This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Guy Who Stole All Our Money Now Wants to Steal Our Paycheck, Too
Ben Bernanke has funneled trillions of dollars worth of bailouts, guarantees and sweetheart deals to U.S. (and foreign) banks.
This
money was pickpocketed from you and me, directly (through government
spending) and indirectly (increasing debt costs, future inflation, etc).
Bernanke is now calling for tax increases and raising the possibility of reductions in entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security.
Tax
increases means we keep less from each paycheck. Reduction in services
means that money we've already paid to the government (through social
security, etc.) will now instead be paid to the bankers to service the
U.S. debt.
Isn't that like a guy who stole our money now trying to steal our paycheck, too?
As JR writes:
We
now have the unbelievable spectacle of the banker as the
taxman—Volcker, the banker calling for a VAT tax; Bernanke calling for
a tax hike and the possibility of reductions in Medicare and Social
Security.
At last, the pretense is gone. First
these bankers, posing as national leaders with a mission to rein in
inflation, steal the money from the treasury, debase the currency, game
the debt, and, now, take the lead in asking for more.
- advertisements -
I do not think he is banker as taxman. More like this is his impersonation of David Copperfield. It's Social Security and Medicare! Pay no attention to the dilution of your purchasing power! Spiraling debt? Don't blame my low interest rates that are feeding this beast! It's Social Security and Medicare!
As information begins to flow more freely the scales will tip and the legacy of Ben Bernanke and Alan Greespan will be shat upon quite throughly. This I think, is what they fear most. Bernanke will be spinning like a top from now until he is replaced. I doubt any media outlet including FOX will take him to task. But once Obama is out of office and a new Fed chairman replaces him, the LONG knives come out. Bernanke is just trying to lay the groundwork for his defense.
Pitchforks? Guns? Neither. America is too polarized and too captive for real revolution. Obama could declare socialism tomorrow and 50% of Americans would support him.
spot on. comfortably numb.
Polarized by the main event: WWE BIGGEST SHOW OF ALL TIME - DEMS. vs. REPUBS. In a no holds barred, no rules, knock down drag out EXTRAVAGANZA!!!
NO! Not a pay-per-view event! Every fucking day and night 24/7 on TV, The Internet, Radio, Newspapers and Magazines (did I miss any media outlets?)
Disclaimer: Outcome is pre-determined by our panel so don't sue us.
.......correct. The same 50 % who pay no federal income tax.
Socialism would be far better than today's fascism.
Who are you kidding. We are working hard on option #1. You are the purveyor of fascism.
The label doesn't matter:
Capitalism, Socialism or Fascism?'Capitalism' is essentially a term invented by Marx, a straw man to knock down, the better to show off his own big new idea.
'Free Enterprise' is really what's important when considering what has most improved the human condition. And it isn't an -ism with a bunch of rules and doctrine, it's simply about turning something into a more or better something, by your own means, for your own or your family's benefit...and it's as natural as food gathering, sex or shelter seeking. Once there is a state, free enterprise is inhibited to a greater or lesser extent. But recognizing that it is a good thing to make as much room as possible for free enterprise (especially new free enterprises) is the rare exception in human societies, not the norm.
Real 'capitalism' is probably more accurately described as a system wherein the exchange of abstract representations of value, obligations, property etc. dominate the economic system. This probably first occurred sometime during the Medici era - when most trade or commercial activity was initiated by some originating sort of capital exchange...little bits of paper really. By this (my) definition, all modern developed economies are 'capitalist' because the exchange of abstract representations of capital is simply the electricity in the system that makes everything happen, even if the government is running the show.
Forget about -isms and think more in terms of free enterprise and how much the government or anyone else is able to limit your range of motion in different areas of your life - even if this power has been exchanged for real or promised benefits - and whether you are satisfied with this deal or not.
Not true. The term capitalism wasn't invented by Marx at all. In addition, there is no consensus of the definition of what capitalism consists of, e.g. Capitalism is (according to http://www.answers.com/topic/capitalism):
There is no free enterprise requirement in here at all.
Try a different definition then:
No free enterprise or free market here either. Next one then:
OK no free market or free enterprise at all. But wait, Investopedia has a definition to your liking (the capitalist propaganda version):
Marx was working against the definitions 1 and 2 with which I happen to agree. A read of the Manifesto of the Communist Party also is worthwhile, simply because it is rather eye opening and could have been written today (I have a version here: http://wp.me/px1MN-gA).
It may be counter-intuitive in light of what most people have been force fed, but if you want a free and equitable market and society, you have to go communist.
I'm hardly a definitive authority here but if more than two people in the world wrote even briefly about 'capitalism' before Marx I'm not aware of them but more significantly, neither is anyone else. When you start throwing around phrases like "controlling the means of production" you're talking on Marx's terms, which was my whole point.
I explicitly define 'capitalism' and 'free enterprise' separately and in no way claim that one is dependant on or part of the other. So the rest of your post, claiming that I think free enterprise or the free market is part of what defines capitalism, is pure bullshit as usual.
I'm certainly not going to waste space on Zero Hedge (and what more sterling example of 'free enterprise' is there really?) getting into the weeds with you about how wonderful communism is. But since I've been quoting rock bands in this section I think it's fair to say that around here
...if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Yes! very good. and the monopolists are the -isms.
Nice comment. I always favor freedom - and freedom of enterprise (or free enterprise) is a better description/line of thought than capitalism, agreed.
let's try satanism.
Inflation, deflation, stagflation, whatever.
The cost of living will somehow involve more cost and less living.
They keep going on like this, there's going to a big party in Times square, Kyrgyzstan style.
Looking at it from their twisted point of view, they must be astounded they got away with all this so far, and so what the hell: order everyone to defuse the ticking time bomb by requiring ordinary Americans to actually PAY for the privilege of getting screwed so deeply. Why not? It's not like anyone has squealed yet?
"Thank god Jamie Dimon is still employed - and we know you feel good about that too. Er, ah . . mission accomplished. Um . . . that will be $53,767.89 please. Or your first born."
You already paid for the defence of the banksters by way of "Homeland Security". How many are left that still believe that this was to protect the citzens of the country?
Have a second look at that wikileaks video if you have any notions of going against the security state with pitchforks and Mossbergs.
------------------------------------
This message is monitored and recorded by your ever viligant National Security Agency.
Corner the pitchfork market. Demand should be going thru the roof anytime now.
Git with the times man! It ain't pitchforks no more. It's Sig, Mossberg, Springfield, H&K and Glock and ammo. Now THAT was a bullmarket.
we ought to just dump the pretense of having a government. disband it entirely, hand all the cash over to the bankers directly.
I am tired of the suspense. It would be far more efficient, the submit to the historical endgame, skip the romance, and proceed directly to the Marie Antoinette haircuts...or perhaps a few steps beyond to the Robespierres or Bonapartes.
/sigh...I guess we peasants should just enjoy the journey
Friend, there is an alternative. The colonial Americans came real close to achieving it but the Alexander Hamiltons of the world sneak in and the rest becomes a repeat of history as you envision. We do something different this time! Study the works of Hans Herman Hoppe, Murray Rothbard and Ludwig Von Mises. You make a system where you always retain the power to cancel the contract and stop paying the moment the contract is breached. You allow multiple entities to provide what ever services you imagine you need a government to provide you. Those entities compete for the privilege of providing those services and you remain free to choose which ever one you think best. These entities in turn enter agreements on how to resole disagreements between each other: (some entities provide adjudication services based on the common law most agreed to as “just” by the society in question). Peaceful adjudication is always in everyones best interest as war is very expensive in life and property. No one holds a monopoly on “lawful” force. No one holds a monopoly on adjudication in a particular region. Monopolies are bad and can only exist when the mother of all monopolies, “government”, exists to make them possible.
The one who pays for the service retains ultimate power of the purse, not anyone who welds the gun and would presume to call itself “government”. Those who wish to live by fraud or force quickly end up dead or running for greener pastures elsewhere. All other societies see how well this works and soon there is nowhere for the parasites to run to and humanity enters a new era of peace, prosperity and freedom.
It is a contractual society. You have no “government” in the traditional sense that humans have been repeatedly brainwashed into thinking they need. About the only way left for Americans to redeem themselves and pay their debt (karma) for all the crimes committed in their name is to be the first to give the world this most precious gift that the other societies of the world may freely choose to adopt as they learn the blessings it reaps.
Great points but when we have other centralised power hungry entities(governments) eager to divide and rule other societies, this system is likely to make it easier for them to do so. Maybe we can have this system for internal governance and a centralised one for the nation's defence and foreign policy. I mean the Armed Forces and the external intelligence agencies and not 'homeland security' when I said nation's defence
Also, just to answer the other aspects of your question: such a system has very little need for “external intelligence” and the system does not have, nor does it need a “foreign policy”. The “policy” if you call it that is expressed in the rules and practice of the security and insurance entities who come into immediate contact with any one or group who attempts to gain entry anywhere in the the society's encompassed region. Also when a person or group attempts entry any other security firms and insurance entities not immediately in contact with the attempted breach also have a motivation to come to assistance if needed and additional help is deemed appropriate to the level of the threat, because if the threat is sufficient it becomes a concern to the property owners of all adjacent regions that have different security and insurance arrangements and in fact to every person in the region as a whole if the threat is great enough. Such a system is very proactive because the prevention of any damage whatsoever before it even happens is the primary goal. Action is very quick in coming and is as devastating as the system is capable of making it, if the particular need necessitates it. In fact in such a system if the treat were sufficient such a system would be the best at motivating and mobilizing EVERY Single able bodied person within is, not just the security and insurance entities to come to the aid of any point of attack. Always think of the analogy to a body and its distributed immune system. Each phagocyte would be analogous to every security or insurance firm or even the individual.
The fundamental idea of the system itself is highly provocative to all people anywhere who live by honorable activity. A parasite is by extension a potential threat to every non-parasitic person on the planet. There becomes a strong motivation to all people living in geographic proximity to such a system as they learn about its benefits to in turn adopt a contractual society as well. And where culture and practicality permit it, it is in the interests of the original society to openly embrace and integrate into an active cooperation network all new break away orbital societies and regions it is in proximity to. The only “foreign policy” of a contractual society is the fundamental universal natural law truths upon which it is founded. Thusly the foundational principle of voluntary exchanges without the initiation of force or deception become an ambassador/ “foreign policy” and in fact a revolutionary movement in the mind of each individual the moment that individual comes to understand what a society like that looks like. Seeing is believing and people learn fast. At a certain point it will be like a phase change to human civilization. A new age very different from ours and forever divorced from the idea of a monopoly of force and adjudication as a way to gain security and justice will have come.
Thusly you can come to see that any move towards a centralized “world government” or centralized paper money or cashless system, world army, etc ... should be instantly recognized as the universal enemy of all people of good will everywhere. Ultimately we will be free, it is our destiny and our pedigree. You come to see the fallacy of the idea of centralization/authoritarianism which is forever refuted. In its place stands the ideas of universal natural law truth expressed universally in a totally and maximally distributed and expanding network of free, moral, and productive individuals.
Hi Observer:
At first glance you might think so, but if you deeply analyze human actions you might form a different opinion. The motivations and moral strength (very important in conflict) are quite clearly cut and very polarized in the favor of the free society. I invite you to see what Hoppe and Rothbard had to say about your belief. Such a system is very robust. The disrupter states have a tenancy towards destabilization themselves by the very presence of such a system. All systems are composed of individuals, and the motivation of each individual to “defect” to this system once they come over is quite great. (Assuming they are of the non-parasitic type.) A ruff analogy was the defection problem of the Hessians to the revolutionary Americans side. A portion who do not defect have a tendency to become more revolutionary themselves if they return to the tyrant state. Also the cost vs. benefit of such invasion is a rather poor payoff. Internal security can be quite high in such a society, if you follow Hoppe's arguments about it. In such a state only those who own property or are invited in by property owners gain admittance to the region. There is a security barrier that is higher just to get in. Agent provocateurs suffer a better chance of detection when they attempt to enter. Also the level of security at any geographic point within the system is much greater, since there is almost nothing like a “commons” (almost everything is “private”) and anyones presence gains immediate attention if they are not recognized or do not belong. As long as the members of the free society remain well educated about their society, it is very very hard to subjugate such a people. The same power that structures their society makes it hard for a tyrant to maintain any kind of worthwhile control. It simply does not pay.
And then stop using it promptly. We need an alternative currency that is controlled by "We the people".
We already have it. It's called gold and silver. You never let an entity issue unredeemable paper "money". Especially if that entity has guns and claims to make laws. It will always come back and bite you. Why? Because it is a fraud and theft, and thusly attracts all who love fraud and theft.
I like this idea. I wonder what they will do with it since we are all armed and the bankers usually can't do anything for themselves like fix a car, grow food, clean dirty water, etc.
If we are cutting out the middleman and going to a direct pillage system does that mean gov spending will go down? Maybe get a bulk deal in fraud from the bankers and cut the politicians out? Looking for a silver lining here!
That is the goal. It will look strikingly similar to China.
The government is in business for itself at this point: bigger, more, stronger. When you discover you're not part of it or being paid off to abet it, you're singin' the blues. But on ZH at least it's electric and loud...
Didn't take too long 'fore I found out,
What people mean by down and out.
Spent my money, took my car
Started telling her friends she gon' be a star.
'Black Dog' (sorry, no pun intended)
Led Zeppelin
Best band ever! Their songs are filled with love, and longing...and hobbits :)