math, science and mechanics fail to excite most women, communication really turns us on.
Madame Curie disagrees with you.
You share the mindset of the Taliban on women and intelligence.
If not for Pierre Curie's electrometer, invented 15 years prior to their marriage, his wife would have been relegated to kitchen duties.
Most lame troll ever.
I played duplicate bridge the other day with a retired research chemist from a national lab. A woman. The mother of a friend of mine led cancer research teams using particle physics.
Somewhat of a rhetorical question, but why is no one pointing out that these same people refusing the vote to raise the debt ceiling voted numerous times under Bush to do just that. So long as they want to cut, why are they not talking about cutting funding for three illegal wars? Even the MSM has stopped talking about recent U.S. and NATO casualties in the war zones. Having encourage my neighbors to buy physical silver and gold like myself, we are now buying lead, brass, and, well you get the idea. Something wicked this way comes indeed. The like of which the world has never seem, especially in the subtle way it will engulf all of us, even those who thought they were safe. I am continuously amazed by the people who consider themselves "better then middle class". Idiots, not even good drones for that matter.
Because if you understand the gangs, you understand the US.
They do not oppose debt ceiling rise, they oppose not the being the ones rising it. It is very different.
Both parties love big government, just in slightly different variations. Neither one wants to cut the budget. They just want to cut the other party's slime. They are all pathological.
If you think of the Democratic and Republican parties as two mafioso crime families fighting over the same turf, it all makes more sense.
The "25 wrongs make a right" argument has already been tried here, pal. So has pointing-out the hypocrisy of the former junior Senator from Ill-noize voting against debt-limit increases before being elevated to the big chair.
I am all for hitting the reset button and bringing people back to reality, the world needs to re-learn what real value is and I am no fan of any politician, especially flip-floppers (like Obama). What is your fucking point? Anything constructive to actually bring to the table?
My point was that you brought-up a "rhetorical" question that has been mentioned, repeatedly, on every fucking thread on this subject for the last month. It gets tiring after a while and is hardly - what's the word you smarmily used? Oh yeah - constructive.
Fair enough. At least this site does provide tradable information (although more and more theater these days) and it does get people talking and thinking. Now if only we lived in a similar neighborhood.
We're cool, Phys.
Heh - you're a brave soul for "trading" in this climate. I'm out until after the rebuilding starts. Nothing but PMs hedged with FRNs for me for now. Good luck.
Don't forget about getting a little land.. Grow a garden and eat your peas..
>> Nothing but PMs hedged with FRNs for me for now.
Thank you for putting it in perspective for me. That is basically my position, but I wasn't looking at it that way. I felt I was sitting on a pile of cash that wasn't doing anything for me. Now, considering it's a hedge, I feel it is working for me and I don't have feel anxious about it. Simple concept for most, I'm sure, but I just wasn't getting it. My main objective, after all, is not lose ground.
And as to the previous reply to you about land, I've done that, looking for more.
Mitch McConnell is a cowardly horses ass RINO and the McConnell plan to abdicate Congressional responsibility will not pass Congress is my guess.
My best guess is that Boehner and Cantor have come to realize when negotiating with Obama - a narcisstic personality - you are not really negotiating (Been there, done that with NPD people). You are only speaking of "O"'s demands, which are impossible to meet. You find yourself stuck between a rock and a hard place. Finally, you make the choice that you must stand your ground, no matter what. Because Obama does not care a bit...he will spend, spend, spend, and destroy the country for the next President. So that becomes your choice. Stand or retreat. If you retreat or compromise it gets worse, not better. You will be used and abused if you compromise. So you must stand your ground and not give in, and you must stand NOW. I'm beginning to believe that's where Boehner and Cantor are at.
If so, we default. Because "O" will do nothing, but blame everyone else.
I have also seen it where the NPD mentally crashes and comes to a period of temporary sanity where they give you everything you want. But this is unusual, and they quickly return to insanity and disavow everything that just happened that they agreed to.
The best take on the McConnell plan is from WaPo's Michael Kinsley (mostly because it made me lmao).
The plan is summed up here:
1) The president writes three numbers on separate pieces of White House stationery, puts them in individual envelopes and hides them in three places across the country.
2) House Republican leader Eric Cantor then tries to find these envelopes. When he finds one, he must guess the number inside. If he guesses wrong, he has to shut up — not say one more word — for three months. If he guesses right, he then may propose a list of spending cuts, which are put to a nonbinding vote by the Supreme Court.
3) If the high court upholds Cantor’s cuts, they then go through the regular legislative process, where all Democrats vote against them. That triggers creation of a commission composed of three senators (one from each party, plus John McCain), two House members, the most recent Academy Award winner for best supporting actress, and Warren Buffett. (If Buffett declines, Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, may appoint any other billionaire of his choice, with the exception of Donald Trump.)
4) Members of the commission have complete authority to meet, study the problem, engage in extramarital affairs with other commission members, and put out a report recommending major cuts in Medicare. Ten thousand copies of the report will be printed, boxed, shipped to storage in Nevada and immediately destroyed to prevent the recommendations from becoming public and being misrepresented in the press.
5) Congress will then pass a responsible budget, raising taxes and cutting spending in ways that nobody minds. The economy will take off. Everyone involved, from either party, will get reelected by a large margin. And we’ll all live happily ever after.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-mcconnell-debt-plan-explained/2011/07/14/gIQAUL9gEI_story.html
Yeah, anarchy. Doesn't have a prayer I hope.
Coming soon to a theater near you
Anarchy != Chaos
"Because Obama does not care a bit...he will spend, spend, spend, and destroy the country for the next President. "
Yep, just like George Bush did, and every president has done before him since we took our currency off the gold standard. I wonder why Mitch had no problem voting to raise the debt ceiling under Bush?
No, not like Bush. Obama is far worse than anyone in US History.
you people deserve whats coming.
Who? And why?
You! and because YOU! support them! there LOBBY WHORES!
Wrong.
That's the spirit!
I am old I needed a nap! sorry!
"you people" ?? damn - I knew all along you were a fuckin' CIA plant
I was describing the two party supporters here.
We're taking you people down with us people
I am going to the Bahamas (they are 25 minutes away by plane an hour by boat).. so no one is taking me anywhere, unless it is fishing or bug hunting!
>> I am going to the Bahamas (they are an hour by boat).
Where in Florida to where in the Bahamas? What kind off boat can make the trip in an hour?
I've got news for you. If TSHTH, the Bahamians aren't going to be too friendly to whitey seeking refuge. They don't like us now, they'll like us even less if things go down.
I think that would depend on how many times you've been and how many friends you've already made there. You'd be amazed how many people of color outside the US don't "hate whitey" when "whitey" doesn't have the same accent as their former colonial masters.
My Family has had Property in the Bahamas for 3 Generations +. I am not worried about anyone there. Great People! Fellow Pirates!
I was allowing for ruff seas in the hour..
Palm Beach inlet.. Pinders or anywhere West End.
Boat(s) that can make it easily the 53 (53.4 miles dock to dock, not as the crow flies) miles in 60 minutes..
my preference is a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB16YJIsAWo Kevlar Hull Modified V Trip Power (yamaha). 34' not 39'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRIMWhAx6kU
The Veture is good for back and forth, fish a 61 Viking and a 60 Ocean on the other side of the run. http://www.spanishcay.com/
I like your style, Swabbie. I used to work for Bob Nordskog when I was a teen...man that dude loved him some fast boats (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxADsKm13pM). Even when he was too old to race they'd strap him in so he could bob on the waves while they piloted.
You get the gubmint you deserve. Hahahahahahhahahahahahahah
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
JLee2027
Any chance you could explain this? Why is Obama worse than Bush?
Thanks in advance..
Because that's my opinion. There is nothing to debate or explain.
Now go troll elsewhere.
Just like assholes, everyone has an opinion. Troll elsewhere indeed fucknut.
Was I talking to you? Or maybe I was referring to you?
Idiot.
Not one useful or original thought rolling around in there with the pea.
Yep, everyodys got one and they all stink.
Because that's my opinion. There is nothing to debate or explain...
If you're posting your stupid opinions in a discussion forum, you should be prepared and willing to back-up them up. I mean, that's the point of a discussion forum, isn't it? Otherwise, your answer is no more meaningful than stating your favorite color.
It's sort of difficult to have a discussion if Rush and Hannity haven't pre-packaged the answers for you before hand, isn't it? Your shallow, elementary school response is pretty much what I had expected....just more unsubstantiated, hypocritical hot-air from a hollowed-head Republican who believes on Wednesday the exact same thing as Monday, no matter what happens on Tuesday.
Go red team, GO!
"Let the sargeant mirror spin, if we lose, the barbers win!
Happy family, one-hand clap, four went on but none came back."
Same transcription error everywhere you look, damn stupid innertoobz.
It's "this argent mirror."
Listen to this asshole. Where does one start to critique his never ending bullshit?
Is the "Bay of Pigs" name in reference to the Cuban invasion of 1961, or was it the theme of your most recent family union in Tampa?
on Sat, 07/16/2011 - 15:21
#1462330
Because that's my opinion. There is nothing to debate or explain.
Now go troll elsewhere.
**************************************************************
It his party and he will cry if he wants too! he doesnt have to give you sourced and sited facts.. he is talking about his feelings.. and we all should be-careful before stepping on another human beings feelings..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJQVlVHsFF8
cry it out bro.. no worries it happens to all the guys!
God's Chosen Party should be running the Country into the ground instead of Obama! You tell'em!
Palin / Bachmann 2012...a vote for us is a vote for Jesus!
Perhaps because his deficits are three times larger than Bush's.
The biggest Bush deficit with a Republican Congress was in 2004 at $400 billion + $120 billion for the Iraq/Afghan wars. That's $520 billion.
Obama's 2010 deficit was $1.48 trillion with the Democrats in control of the House and Senate.
FYI - I am no fan of Bush
And that spending went to whom? I am no defender of Obama, but who signed TALF and TARP, putting us on the slippery slope that lead to that spending? Moreover, where has the vast majority of ALL president's spending since the 70's gone, aside from wars? If you said "the financial sector" You are a winner! The sooner we default, the sooner compensation finds it way back to people with skills that are actually worth real value. Fuck all the paper pushers, got physical and marketable skills? You better.
>> Perhaps because his deficits are three times larger than Bush's.
But no real consideration of the economy and budget situation Bush inherited and the one Obama inherited? Odd that folks like you can make such sweeping judgements without considering extenuating circumstances. What would Bush's (or McCain's) budget look like with the same starting point?
FYI>> No fan of Obama or Bush
I'm guessing McCain's would have $50B less from Medicare and SS and $200B more for defense...Reagan-lite.
Those that can count, will note the $100B net increase.
Yeah, aside from the completely preventable terror attack and the completely avoidable financial crisis, he did a "heckuva job".
>> Why is Obama worse than Bush?
Pretty simple. Republican vs Democrat. These fucknuts are still fighting that war.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
THEY ARE ALL LOBBY WHORES!!
SELLING "We the People" out for LOBBY MONIES!!!
God Bless You for bring to lite that they ALL! SUCK BALLS!!
+23
they hafta do something! this is practically a real-time account of the bankster-brainwashing of a young congo.
senior bankster agents leading the congress around by the nose.
"He said if we pass Aug. 2, it would be like 'Star Wars,'" said Rep. Scott DesJarlais, a freshman from Tennessee. "I don't think the people who are railing against raising the debt ceiling fully understand that."
this is pretty long and you might risk spending hours checking out these vids, but this is our hero on the same learning curve as young scott, from TN, releasing a flood...
?Walt Disney - Fantasia - Mickey The Sorcerer's Apprentice? - YouTube
RESET !
Think about this:
Summers said a potential default makes him worry about“runs on banks, runs on money market funds,” exchanges facing“the prospect of collapse, institutions that had been built over decades” being “swept away.”
In a nation where 250 million of 300 million peopl have effectively been dis-enfrachised-------------Who cares about the above?
No money? we are still going to eat
I wonder what Summers would say about this reality---guess he doesn't live here
It really is funny how clueless these idiots in washington really are........they had to be taken into the back room and told what fiat money is........
I believe the market will do what is has to do and Downgrade the Debt of the USA. Higher rates will put and end to the spending binge and debt charade. Boner and Odrama will be rendered impotent.
And a market crash will follow...and much gnashing of teeth...and a strong-man will appear...saying mean things about the Chinese...or illegals...or some other convenient bogeyman.
I nominate the Republicons and Decepticrats as the "Bogeymen...", can I get a second?
There are plenty of other people to pick on. No need for racism or picking on law breakers. Hey they could just go after overweight people. Or skinny people. Scapegoats are easy. Solving problems is very hard. Just ask Zero. He is finding it harder each day to vote present.
Maybe i'm missing something, but if the debt ceiling isn't raised, can't the Treasury simply print enough physical cash to pay the bills? They have the actual printing presses, and that's not borrowing.
That's what will come eventually.
Not now, of course, but after a ~20% crash on equities. Everybody will be begging for it.
How we print has a lot to do with selling bonds. Bond buyers get antsy when they don't get their interest. Interest is paid by day, on out to 30 years. The overnights could go nuts.
And here is the biggest rub. All this will be added to the national debt, no Austrian free lunch.
It actually costs money to print "real" money, paper, workers, distribution, etc. The cheapest money is electronic.
Yes, but what i mean is if the debt ceiling is capped, they can't issue bonds, and by law the Fed can't fund the treasury directly, it has to loan money indirectly by purchasing bonds through dealers.
What i'm saying is the Treasury itself can legally print $100 dollar bills and deposit them. Legally they have not breached the debt ceiling, and the Fed has not directly funded them. Problem solved. Sarc
But the green bill in your hand is not a treasury bill. Have a close look. It says " federal reserve note".
The treasury could print their bills on green paper instead of pink treasury paper, sure but who do they sell this to? They have to exchange the treasury bill for some debt. Her's the kicker, legal tender laws (as i understand it) don't include treasury bills), so treasury bills will not settle debts (technically FRNs don't either, but at least the government mandates you accept them as full payment of a debt).
So you understand the problem now? The treasury is trying to print up as much paper as it can (bills), but there is no one who can turn it into 'legal tender' except the federal reserve.
And that, my dear brother, is why we need QE3.
It's also what we all call 'monetisation' of debt
The Bush legacy is almost unsolvable.
Sure - because all was right and well with the world prior to Jan 2001, right?
Delusional.
Bush "legacy" was just the proverbial icing on the cake....THE GRAND FINALE.... after decades of untold BULLSHIT, CONS, LIES, DECEIPT, GREED, BRIBES, TAX GAMES, WHORE-MONGERING, BUREAOCRATIC BUILD-UP, MILITARY BUILD-UP <foam & spittle flying forth now> AND....UHH.. A FEW OTHERS
How is that any different from what is happening now?
Yep - a disaster almost a century in the making. The stage was set in late 1913 by the man who, if history were truly dispassionately written, would go down as the worst American president ever (yes, worse the Carter, Obama and Bush II). All it took was a major shock to the system once the collapse was underay and we got that with the oil embargos of the 70's.
We've been on borrowed time for 40-years and it looks like our time might almost be up.
Everything is just perfect now.
What does "it will be like Star Wars" mean? If I am not mistaken and George can certainly tell me if I am wrong, but in Star Wars our heroes fought with an empire trying to enslave them, won a few, lost a few, won a big one and everything worked out pretty well except for the bad guys. So if his references is "we must help the bad guys win this time", understood.
What the hell kind of reference does the idiot congressperson intend? Maybe he is talking about the porker that was Raygun's "Star Wars" space based personal planetary punitive destruction device? That was a boondoggle though, can't be that.
The only thing left is that this must refer to the talks as a movie, fantasy or fiction as opposed to documentary or real.
We just have to remember that if the person says more than 1 or 2 completely idiotic things as blackmail, they are disqualified from anything but prison labor from that point onward.
I assumed he meant the Death Star, populated by all the evil imperial politicians, would get destroyed in the end.
in 2006 all democrats, including Obama, voted against raising the debt ceiling.
all republicans voted for it.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
a farce in the making indeed.
..and there it is...
As someone previously stated, this isn't about the debt ceiling - its about the vig and who gets it.
75bp would not come from $600 bn QE. your math is linear. right concept but damning to use linear math here. its probably mor elike the $600 bn QE equates to a 3bp federal funds drop.
I thought that this was a good idea: http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/07/qe3-treasury-stylego-around-not-over.html
I hope if they do default that they seriously reset the system. Not a selective default of say $50 bn, then the market drops and they use the fear to enact another $2.5 trillion spending bill
I'll agree with that. We need a reset. Rioting cannot be avoided, so why make the problem worse?
I hope if they do default that they seriously reset the system. Not a selective default of say $50 bn, then the market drops and they use the fear to enact another $2.5 trillion spending bill
The West is totally broke, I just wonder how will the world look like in 20 years.
Personally, I've taken to trying to learn some Hindi.
How did things look in America in 1939? How about 1860? How about 1776? In each case, disaster loomed.
20 years from now, America will have rebuilt from the debt crisis and will be stronger than ever.
You are out of your mind.
Look around at the avg amerikan TODAY...
leave your little ranch on the prairie, pull your head out of the ass
of whichever strand of political bullshit you worship and go out and look.
You are nuts.
60% MIN are dead fucking weight with no ability at all.
Maybe after you waste all of them , maybe.
Go back to Old Europe son. Did you see America in 1939? Perhaps you need a refresher course...ie. Soup Lines!
http://kilburnhall.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/bread-lines.jpg?w=308&h=250
You fucking idiot.
So...less obese, then.
You are on the wrong site: check it out!
Technology Smithology: Assumption of Embedded Error
Funny/not how important it is to approach the problem with a suitable language (language is like Judo).
The impenetrable mist preventing many from reaching the event horizon is the nonsensical mythology/assumptions pumped into them at the GIGO grade school to the end of accelerating gravity. The fact is that the “founding fathers” were the latest iteration of ponzi operators taking advantage of an ignorant population organized for the purpose by the church, which was the root of Ben’s problem. His son knew his dad was another guy gaining ownership on the ideas of others. You’ll have that.
Start with Washington’s apple tree, study his casualty numbers in the context of political/gravity consideration at the time, and finish with how he took his land and kept it with slaves. The mistake the indigent people made at the time was assuming that technology was evil because evil people were employing it, and compounding the error all around by fighting fire with lessor fire in frustration, paying to destroy their own culture, a policy which continues globally to this day.
In a digital world of divide and conquer, the opposite of 1 is 0, and that is all the humanists on the other side of the coin see, assuming that is all there is. Not ironically, Uncle Sam is turning to the Indian, exempt from the law, some of whom are turning out excellent community technology, as the world turns its focal point. Evil is a counter-productive focal point. Some tools withstand the test of time.
America lost access to the best technology in the mist of its own creation, and is now being cut to pieces by the other edge of its own sword.
Before the crows start, the algorithm we have seen repeatedly goes:
attack the author based on a bad assumption;
the body of the argument is a piece of paper from a collapsing institution, therefore, on authority, the argument must be wrong (the student loans are already in the bad bank and professors need real students, not the other way around);
in Johnny-come-lately conclusion, the argument is impenetrable;
the derivative follower to the follower chimes in;
the follower to the follower to the follower labels the author;
and majority wins from what is a “world-class” education system, none of whom realize that their counters have already been addressed in the original analogy, on a platform built exactly for that purpose.
The most common path to gravity is empathizing with those who do not deserve it, and, out of frustration, failing to provide consideration to those who do deserve it, landing the offender in the blender, seeking company. No intelligent consideration locally, none globally.
I have been providing tools for some time. If you have a better tool, present it. The hedge fund managers are cleaning up; build a better tool or get your clock cleaned. After drop-dead there will be no do-overs. Get back in the herd or don’t look back. Caesar is about to start flailing about, testing Mr. Black’s theory. Different tools for different folks at different times.
If you look at the record, the President has been talking like a mama’s boy up until recently. Now that everyone sees the rubber hitting the false runway, talking about 10k new entitlement recipients a day, which is the sprinkle before the storm, he is threatening to take away all the toys/drugs, while we watch Harry Reed come in through the back door, to lock the herd in and everyone else out.
Bait and switching social mobility for future generations with real estate immobility for the current generation as the American Dream created the short and the open, sending authority to tax a lemonade stand in California and returning it to Rockefeller Plaza. That’s density, the implosion of which is in a closed loop with the community that constructed it.
Ironically, Caesar must watch you watch the show to determine its popularity. Selfishness is an excellent means to generate gravity, which has its uses.
Good Ideas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU&feature=related
The Empathic Civilisation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g
"because they created a space where ideas could mingle, swap & create new forms..."
nice you think that space can exist virtually or should it exist in meatspace? or both?
thanks for the videos JDub. sometimes you pleasantly surprise me.
until you see Ben Bernake..
in your back yard..
with an axe..
cutting down your tree's!
to print more paper..
we are NO where near the end.
"We the People" are to fucking ignorant or outright stupid to grasp the robbery that is ongoing.
Ignorance is Bliss!
Stupidity is Heaven!!
I think it goes
ignorance is bliss
stupidity is heaven
both are Washington
If he were here, what would famed Austrian economist, Murray Rothbard, say about the depravation inflicted on the U.S. economic system by the banking cartel? He’s been gone 16 years but a disciple and youthful colleague of Rothbard’s during his last years, Justin Raimondo, is here to put Rothbard’s insight into the context of today’s dilemma.
Sorry for the length, but it was too all encompassing and vital to resist:
The Banksters and American Foreign Policy: What’s Driving the Debt Ceiling Debate | Justin Raimondo | July 15, 2011 | Antiwar.com
Everyone agrees the United States is in a crisis of momentous importance: we’re approaching bankruptcy [.pdf], millions are out of work, and the emotional leitmotif of our culture can be summed up in one word: demoralization.
Is there a way out?
Well, yes and no. Yes – if the solution comes from below: no, if we’re depending on our "leaders" to pull us out of the abyss.
Let me explain.
The problem is dramatically illustrated by our current debate over the "debt ceiling" crisis. In order to reassure themselves – and, more importantly, the public – that they aren’t just madmen, Congress imposed on itself a "debt ceiling" beyond which they are not supposed to go. In reality, however, they have raised the ceiling whenever they’ve felt like it. Now, however, as the imminence of America’s bankruptcy has impressed itself on increasing numbers of voters, there is some resistance to raising it – and, as a result, there is panic in Washington. Are the peons objecting to Washington’s assumption of absolute power, and actually challenging the elite’s ability to spend without limit? Horrors!
For months, the pundits and Washington think-tank know-it-alls have been in a tizzy: who do these unwashed peasants think they are? But of course we’ve got to raise the debt ceiling – after all, what about the "full faith and credit" of the United States? Don’t these denizens of flyover country realize they don’t have a choice in the matter? And now, with unmistakable finality, Wall Street has spoken in the form of Moody’s and S&P, the bonds rating agencies, which are threatening to downgrade US bonds if Congress fails to raise the limit.
This should give the ordinary American a clue as to what is at stake here, and who is on what side: it’s the Washington insiders and Wall Street versus the people of the United States – and the stakes are the fate of the nation.
Let’s recount a little history here: in the winter of 2008 the house of cards that is the American economy suddenly collapsed, and the Great Bubble of faux "prosperity" burst. A long orgy of malinvestment – spurred by bank credit expansion [.pdf] (i.e. the Federal Reserve printing gobs of "money") – came to an ignominious end. The housing market, already weak, imploded. It was a massive market correction, one that had to be endured before it could be cured – but the big boys weren’t going to take their medicine.
In a free economy, the banks that invested trillions in risky mortgages and other fool’s gold would have taken the hit. Instead, however, what happened is that the American taxpayers took the hit, paid the bill, and cleaned up their mess – and were condemned to suffer record unemployment, massive foreclosures, and the kind of despair that kills the soul.
How did this happen? There are two versions of this little immorality tale, one coming from the "left" and the other from the "right" (the scare-quotes are there for a reason, which I’ll get to in a moment or two).
The "left" version goes something like this:
The evil capitalists, in league with their bought-and-paid for cronies in government, destroyed and looted the economy until there was nothing left to steal. Then, when their grasping hands had reached the very bottom of the treasure chest, they dialed 911 and the emergency team (otherwise known as the US Congress) came to their rescue, doling out trillions to the looters and leaving the rest of America to pay the bill.
The "right" version goes something like the following:
Politically connected Wall Streeters, in league with their bought-and-paid-for cronies in government, destroyed and looted the economy until there was nothing left to steal. Then, when their grasping hands had reached the very bottom of the treasure chest, they dialed BIG-GOV-HELP and the feds showed up with the cash.
The first thing one notices about these two analyses, taken side by side, is their similarity: yes, the "left" blames the free market, and the "right" blames Big Government, but when you get past the blame game their descriptions of what actually happened look like veritable twins. And as much as I agree with the "right" about their proposed solution – a radical cut in government spending – it is the "left" that has the most accurate analysis of who’s to blame.
It is, of course, the big banks – the recipients of bailout loot, the ones who profited (and continue to profit) from the economic catastrophe that has befallen us.
During the 1930s, the so-called Red Decade, no leftist agitprop was complete without a cartoon rendering of the top-hatted capitalist with his foot planted firmly on the throat of the proletariat (usually depicted as a muscular-but-passive male in chains). That imagery, while crude, is largely correct – an astonishing statement, I know, coming from an avowed libertarian and "reactionary," no less. Yet my leftist pals, and others with a superficial knowledge of libertarianism, will be even more surprised that the founder of the modern libertarian movement, also an avowed (and proud) "reactionary," agreed with me (or, rather, I with him):
"Businessmen or manufacturers can either be genuine free enterprisers or statists; they can either make their way on the free market or seek special government favors and privileges. They choose according to their individual preferences and values. But bankers are inherently inclined toward statism.
"Commercial bankers, engaged as they are in unsound fractional reserve credit, are, in the free market, always teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Hence they are always reaching for government aid and bailout.
"Investment bankers do much of their business underwriting government bonds, in the United States and abroad. Therefore, they have a vested interest in promoting deficits and in forcing taxpayers to redeem government debt. Both sets of bankers, then, tend to be tied in with government policy, and try to influence and control government actions in domestic and foreign affairs."
That’s Murray N. Rothbard, the great libertarian theorist and economist, in his classic monograph Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy. If you want a lesson in the real motivations behind our foreign policy of global intervention, starting at the very dawn of the American empire, you have only to read this fascinating treatise. The essence of it is this: the very rich have stayed very rich in what would otherwise be a dynamic and ever-changing economic free-for-all by securing government favors, enjoying state-granted monopolies, and using the US military as their private security guards. Conservatives who read Rothbard’s short book will never look at the Panama Canal issue in the same light again. Lefties will come away from it marveling at how closely the libertarian Rothbard comes to echoing the old Marxist aphorism that the government is the "executive committee of the capitalist class."
Rothbard’s account of the course of American foreign policy as the history of contention between the Morgan interests, the Rockefellers, and the various banking "families," who dealt primarily in buying and selling government bonds, is fascinating stuff, and it illuminates a theme common to both left and right commentators: that the elites are manipulating the policy levers to ensure their own economic interests unto eternity.
In normal times, political movements are centered around elaborate ideologies, complex narratives that purport to explain what is wrong and how to fix it. They have their heroes, and their villains, their creation myths and their dystopian visions of a dark future in store if we don’t heed their call to revolution (or restoration, depending on whether they’re hailing from the "left" or the "right").
You may have noticed, however, that these are not normal times: we’re in a crisis of epic proportions, not only an economic crisis but also a cultural meltdown in which our social institutions are collapsing, and with them longstanding social norms. In such times, ideological categories tend to break down, and we’ve seen this especially in the foreign policy realm, where both the "extreme" right and the "extreme" left are calling for what the elites deride as "isolationism." On the domestic front, too, the "right" and "left" views of what’s wrong with the country are remarkably alike, as demonstrated above. Conservatives and lefties may have different solutions, but they have, I would argue, a common enemy: the banksters.
This characterization of the banking industry as the moral equivalent of gangsters has its proponents on both sides of the political spectrum, and today that ideological convergence is all but complete, with only "centrists" and self-described pragmatists dissenting. What rightists and leftists have in common, in short, is a very powerful enemy – and that’s all a mass political movement needs to get going.
In normal times, this wouldn’t be enough: but, as I said above, these most assuredly aren’t normal times. The crisis lends urgency to a process that has been developing – unfolding, if you will – for quite some time, and that is the evolution of a political movement that openly disdains the "left" and "right" labels, and homes in on the main danger to liberty and peace on earth: the state-privileged banking system that is now foreclosing on America.
This issue is not an abstraction: we see it being played out on the battlefield of the debt ceiling debate. Because, after all, who will lose and who will win if the debt ceiling isn’t raised? The losers will be the bankers who buy and sell government bonds, i.e. those who finance the War Machine that is today devastating much of the world. My leftie friends might protest that these bonds also finance Social Security payments, and I would answer that they need to grow a spine: President Obama’s threat that Social Security checks may not go out after the August deadline is, like everything out that comes out of his mouth, a lie. The government has the money to pay on those checks: this is just his way of playing havoc with the lives of American citizens, a less violent but nonetheless just as evil version of the havoc he plays with the lives of Afghans, Pakistanis, and Libyans every day.
This isn’t about Social Security checks: it’s about an attempt to reinflate the bubble of American empire, which has been sagging of late, and keep the government printing presses rolling. For the US government, unlike a private entity, can print its way out of debt – or, these days, by simply adding a few zeroes to the figures on a computer screen. A central bank, owned by "private" individuals, controls this process: it is called the Federal Reserve. And the Fed has been the instrument of the banksters from its very inception [.pdf], at the turn of the 19th century – not coincidentally, roughly the time America embarked on its course of overseas empire.
There is a price to be paid, however, for this orgy of money-printing: the degradation, or cheapening, of the dollar. Most of us suffer on account of this policy: the only beneficiaries are those who receive those dollars first, before it trickles down to the rest of us. The very first to receive them are, of course, the bankers, but there’s another class of business types who benefit, and those are the exporters, whose products are suddenly competitive with cheaper foreign goods. This has been a major driving force behind US foreign policy, as Rothbard points out :
"The great turning point of American foreign policy came in the early 1890s, during the second Cleveland Administration. It was then that the U.S. turned sharply and permanently from a foreign policy of peace and non-intervention to an aggressive program of economic and political expansion abroad. At the heart of the new policy were America’s leading bankers, eager to use the country’s growing economic strength to subsidize and force-feed export markets and investment outlets that they would finance, as well as to guarantee Third World government bonds. The major focus of aggressive expansion in the 1890s was Latin America, and the principal Enemy to be dislodged was Great Britain, which had dominated foreign investments in that vast region.
"In a notable series of articles in 1894, Bankers’ Magazine set the agenda for the remainder of the decade. Its conclusion: if ‘we could wrest the South American markets from Germany and England and permanently hold them, this would be indeed a conquest worth perhaps a heavy sacrifice.’
"Long-time Morgan associate Richard Olney heeded the call, as Secretary of State from 1895 to 1897, setting the U.S. on the road to Empire. After leaving the State Department, he publicly summarized the policy he had pursued. The old isolationism heralded by George Washington’s Farewell Address is over, he thundered. The time has now arrived, Olney declared, when ‘it behooves us to accept the commanding position… among the Power of the earth.’ And, ‘the present crying need of our commercial interests,’ he added, ‘is more markets and larger markets’ for American products, especially in Latin America.’"
The face of the Enemy has long since changed, and Britain is our partner in a vast mercantilist enterprise, but the mechanics and motivation behind US foreign policy remain very much the same. You’ll note that the Libyan "rebels," for example, set up a Central Bank right off the bat, even before ensuring their military victory over Gadhafi – and who do you think is going to be selling (and buying) those Libyan "government" bonds? It sure as heck won’t be Joe Sixpack: it’s the same Wall Streeters who issued an ultimatum to the Tea Party, via Moody’s, that they’ll either vote to raise the debt ceiling or face the consequences.
But what are those consequences – and who will feel their impact the most?
It’s the bankers who will take the biggest hit if US bonds are downgraded: the investment bankers, who invested in such a dodgy enterprise as the US government, whose "full faith and credit" isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. In a free market, these losers would pay the full price of their bad business decisions – in our crony-capitalist system, however, they win.
They win because they have the US government behind them — and because their strategy of degrading the dollar will reap mega-profits from American exporters, whose overseas operations they are funding. The "China market," and the rest of the vast undeveloped stretches of the earth that have yet to develop a taste for iPads and Lady Gaga, all this and more will be open to them as long as the dollar continues to fall.
That this will cripple the buying power of the average American, and raise the specter of hyper-inflation, matters not one whit of difference to the corporate and political elites that control our destiny: for with the realization of their vision of a World Central Bank, in which a new global currency controlled by them can be printed to suit their needs, they will be set free from all earthly constraints, or so they believe.
With America as the world policeman and the world banker – in alliance with our European satellites – the Washington elite can extend their rule over the entire earth. It’s true we won’t have much to show for it, here in America: with the dollar destroyed, we’ll lose our economic primacy, and be subsumed into what George Herbert Walker Bush called the "New World Order." Burdened with defending the corporate profits of the big banks and exporters abroad, and also with bailing them out on the home front when their self-created bubbles burst, the American people will see a dramatic drop in their standard of living – our sacrifice to the gods of "internationalism." That’s what they mean when they praise the new "globalized" economy.
Yet the American people don’t want to be sacrificed, either to corporate gods or some desiccated idol of internationalism, and they are getting increasingly angry – and increasing savvy when it comes to identifying the source of their troubles.
This brings us to the prospects for a left-right alliance, both short term and in the long run. In the immediate future, the US budget crisis could be considerably alleviated if we would simply end the wars started by George W. Bush and vigorously pursued by his successor. Aside from that, how many troops do we still have in Europe – more than half a century after World War II? How many in Korea – long after the Korean war? Getting rid of all this would no doubt provide enough savings to ensure that those Social Security checks go out – but that’s a bargain Obama will never make.
All those dollars, shipped overseas, enrich the military-industrial complex and their friends, the exporters – and drain the very life blood out of the rest of us. Opposition to this policy ought to be the basis of a left-right alliance, a movement to bring America home and put America first.
In the long term, there is the basis for a more comprehensive alliance: the de-privileging of the banking sector, which cemented its rule with the establishment of the Federal Reserve. That, however, is a topic too complex to be adequately covered in a single column, and so I’ll just leave open the intriguing possibility.
"Left" and "right" mean nothing in the current context: the real division is between government-privileged plutocrats and the rest of us. What you have to ask yourself is this: which side are you on?
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/07/14/the-banksters-and-american-foreign-policy/
This is not the current libertarian movement as controlled by the Koch's and others.
"Yet the American people don’t want to be sacrificed, either to corporate gods or some desiccated idol of internationalism, and they are getting increasingly angry – and increasing savvy when it comes to identifying the source of their troubles."
The avg amerikan doesn't have a clue.
Look at any event when the warplanes buzz the place....
The clowns drool and applaud like a bunch of sheep on dope.
They live for it and luv it.
An awful long tale to say:
"the machine is dead"
your poor mentor-----he only had two sides?
you only have two sides?
we only have two sides?
sorry, pal, you will have to come up with something more interesting
Been stuck in that place for eons, no?
Don't you people ever get tired of just 'two sides'?
He's got a point. Both sides, left and right, are weakened by pointing fingers at each other rather than at the real enemy. What's your view?
Exactly. Except for a population segment we can call low-information people, there are only two sides: the exploiters (from banksters to low-level takers) and the citizens who seek justice and liberty.
The latter are the true patriots…not war-party Americans nor welfare-party Americans. Again, there are really only two groups of people in this crisis: those who will fight for the truth… and a solution, and those who won’t.
JR
If there were only two groups we would have effective resistance, but we divide everything into 'self-interest' groups and are divided against the single-minded drive for more money and power by the financial sector. I can tell you that they(the bankers) dis-like each other a lot; but, they are united in their objective.
They even divide us by feeding the frenzy of racism, genderism,---------------------
Shit, JR---I can't go on with this----you have known all of this from birth and have your own reasons for believing whatever it is you believe.
I apologize for having nearly insulted your intelligence and bored everyone else om
sherryw,
my view is that all of this is wonderful and that the 'number' of possible realities and universes is infinite.
That life is too wonderous to get stuck in a hole with limited possibilities.
My hope is that out of this will come a wonderous organic self-organizing species to replace the rigid mindset of the past 10,000 years.
That's what I'm all about as duel with the intellects here-----pretty simple story, mine.
Thanks for asking, sherryw om
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EsoOmLKsHM
Excellent analysis...and the first libertarian I could read without completely cringing.
With America as the world policeman and the world banker – in alliance with our European satellites – the Washington elite can extend their rule over the entire earth.
i prefer more of an int'l elite here.
this guy: oldman
seems to me to be from troll city. pls be advised. thx.
Slewie,
you are right; I did come from troll city---LA.
And I must be a troll because I returned to the nation of trolls.
I am amused at how trolls are so vindictive, envious, and cowardly.
At least you did'nt junk me nor I you---so there's hope for us--a rather mutual understanding or respect---
thanks for the post om
my view is that all of this is wonderful and that the 'number' of possible realities and universes is infinite.
That life is too wonderous to get stuck in a hole with limited possibilities.
My hope is that out of this will come a wonderous organic self-organizing species to replace the rigid mindset of the past 10,000 years.
i've watched these moronic posts long enough to form an opinion about whether this is helpful and cogent, dialogically, here. you denigrate human history,yet much of what you see as unworthy was produced by men & women who were clearly a cut above any rigid mindset.
let others decide for themselves.
i's kinda pretty and "evolutionary"; it just isn't real, that's all, in that it lacks any practical insight. many are trying to think in new ways, here, to challenge old paradigms. if you want to play hoot koomi, please go elsewhere.
now, i'll admit i screw around with ideas here, all the time; not always sucessfully. that is the functionality of this type of dialogue.
but when people just post shit that really doesn't add up to 1, no matter how you slice it, we call that trolling.
for example, during the greek/EU crisis, we have had to learn a lot about the political and financial processes involved in these nations and some of the covenants of the EU. there are political and economic choices to be made and they will be made in the steady march of time. debts have dates when payments are due, or we have a default---soft, hard, contained or contagious.
it does not seem from your comments that you understand the US political process around the debt ceiling, even tho you live in LA.
Moody's Puts US AAA Rating On Downgrade Review was a piece you blogged on a few days ago.: I was a 'retail puke' trading bonds from '78 to '94.
in respose to your #1453757, tyler posted #1454028 in response to what you were saying, i would say. 9 min later, you answered t.d. #1454061: Tyler,
I don't understand a word of your post.
oldman: maybe you should ge back to where tyler was trying to dialogue with you and spend a bit more time trying to figure out what he is trying to say, and whether you agree or disagree, as an ex-bond trader. you closed this #1454061 with: Shit, I guess it is off to the forest for this oldman, after all.
if you're not willing to do the work to learn, here, your playfulness may not be appreciated by one or more bloggers.
my friend, it has taken almost two hours of my morning to pen this response to your utter bullshit. you are wasting people's time, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of it, well, after 10,000 years, ?Only A Fool Would Say That - Steely Dan? - YouTube which is what sno_all777 responded to you in the first place.
you will not be able to understand zeroHedge unless you do the work to bring your understanding level a bit higher, it seems. everybody else is in the same boat, btw.
What is the difference between monkeys flinging poo at each other at the zoo and these debt ceiling talks by politicians, all led by a zoo keeper with no more experience than a 7 year old kid running a lemonade stand!