• Sprott Money
    05/05/2016 - 06:02
    Why is a Deutsche Bank mouthpiece suggesting “negative retail deposit rates or perhaps wealth taxes”? The answer is to (supposedly) stimulate our economies.

The Government Monster: Presenting The Centrally Planned States Of America

Tyler Durden's picture




 
0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 06/12/2011 - 21:54 | 1363859 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

Top marginal rate >70%

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 22:01 | 1363872 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

novel idea - confiscate more and have the unaccountable "manage" it...

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 22:20 | 1363908 Instant Karma
Instant Karma's picture

The ponzi socialist experiment are imploding all over the world, here too.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:05 | 1363955 I am Jobe
I am Jobe's picture

Long Live Rome. Yeap back to the Roman Days.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:38 | 1364004 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

I'd hate to see Obama being generous to  Wall Street...

Seriously...could they have had it any better?

 

Obama Seeks to Mend Fences and Win Back Wall St. Cash
  • By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE 10:19 PM ET

President Obama has started an aggressive push to win back the allegiance of a vital source of campaign donations in 2008.

 

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 05:35 | 1364231 malikai
malikai's picture

You have just proven to me that I can laugh and cry at the same time.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:43 | 1364016 john39
john39's picture

If we are allowed to see the bilderbergs, they are not the true center of power. Just a diversion. Have to look deeper in shadows.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 02:58 | 1364176 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Give the man a cigar.  A nice Cuban.

I am Chumbawamba.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 11:13 | 1364823 SilverDOG
SilverDOG's picture

Precisely. 

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 06:11 | 1364248 snowball777
snowball777's picture

The manwhores were for Bezos.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 22:25 | 1363916 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

I was just stating that in the goold old days the top marginal rate was >70%.

And it stayed that way for a long time as the Nation became a super power.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 22:38 | 1363930 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

The "good old days" were embryonic of the catastrophe that is upon us now.

Class warfare/wealth redistribution is one of the socialists' most powerful misdirections in the grand scheme of consolidation.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 22:40 | 1363933 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Class warfare?!

Where do I enlist?

Class Unity - Class Pride

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:01 | 1363943 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

Wrong!!

The embryonic cause of this catastrophe happend when in the 80s the Trickle-Down bullshit and the Supply-Side plainshit was sold to everybody.

Instead of trickle-down, we've had pump-up-with-no-return .... supply-side is a sham, as we can see ...

That killed the core of the nation: the middle class ...

the rest is history ....

As for socialism ... the only socialism in the USA is the welfare for the Oligarchy.

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 22:59 | 1363950 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Austerity is for the suckahz!

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:17 | 1363975 Manthong
Manthong's picture

Wrong.

Embryonic was 1913:

1) Inaguration of Woodrow Wilson
2) 16th Ammendment (Income Tax)
3) Federal Reserve Act

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:23 | 1363987 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

Or 1492 with the arrival of imperialist euro-kleptocrats.

America and China had been trading for decades before the arrival of euro-kleptocrats.

 

http://articles.cnn.com/2003-01-13/entertainment/1421_1_gavin-menzies-zh...

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 00:47 | 1364086 Manthong
Manthong's picture

Couldn't be.

The first printing press didn't make it to the colonies until 1638.

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi733.htm

Add:

4) FDR Executive Order 6102 siezing gold - 1933
5) Ending silver currency - 1964
6) Nixon repudiates gold standard - 1971

and it's mission complete.. door open to print for socialism and inflate to serfdom.

All that was needed then was a series of clueless or evil leaders to finish us off.

We certainly got that.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 01:11 | 1364110 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

This is so funny. How far back do we want to go? Adam n Eve?

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 01:35 | 1364131 akak
akak's picture

The PreCambrian Axis of Evil: Amoebas, Diatoms and Cyanobacteria.

If you're not evolving into us, you're against us.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 03:03 | 1364177 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

DAMN YOU BIG BANG!!

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 06:12 | 1364249 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Please spin the big wheel of natural selection, samsara, what have you.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 07:10 | 1364284 iNull
iNull's picture

Existence is evil aka First Noble Truth

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:17 | 1364375 boooyaaaah
boooyaaaah's picture

Adam was capable and reasonable according to Locke. And he sired capable and reasonable offspring (us).

He was not totaly depraved in need of totalitarian or royal direction as the Pope and Royalty would have you believe.

All we have to do is claim our rightful place and water the tree of liberty as suggested by Thom Jefferson

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:31 | 1364397 Ridgerunner
Ridgerunner's picture

Locke was wrong again? Surprise, surprise. Are Obama, Bernanke, Geithner, et al., any less Adam's offspring than the rest of us?

Poor Jefferson. It was a nice dream... but up against original sin, it's going down like everything else.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:57 | 1364460 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

How far back do we want to go? Adam n Eve?

 

Unneeded and unproductive: the current world order is dominated by certain features, suppressed or inexistent before.

 

The date to go back is 1776 and the inception of the US. Since that date, several new elements replaced older dominant elements, other elements that were minor became major etc

To reach in what is today: the US world order, dominated by duplicity, racism, smithian economics, consumption for the sake of consumption, culture of death and some other stuff.

Backpedalling too much will be highly unproductive as the older orders have little in common with the newly imposed world order, the US world order.

Human nature is not eternal. Only US citizens nature is. Hasnt changed one bit since inception of the US.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 05:51 | 1364237 writingsonthewall
writingsonthewall's picture

...and for your bonus question - what was the Federal reserve set up in 1913 in response to?

 

That's correct - a previous crisis of capitalism - the panic of 1907 - plus a number of other crises in years prior to that.

 

Whichever way you look at it - this chicken and egg mystery is obvious. Capitalism FAILED - then Governments tried to resuscitate it by meddling in it at the demand of the people who were pissed off at all the uncertainty that Capitalism was bringing.

 

Capitalism will always lead to totalitarian control. If it's not the wealthy controlling the poor - then it's the Government controlling the markets in an pointless effort to stop capitalism failing.

 

All those who talk of 'scoialism' are talking out of their arses.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:37 | 1364413 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

Capitalism FAILED

The Panic of 1907, also known as the 1907 Bankers' Panic, was a financial crisis that occurred in the United States when the New York Stock Exchange fell close to 50% from its peak the previous year.

The crisis was triggered by the failed attempt in October 1907 to corner the market on stock of the United Copper Company. When this bid failed, banks that had lent money to the cornering scheme suffered runs that later spread to affiliated banks and trusts, leading a week later to the downfall of the Knickerbocker Trust Company—New York City's third-largest trust.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:12 | 1364492 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The Panic of 1907, also known as the 1907 Bankers' Panic, was a financial crisis that occurred in the United States when the New York Stock Exchange fell close to 50% from its peak the previous year.

 

When this bid failed, banks that had lent money to the cornering scheme suffered runs that later spread to affiliated banks and trusts,

 

Banks, the banking structure has had a specific and exposed position in the economic world.

Symptoms are expected to show in some priviledged places, which do not change the very fact they are mere symptoms.

A person lifting heavy loads all day long is likely to feel pain in the back at first. Still remains it is a symptom and not a faulty back behaviour.

In structures, certain links fail before the others.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:03 | 1364476 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

...and for your bonus question - what was the Federal reserve set up in 1913 in response to?

 

You wont get popular with statements like that.  Dont worry, most people here see the 19th US century as the golden past, the days when the US prosperity was generously sponsored by the Indians.

Life was cool in those days, it is only because of the bankers in 1913 who did not react to a situation (the end of the colonization of the Indian lands) and had to figure out another means to maintain expansionist schemes (and then had to subsitute monetary expansion for land expansion)

The damned bankers acted, they did not react. Before 1913, it was the golden era.

 

Learn the mantra to fit in on this site.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:51 | 1364596 BigJim
BigJim's picture

It's true that the US' colonists' economic expansion was at the native americans' expense (their lands were stolen and they were slaughtered). However, by claiming the 'Indians' "sponsored" US prosperity is falling for a syllogism. Ask yourself this - if the US had been completely uninhabited before the Europeans came, would US economic progress have been significantly less? The answer, obviously, is no. So though the economic progress was at their expense, they didn't contribute to it particularly (unlike, say, the way that African slaves did)

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 10:04 | 1364622 BigJim
BigJim's picture

You can only get away with statements like 'capitalism failed' with people who don't conflate government-mandated financial oligarchy with free-market capitalism.

The 1907 panic wasn't a crises of capitalism; it was a crisis of fractional reserve banking - something which would not happen without the government granting banks the licence to create money.

People like you who don't understand the nature of free markets and sound money are the ones talking out of their arses.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:40 | 1364412 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

I cringe at these words, but I'm with Manthong.  :D

Sun, 06/12/2011 - 23:52 | 1364026 bigdawg
bigdawg's picture

No, the cut taxes/trickle-down idea from Reagan was to take us to the last gasp of the debt bubble 2007/2008...pretty amazing it went on for that long. 

When we we went to debtor nation status in 1973...it was the beginning of the end and the shot across the bow.  All Reagan did was get the country a little further along before the implosion. 

The current tax rate has little to do with anything.  If you tax more, the govt. spends more.  If you tax less, the govt. spends more.  So, why not just tax less? 

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:18 | 1364381 writingsonthewall
writingsonthewall's picture

Are you really that slow?

 

The Government spends based on the demand of it's citizens. Right now there are a lot of unemployed citizens and the Government is spending money trying to assist them through these hard times.

....or do you think by stopping the assistance that these people will simply 'disappear'?

 

Despite what your MSM feed tells you - the amount of Government waste is small in comparison to the total spend. You will find that most spending is unavoidable and even if you removed all the uneccessary spending - you would see about a 5% difference - if you're lucky - and you might actually increase costs as a result.

 

You see many people like yourslef live in a bubble, you think that removing 'costly' youth clubs' might be a saving (mainly because you don't use them) - but you'll be the first to complain to the police when bored youths start hanging around in your street. Then the cost of calling out the police and the ensuing problems you will have in your street with vandalism and petty crime will far outweigh the saving made by closing the youth centre.

 

I guess you (like many others) don't think much further than "close youth centre - save money" - perhaps because your prejudice ensures you believe that it wasn't set up for a good reason other than the Government wanted to 'waste some money'.

 

Part of me wants Government to cut it all - all spending, every last penny - just to see the look on the faces of the 'bubblisers' who suddenly realise how much Government assistance they were actualy getting - especially the indirect assistance.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:42 | 1364424 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

You will find that most spending is unavoidable

That is an interesting assumption.

and even if you removed all the uneccessary spending - you would see about a 5% difference - if you're lucky - and you might actually increase costs as a result

Ooh, logic...Or something meant to look like it.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:42 | 1364425 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Part of me wants Government to cut it all - all spending, every last penny - just to see the look on the faces of the 'bubblisers' who suddenly realise how much Government assistance they were actualy getting - especially the indirect assistance.

I say go for it.  I'll be fine.  The only assistance I get from the Federal government is that they double-check my tax returns each year. 

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:56 | 1364446 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Despite what your MSM feed tells you - the amount of Government waste is small in comparison to the total spend.

Can I get some of what you smoke? 

Are you David Axelrod incognito? 

When you say small, you mean less than 100%, right?

Do you think transfer payments (wealth re-distribution) is efficient? 

Ever heard of tragedy of the commons?

Did you graduate the 4th grade?  On the first try?

 

When I hear this from folks that earn less than I pay in taxes, I understand better why I should invest more in Pb than any other metal.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:56 | 1364459 Blano
Blano's picture

Government waste is small??  Now that's the slowest comment I've seen on here in a while.

Besides, I'd rather pay the police to beat some sense into those bored youths while they still have a chance to learn something.

Using your logic, why don't we also buy them prostitutes so they can have their needs met that way as well??

Talk about stupid.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:09 | 1364493 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Here may be the most telling thing about what you worship...

...you capitalize Government at every turn.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:58 | 1364605 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Where does he say anything about closing youth clubs, fuckwit?

You're suggesting only 5% of our military spend is wasted? How about 95%?

Most Government spending isn't 'unavoidable'. Singapore manges to avoid most of it, yet it has a functioning society.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 01:35 | 1364132 oldman
oldman's picture

I was there before trickle down was sold to the wealthy and middle class. I walked out of a meeting where Laffer was explaining the miracle it would bring---and why not? Not paying taxes unless you are a working stiff IS a pretty good deal for the 'upper income yuppy'----and abandoning maintainence of infrastructure and cutting nearly all direct fed social costs to thye states with a request to 'bill us' meant all the crazies hit the streets and became 'streetpeople'---oh, it goes on and on---this reaganmadness by the kiss-ass yuppies who we now call 'boomers'. We ruined this country not 'them'. Sorry, dudes, I just get tired of all of your whining----it reminds me of the boomers whining about the poor and unemployed and less-fortunates that was the core of the conversations by the boomers to cut taxes to the bone.

One thing was forgotten, however, the middle class benefited more from their underclass that was the meat and potatoes of their own dinner. I was there before and after; it was not only better for most people before but more humane, honest, and just----except for the class who ate all the food and now refuse to pay the bill.

I wish it had of been other-----

sorry---nothing personal here just an oldman's memory of the cause of this shit----nothing trickled down except pain and suffering for most americans

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 04:50 | 1364219 oldmanagain
oldmanagain's picture

Idiot is correct. The tax cut pay for themselves BS did the nation under along with their friend the lack of regs.  The conservative Santa Claus, Almighty, manifest destiny, chosen people syndrone anti science and fact problem has wrecked the country.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:00 | 1364349 Zoomie
Zoomie's picture

No mater the marginal tax rate, we always collect about 19% of GDP in taxes.  So we should never spend more than 19% of GDP for programs to help the boomers.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 08:51 | 1364434 Monedas
Monedas's picture

You are free to drink all the Democrat Kool-Aid you want ! Do you have to spit up on us ? Monedas 2011 Hell hath no fury like a Democrat scorned by reality !

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:03 | 1364466 Blano
Blano's picture

The tax cuts did pay for themselves, many times over.  It's the SPENDING that has gotten us into trouble.

Sheesh.  Why is this so hard to understand??

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:07 | 1364488 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Because you're dealing with brainwashed drones.  Apparently the same strain of DNA that is in charge of pretty much every failing state on the map these days.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 07:49 | 1364328 docj
docj's picture

So, you're OK with the Gov being thousands of times larger than a century ago because you seem to think that if mean-old Ray-Gun hadn't cut taxes is 1981 everything would just be moving along swimmingly now. Is that about it?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

The US middle class was already on it's death-bed after LBJ's "guns and butter" nonsense. It's been a slow death since 1913 - the year the oligarchs won their final battle over the "independent" people of the nation. The destruction of the industrial capacity of the rest of the world in 1918 and again in 1945 delayed the inevitable a bit, but they can't go back to that well again because we're far too far gone.

Mon, 06/13/2011 - 09:14 | 1364511 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The US middle class was already on it's death-bed after LBJ's "guns and butter" nonsense. It's been a slow death since 1913 - the year the oligarchs won their final battle over the "independent" people of the nation.

 

The US middle class building was an omen. The US only extended the model of social promotion by nobles, on a larger scale due to coincidence (the finding of the Indian lands)

US stole the lands from the Indians to get the US government to hand it over to the US citizenry.

Once the capacity to expansion has been beginning to thin out, it has been growing more and more difficult for the US middle class.

And people should not blame the bankers in 1913: actually, these men found out a way to extend the duration of the US expansion, this time through monetary means. Helping the US middle to grow fatter in the process.

Now that the world is saturated by the US monetary expansion, well, the very enabler of the US middle class is waning.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!