This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

The Last Resort Of A Dying Economic System: From "Beggar Thy Neighbor" To "Beggar Thyself"

Tyler Durden's picture


The phrase of the week comes from The Privateer's Bill Buckler, who has coined the one term that best describes the lunacy that has gripped the world: "Beggar Thyself." Unlike the 1930s when the theme of the day was "beggar thy neighbor" and which culminated in World War 2, this time the emerging paradigm is one in which the first to defect wins... if only for a few seconds. Because when the "beggar thyself" process is complete, it will mark the end of not only the central banking regime, and the days of excess wealth accrual to the financiers of the world, but also the termination of the 140 year old Bismarckian "welfare state" which is the primary culprit for the creation of trillions of imaginary wealth out of thin paper. When the fiat system ends, so will end the hallucination that developed societies are capable of providing for their hundreds of millions of existing and future retirees. And with that will come the "social instability" that always marks the closure of a failed monetary regime and the admission of global bankruptcy.

From the October 17th edition of Bill Buckler's Privateer:

What Other Choice Is There??:

In the hundreds of articles appearing in the mainstream financial press all over the world and especially the English-speaking world, one headline stood out. It was this - “Currency wars are necessary if all else fails”. The headline appeared in the October 11 edition of the UK Telegraph.

The contents of the article are not germane. What is germane is the naked contention that the nation or nations which will emerge the “strongest” from the current financial malaise is the nation or nations which succeed in devaluing their currency faster than any other. Only in that way can the “currency wars” be won. If these “wars” develop further, they will become a race to see who can come up with a worthless currency faster than anybody else. The 1930s coined the phrase “beggar thy neighbour”.  Today, the financial potentates have gone one better. They are working on a “beggar thyself” policy.

Co-operative debt-based stimulus didn’t “work” and neither have “austerity” programs, according to the IMF. Their “World Economic Outlook” comes to the conclusion that the world can neither “stimulate” its way out of the current GFC nor get there via “austerity” programs. And it isn’t too sanguine on the prospects of currency wars either. As the IMF report noted: “Not all countries can reduce the value of their currency and increase net exports at the same time”. After all, they tried that in the 1930s. The only thing that “saved the day” then was a REAL war, not one on the foreign exchanges.

But still, the global financial potentates keep thrashing around inside their own context looking frantically for a way to overcome their plight. As they want the citizens of the nations they “represent” to see it, they have no choice. If they for one second admitted that the entire system as it is presently constituted is deficient by its very nature, they would instantly have the “social instability” they are warning us against.

In other words, with each passing day the fraud that is the concept of Bismarckian social cohesion and stability, brought to you by a hundred years of central banker subjugation, like a putrid onion, loses layer after layer of its mask, until soon the entire world will see behind the lie. The resultant explosion in pent up decades of anger could easily make all prior conflicts seem tame in comparison. Hopefully it can be avoided. But for that to happen, the fate of the dollar as the reserve currency must and will end. Buckler again:

The “Game” Explained:

On October 12, the minutes of the FOMC’s most recent meeting (on September 21) were released for scrutiny. The gist of these “deliberations” are contained in one sentence - “Policy-makers had a sense that (more) accommodation may be appropriate before long.” This is the expectation on which the world has been basing its investment decisions ever since that September 21 meeting.

The reaction to the release of these minutes was by no means confined to the US. An excellent example of this is a quote from Brazilian Finance Minister Guido Mantega. For weeks, Mr Mantega has been maintaining (quite rightly) that the world is already in a currency war. This is what he had to say about  the US central bank - “The Federal Reserve is promising quantitative easing, which is monetary policy’slast resort. I don’t think it will reactivate the economy, but it will weaken the Dollar.”

This is more than “monetary policy’s last resort”. It is Ben Bernanke’s “helicopter money” scenario writ large. The US central bank proposes to use the Federal Reserve notes it creates out of thin air to “buy” the debt of the US government which the Treasury creates out of thin air. This is the last gasp of a monetary “system” which is as far from sane and historically sound money as it is possible to get. Not only is it doomed to failure, it will doom the US Dollar if it is put into practice to any substantial extent.

Since the US Dollar remains the premier global reserve currency, that will leave the rest of the world with absolutely no choice but to institute radical changes to the money which underpins everything. In the modern sense of the term, there can be no markets without a viable money. The Fed is on a path which will remove the money. The markets can only then survive with a different, and better, underpinning.

What are the alternatives? These should seem obvious.

[The BRIC nations] rank first, second, fifth and ninth in terms of world population. Two of them, China and India, are the two most populous nations on earth with almost 37 percent of the global population between them. The BRIC nations are often singled out as the coming global economic powerhouse, the nations which are and will increasingly drive world economic “growth” in future. In recent surveys done in the US, they were seen as being a better investment bet than is the US itself.

The majority of the “ordinary” people in ALL these nations, but in India and China in particular, are still living in a coin economy. They still conduct their transactions the way the whole world did until the 1920s or 1930s and the way that all but the richest nations (the US and Canada in particular) did until the mid 1960s. Coined money is not a nuisance to these literally billions of people, it remains money itself.

The history of indirect exchange developed in two main stages. First came a steady narrowing down of the physical economic goods which were seen as having the utility to be a medium of exchange. That ended when Gold (and silver) were singled out. The next development was a tangible form that these two metals could take so as to be used as money. Gold and Silver coins emerged and lasted (in the case of silver coin) right up until the mid 1960s. As an illustration of the consequences of the banishment of precious metal coin money, consider this: The US stopped minting Silver dimes (10 cent pieces) in 1965. At current prices, the silver in one of these coins is now worth just under $US 1.70. A pre-1930s US Gold $US 20 Double Eagle coin is now worth about $US 1310 in Gold content. In the early 1930s, $US 20 was a month’s wages for many. At today’s minimum wage, $US 1310 is considerably more than a month’s wages. The difference is that the wages then were TANGIBLE. Today they are promissory.

In essence, that is what the history of the global fiat money era has been. The masters of the universe have taken a simple thing like precious metal coinage and turned it, in stages, into a galactic game of GIGO (Garbage In - Garbage Out). Computers, without which our modern monetary “system” would be impossible, will accept anything that is fed into them. So will a lot of people. But many will not.

The idea of Gold and Silver coin circulating as money may seem like something out of the distant past. But Gold coin DID circulate until about 65 years ago. And Silver coin was still circulating as money in the US when Kennedy was assassinated in late 1963. For half the world, coins still ARE money.

There is little, if anything, that can be added to this.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:06 | 656894 Ethics Gradient
Ethics Gradient's picture

At some point investors will realise that the best place to invest isn't in a country which is debasing it's currency. Then you'll have no jobs and no investment. Brilliant.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:07 | 657010 Conrad Murray
Conrad Murray's picture

This has been going on for some time now.  Not so much do to the rampant printing, but because the U.S. is shot on the manufacturing front.  China and the emerging/frontier markets have been attracting lots of capital that would have been destined for these shores not so long ago.

Now, add on top of it that Rule of Law is a fading memory and taxes/regulation are outrageous, and there's really not much in the way of persuasive reason to do business here.  Sad.


Edit: OT - Here is something interesting I stumbled across:

H.R. 4646: Debt Free America Act - To establish a fee on transactions which would eliminate the national debt and replace the income tax on individuals

"States as purposes of this Act the raising of sufficient revenue from a fee on transactions to eliminate the national debt within seven years and the phasing out of the individual income tax. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a 1% fee, offset by a corresponding nonrefundable income tax credit, on transactions that use a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument"

The APT tax has always intrigued me (
Here's a paper for the more scholarly readers:

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:49 | 657275 B9K9
B9K9's picture

Bill, Tyler and others are beginning to focus on what's really at stake here: the end of the central banking paradigm. This model enabled the growth of the leviathan state (both welfare & warfare), sheltered bankers from primary economic risk, and richly rewarded both those in public (government) and private enterprise who were in on the deal.

Is it any wonder that, once the very foundation of the model itself was exposed to a truly existential threat, the state would defend it at all costs, including the rejection of centuries old legal precedent? National security indeed; a mad attempt to protect the "state" apparatus, not the social construct supposed to represent the People.

Since a model based on compound growth is impossible in a finite world, the end point (aka death) was always accepted - only the means, place & time were unknown. The power-elite understand this; after all, it was they who designed the system in the first place. Money lenders don't need to have the mechanics of exponents explained to them - duh.

Rule of Law is a fading memory and taxes/regulation are outrageous, and there's really not much in the way of persuasive reason to do business here

The wheel is about to turn - the rats are preparing to leave. They know the end point can be brought to an immediate full stop by the mere repeal of the two 1913 monsters: The FRA and the 16th amendment.

It will require a strong man. He is coming. He must come, otherwise we will have full on dissolution. After a natural disaster, (re)growth comes at an astounding rate. There is going to be an incredible amount of change, rewarding those who are disciplined, deligent and thrifty.

There is also going to be tremendous risk, which is why if you have the means & ability, you might consider bailing out now. Soon, there will be nowhere left to turn except making your last stand right where you are.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:06 | 657318 Shameful
Shameful's picture

You speak of taking the exit, and I agree that is safer.  But where do you see the best places for safety and opportunity being?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:28 | 657362 SoloSilo
SoloSilo's picture

I don't know if it's a land of opportunity, but New Zealand is definitely a land of safety. Extremely isolated, with an exporting agricultural sector and friendly people who obey laws.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:32 | 657373 Shameful
Shameful's picture

That one was list I made.  From what I saw it looks like I could immigrate there with the skill/education I have.  How friendly will the locals be to an American coming in to try to take their jobs? :)

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:41 | 657390 SoloSilo
SoloSilo's picture

They like techies, if that applies. Market it as "knowledge transfer from [American university] to NZ".

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:09 | 657681 TemporalFlashback
TemporalFlashback's picture

They are friendly people. However, the grass is always greener.

Based on experience, culturally, NZ is not the idealized world that I think you are envisioning. In fact, it is far from it.

I would go visit before making any type of life-changing decision. Hey, maybe you will like, but I just thought that I would throw my opinion out there. Take it for what it is worth.


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:34 | 657706 CrackSmokeRepublican
CrackSmokeRepublican's picture

It is much easier to invalidate all Jew Debts and kick them out...

Better than trying to pay the Talmudic Babylonians back...


Usury In Old Babylon and In the Roman Empire


Israel Did 9/11 in case you didn't know already...


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 06:42 | 657843 Popo
Popo's picture

It seems you clicked a link somewhere and now you're lost -- Probably trying to find your way back to Yahoo!  


Here, let me help:


(I think you'll be more comfortable with the level of discourse there.)

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 13:30 | 658157 CrackSmokeRepublican
CrackSmokeRepublican's picture

Hey Bankrupt JewTard this is ZeroHedge, go back to your children's books....

 your Talmud Infected Bris ready Rabbi is looking for you...


Here's your Talmudi'C'iti getting another Jew-Fed Bailout again:



Mon, 10/18/2010 - 22:18 | 660148 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

If your going to be racist, make it funny or clever at least.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 04:21 | 657809 Lux Fiat
Lux Fiat's picture

Will likely stay put, as having lived in other parts of the world, know that the grass is not always greener, and also a desire to be part of the solution.  However, if opportunity completely withers on the vine, have to take the kids' futures into account.

Spent a few weeks in NZ about a decade ago.  Beautiful country, friendly folks, bland food.  However, what concerns me longer term is if we do get into serious nat resources shortages, not sure that I would want to be living in a country that could be relatively in close proximity to China.  Australia didn't start trying to beef up it's military just for potential stimulative effects...

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:34 | 657862 snowball777
snowball777's picture

I don't suppose Oz had considered not selling the means of their own destruction to said red giant?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:15 | 657442 Seer
Seer's picture

People miss this very important point: the exit is not of location but of mindset.  In essence the only "exit" is that of removing oneself from the System.  Going to some other country is NOT exiting, it's just relocating: as some note, it might be a bit tricky to fit in elsewhere.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:29 | 657465 Shameful
Shameful's picture

Well I hardly fit in here :)

My thoughts of changing local is some places will do better then others, but sure there is that problem with being a stranger in a strange land, and in a lot of places I would stick out like a sore thumb.

And what do you mean by removing oneself from the system?  Sure the facts are in it's going to crash, but most of us keep going on with our lives because we don't know when the day of reckoning is.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:16 | 657623 i-dog
i-dog's picture

You are very well advised to relocate, Shameful.

Politically and administratively, the federal government is 'Too Big To Fix' now.

There are also some very nasty signs of what awaits those who remain until the collapse actually happens.

Just sayin'.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:16 | 657689 Shameful
Shameful's picture

I'm currently stuck till at least the summer.  And in my profession I have some experience but I'll still be a little shy of what most employers look for.  I'm looking but I'm trying to keep options open.

I figure that best case, the Fed Gov collapses, the dollar hyper inflates and we collapse Soviet Style.  The states split, and local/state govs will be a lot more important.  So in this scenario probably  months of hell until there is some level of order.  This is best case.

Now worst case is a total technofacist police sate that would make Orwell wince, and the mass culling of the population.

A more middle of the road case is a bloody long term civil war, or a wild WW3 to try to keep the game going.  So I hear you this will not be a fun place to be.  My friends and family have decided to tough it out, and most of them are relocating to what they think will be a safer area, and I'm looking at jobs there after I graduate.  Though I don't want ot jump out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:04 | 657676 Oracle of Kypseli
Oracle of Kypseli's picture

We all need to stay put fight and install a constitutional government.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:19 | 657691 Shameful
Shameful's picture

I'd be more apt to fight to break away from the Federal Government.  It's unworkable.  Look at the founders, they broke and violated the constitution.  Not the same insane level as our current "leaders", but even they could not be trusted with that power.  Liberty cannot exist with a massive bureaucracy ruling over an empire.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:36 | 657700 i-dog
i-dog's picture

Great sentiment ... but exactly how do you expect to achieve this in the few months remaining?

Vote in a saviour or three? There are 535 congressmen on the take and only half of them are up for re-election in a few weeks. Expect no party to win an absolute majority in the November mid-terms, which means more deals and payoffs to get anything through. The president also holds dictatorial power -- under a raft of executive orders and directions from overseas oligarchs -- to command the military and all the divisions of homeland security (including transportation, food & energy supply, border control, internet & media, forced "vaccinations", etc).

My suggestion is for the states to dissolve the Union and start again ... since 50 states -- relying on their rights under the Constitution to dissolve the feds (just as the Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation) -- is a far more powerful force for change than a few new congressmen jumping into the cesspool. But I expect only a few supporters here, even fewer among the general public, and probably fewer still among the state houses.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 04:12 | 657784 i-dog
i-dog's picture

PS. Have a look downthread at all the new names posting and all the hate-mongering, bickering over red vs. blue, and misguided revisions of "history" to see how much hope we have for a "democratic" solution!


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 04:53 | 657817 Boxed Merlot
Boxed Merlot's picture

O.K., so you elect to "squat" in a residential structure as the Earls.  Fine.  Now, there are no government subsidies available in the form of "income" (because you house wards of the state), as you have recieved your lump sum.  You either recieve the capital or the income.


No double dipping from the government coffers.


Perhaps building on some sort of agreement like this?



Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:33 | 657704 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

I’m with you, Oracle. The U.S.S.R. is a pretty good example of post-collapse offerings. I don’t see any of their dissidence effecting any meaningful change from their disenfranchised exiles (oligarch’s and blond call girls? Please…)

I think there is plenty of opportunity at home if one is smart and under the radar. Pretty sure things are coming to a head soon and I don’t believe for a second that TPTB are actually out of control (at least in their own minds). But this thing has taken on a momentum of its own its critical mass has already been surpassed. I’m quite sure all parties concerned, from J6P to Blankfein will require a life boat on this Titanic economy.

Just sux that a lot of us aren’t gonna make it…

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:11 | 657619 MountainMan
MountainMan's picture


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:02 | 657671 Oracle of Kypseli
Oracle of Kypseli's picture

When failure comes, Canada (natural resources) will be invaded under a trifle pretext:

"In wars the occassions may be trifling"  Aristotle

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:23 | 657695 Shameful
Shameful's picture

It will be invaded, but not the way you think.  Canada will be assaulted by a human wave of Americans looking for jobs, or handouts.  In an economic collapse the gov won't need to try to get Americans up there, they will swarm Canada on their own.  Would not surprise me to see Canada's pop double in ten years following the meltdown, on the plus side will create a big demand for those houses :)

The thing that kept Canada off my top picks was the fact that when the US goes, Americans will try to come over like a Golden Hoard.  Other then that has a lot going for it for things I'm looking for.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:38 | 657865 snowball777
snowball777's picture

How long until the canucks are petitioning to raze the Ambassador bridge and build walls?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:36 | 657864 Diggintunnels
Diggintunnels's picture

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." 

Damn Right. As citizens of these constitutional states it is our duty and responsibility to ensure ourselves a representative government.  Change this country back from the inside.  Run for local office, support a candidate that is not from the Red or Blue team, don't just sit there and complain.  You think by leaving this country and becoming a passenger in someone else's country you will find justice?  Tell me where?  Once you arrive you will find that you not only lack justice, but are not even recognized as a citizen.  Good Luck...

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:52 | 657386 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

For many considering their options, the crux of the stay versus go problem centers on the question of when to go, if the decision is to leave.  Wait too long, and risk becoming trapped without proper preparations.  Leave too early, and risk false alarm or missing out on a chance of America turning it around.  One also has risk in not siding with a country that has a pretty good record of coming out ahead, in the end, once the shit really starts to fly.

If you stay, you need not worry about when, and can focus on, "making your last stand right where you are."  You also are likely to have a deeper knowledge of those standing with you, and against you.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:23 | 657852 Dangertime
Dangertime's picture

Unfortunately repayment of all debts is impossible in a fiat system.

It really must "grow or die".

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 16:37 | 657011 Gromit
Gromit's picture

Well, yes.

And remember that as soon as more money goes out than comes in we'll have exchange controls.

Kinda like a hedge fund that won't honor redemptions.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:02 | 657041 Oracle of Kypseli
Oracle of Kypseli's picture


The rich will stay rich, the poor will stay poor on government assistance. Most middle class will buy farms in Chile, Peru, Argentina and Brasil and the rest of the middle class will go on an underground economy like in Greece. (Off the books.)

The elite will no longer have anyone to steal from.

Starve the beast

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:19 | 657063 michigan independant
michigan independant's picture

Building the Perfect Beast is what you need to think since it is underway. Define poor as we seen it then as compared to what is acepted. The foot prints are clear.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:16 | 657143 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

Yeh, they oligarchs want everyone to make two dollars a day in wages.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:20 | 657448 Seer
Seer's picture

I don't think that they care one way or another as long as they stay in power.  What advantage is it to them that they stay in power with everyone impoverished and on the verge of revolt, vs. now, where folks get lots more and are distracted by all the toys that the overlords sell?

There's a natural state of things.  One need only note that 2/3 of the world's population lives on $3/day or less.  The ones that are going to get hardest are those most vested in the System.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 02:54 | 657788 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The only thing that “saved the day” then was a REAL war, not one on the foreign exchanges.




Wrong. The only thing that saved the day was not  the war but the very fact that the level of resources was at 1940 level and not somewhere else.


You can go at war all day long, you wont reset the level of resources as it was before this both absolutely and relatively at least for the Western world.

War will not reset oil resources level at 1940s level. People in power know this.


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:47 | 657874 snowball777
snowball777's picture

What 'saved the day' was that the US was left relatively unharmed while the rest of the world was obliterated...the broken window fallacy writ large worked in our favor and made those sitting on the resources beholden to us for protection for a time.

I'm pretty sure peak oil implies that there's a finite limit to how long you can 'war all day' at least with respect to the use of jets, tanks, missiles, etc; you only do so much with a nuke sub fleet alone.


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:57 | 657195 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

Proverbs 22:7 ... The Rich will rule over the poor, and the borrower is a slave to the lender.


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:50 | 657877 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Psalms 15:5

...who does not put out his money at interest, and does not take a bribe against the innocent.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:03 | 657128 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

But, you can make a lot of money in the stock market.






Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:42 | 657589 Sunshine n Lollipops
Sunshine n Lollipops's picture

That's my plan.

With Amway as a backup.

Fucking bulletproof.

Plus, my space ship is almost complete, so I got that goin' for me.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:46 | 657716 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

That's fuckin' funny

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:53 | 657879 snowball777
snowball777's picture

But now how much would you pay for my materials on "How to Start Your Own Ponzi"?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:08 | 656898 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Yeh. It's the welfare state. It couldn't possibly be the trillions of dollars spent on useless wars, and the trillions more that were robbed from the working class by the wealthy elite.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:15 | 656912 fuu
fuu's picture

That has always bothered me as well. People seem to point to social welfare as the root of all evil in the US but no one wants to acknowledge that corporate welfare, bailouts, and military spending dwarf social welfare. But it's the fault of the poor.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 16:09 | 656981 Eternal Student
Eternal Student's picture

+1. And during the past 10 years, the biggest voices against social welfare have been the loudest proponents of corporate welfare. And recipients of  such welfare.

If nothing else, social welfare appears to be much cheaper.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:05 | 657046 doolittlegeorge
doolittlegeorge's picture

"if the money's meaningless what's so hard about cutting the check?"  I agree with that.  Of course "those meaningless checks are cut to military personnel," too so I wish someone on the left would at least acknowledge that "on their road to perdition."  Needless to say "if you want your free healthcare you can serve your country" and "still have it after you leave."  In short "never forget who butters your bread." I know i haven't.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:57 | 657419 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

I butter my bread with butter made from milk from my cow.  God bless her.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:23 | 657451 Seer
Seer's picture

And a big ficking Amen to That!

The greatest threat to TPTB is to be able to feed yourself.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:54 | 657882 snowball777
snowball777's picture


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:50 | 657509 Hulk
Hulk's picture

are you churning by hand and are you making cheese?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 09:52 | 658037 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

MagiMix as long as I have power.  Hand crank churn at the ready.

Yes, we make cheese.  Thank you, Ricki.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:52 | 657719 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

Put radishes, carrots, couple kinds of lettuce, etc.. got a little better than 18 rows (big fucking rows) in the ground today.

And as if the friggin' universe said, "Good job.", it started to rain.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 01:09 | 657737 Hulk
Hulk's picture

LOL, that is nice when that happens!

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 01:15 | 657743 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

Central coast of CA. Kids are gonna eat good this X-mas.

Stay true, Hulk. Love ur posts.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:01 | 657199 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

OK, so is that really different from a Roman Emperor making sure that the Praetorian Guards who installed him in office are taken care of?

The question quickly becomes one of, "What can I learn from prior periods in history where civil society collapsed ... how to I avoid becoming a serf?" Chances are, you already are one, but at the risk of being glib, let's assume you still have some freedom of choice.


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:27 | 657459 Seer
Seer's picture

Yours is a pefect example of thinking!  If people just look for the reasons/ways in which they can keep from being slaves they are likely to break the bonds.

More people need to read this:

Time to wake up, time to grow up. We're not children. We do not need to ask permission to live like sane, reasonable, thoughtful, compassionate human beings. We do not need to beg or bow or kneel. We do not need to look to government or to experts or to the rich and famous. Whatever we need, we can get it ourselves. Whatever we want to stop -- we can stop it ourselves. Whatever must be done, we can do it ourselves. We do not need them; we need each other.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:55 | 657871 Diggintunnels
Diggintunnels's picture

Posting Error

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:45 | 657265 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

and no one who receives social welfare, gets rich off it.  actually lots of business gets rich off it since it touches the poor's hand only briefly before going into another's coffer


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:26 | 657855 Dangertime
Dangertime's picture

Both are disgusting.  Welfare is bad in any form.


Until the constituents of both political parties realize this, the  US will continue it's death spiral.


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:43 | 657096 Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture

I agree completely.  However it would be extremely difficult to convince US citizens that the real culprits are wearing fancy uniforms and not begging for FRN on the side of the road.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:03 | 657308 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

Ok, I have to call bullshit here. Can you say bullshit brother! I knew you could. Its an issue of who's responsibility is it. The Federal Gov has no legal authority or responsibility to provide welfare (corporate or personal), education, health care or any of the feel good shit that the euros in our mist are so fond off. The Federal Government has 18 delineated duties. Among those are to provide for the common defense of the states. That includes and is specified as raising and training an Army and Navy. I agree, most of the wars we have engaged in since the civil war were bull crap designed to enrich TPTB. But you can't blame those Federal Employees that swear to uphold the constitution and volunteer their lives and limbs to the Commander in Chief. Blame congress or the CiC if you wish, but Soldiers, Airmen and Marines must follow their orders. No questions asked. If they cant, get out. Period. They are not welfare queens working for Obama money in their crack houses. They are employees. They are not demanding bail out money on the threat of destroying the US economy (TBTF), they are employees.

On welfare, please explain how any country can be productive when it encourages its citizens not to produce?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:37 | 657381 midtowng
midtowng's picture

You obviously missed the point.

Let me put it in an easier way: The country is going into the crapper. Which group of people do you think is most responsible for this situation, a) the poorest and least influencial people, or b) the wealthy f*cks who wrote the laws and control the policies of the nation?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:18 | 657626 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

In between those two choices, sit the government we elected, and which we deserve.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:43 | 657713 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

No we/I didn't. Diebold handed us our elected officials.

If you are referring to the Kool-Aid drinkers that bought the "hope" and "change" crap, well, that's what you get when you subscribe to the Us vs. Them mindset. That wasn't ever gonna work.

On an up note - there is always the Tea Party <sarcasm/>

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 13:49 | 658694 aerojet
aerojet's picture

The biggest trick the elite have is democracy--make the people think they brought all this bullshit down on themselves!

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:58 | 657422 Strongbad
Strongbad's picture

I agree in general, but soldiers/airmen/sailor are not mere "employees" - they are under oath to defend the US Constitution, which means they are not just robots following orders, but duty bound to DISOBEY orders that are in direct contradiction to the Constitution.  For example if the president ordered the military to shut down all newspapers and radio stations that criticized him, they would be obliged to refuse that order.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:35 | 657475 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

Not their place. Its the responsibility of the civilian leaders to determine the limits of the laws based on the constitution. At least that is how it was supposed to work. If the generals were to freely determine what is and is not constitutional it would prompt a coup. Would you rather see Petraeous marching the 5th SF group into the White House and the 82nd into the halls of congress and removing the civilian leadership because their orders are unconstitutional in his view? Would you not scream about the military SS taking over?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 01:57 | 657765 Attitude_Check
Attitude_Check's picture

Actually you are incorrect.  You can get into SERIOUS trouble if you follow an unlawful order.  "I was just following orders" will not stand as an excuse.  Of course the determination of what constitutes an unlawful order is made with perfect 20/20 hindsight, while the poor slob who makes the decision to disobey, has to make it immediately.


Generals are ABSOLUTELY required to ensure their commands are constitutional and to not follow commands from their civilian leaders that are unconstitutional.  It is a very tough position to be in - but when you put on General rank it comes with the territory.  A general refusing to follow and unlawful order is hardly going to result in the 82nd airborne taking over Congress - that would clearly be a coup and obviously unconstitutional.


When an elected official operates outside of the Constitution, he no longer has Constitutional authority, and can and must be ignored,  That is why the military oath is to the Constitution NOT the government.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 02:05 | 657769 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

So why hasn't the military overpowered the alleged counterfeiting operation at the Fed and apprehended the perpetrator/s?

Is it because he/they weren't elected?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 02:28 | 657779 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

No, I'm actually correct. The determination of what a lawful order is is very clear and defined within the moral codes and the uniform code of justice. Executing innocent civilians in a strange land is an unlawful order, dropping 500Lbs of ordnance on a suspected Taliban hideout is not. Not much difference on the surface is there? The military goes to extreme measures (in some cases too extreme), to make sure the orders that are issued do not cross the boundary. Why? difficult for soldiers (generic term here) to continue following orders that they perceive as morally wrong. A General refusing to follow orders he considers unconstitutional is called insubordination and he will be replaced by the next chosen amenable General.

So, lets get real here. If you are expecting Generals or soldiers in general to make conscious decisions to stop obeying unconstitutional orders the only option is a coup. Anything short of that will just get the offending officer removed and courts martialed. 

Back to the original point that got my dander up. Soldiers obey the orders of the commander in chief as long as their are lawful. The chain of command, which the CiC is part off, determines what a lawful order is, not the individual soldier, regardless of rank.

Would American soldiers, in clear conscience, run a concentration camp? It happened before. From the Indian Reservations to the internment camps of WWII. Would they open fire on their fellow citizens? Check, Civil War. Would they drop a bomb that kills millions of civilians? Check, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Are any of those actions constitutional? Perhaps the nukes in a time of war, the others clearly not. Are those soldiers criminally responsible for those actions? NO. They followed the orders of their chain of command.

Yes, well aware of the Nuremberg trials. The victors get to make the rules. If the Germans would have won, the guards at Dachau would have received medals, not the hanging ropes. That is the point of civilian control of the military. They can not chose what is lawful or not. The CiC does.

When an elected official operates outside of the Constitution, he no longer has Constitutional authority, and can and must be ignored,  That is why the military oath is to the Constitution NOT the government.


True, but is not the place of the General to disobey him or replace him. I don't remember Eisenhower or Paton disobeying or removing FDR and that SOB shit all over the Constitution.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:40 | 657485 Seer
Seer's picture

"Among those are to provide for the common defense of the states."

And were in the Constitution does it say that we're supposed to have an Airforce?  Or, spend a trillion dollars a year, much going to wealthy "defense" contractors?

Never the fuck mind that our military is anything but "defensive."

Yeah, let's talk about laws, shall we?  That the US is bound to international treaties, as stated in US law.  And that it is violating said interntational law/treaties by engaging in offensive wars.

Fuck the Pentagon.  Fuck "defense" contractors!  They're the ultimate mafia!  Only anal, hate-filled, pecker-heads cheer this shit on (and display patently false logic trying to defend such criminal behavior).  Get your mouth off their peckers.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:40 | 657584 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

And were in the Constitution does it say that we're supposed to have an Airforce?


Would you feel any better if we re-named it by its original name? The US Army Air Corps? Would it make any difference? There is nowhere in the constitution where it says "provide for the common defense, unless of course it cost so much dickweed seer will have a problem with it". How much do you think an M1 Tank should cost? Can you build one in your garage asshole? Or should we just beat them into plow shares and by example hope there are no more violent assholes in the world (except you of course). My point was that there are certain tasks that are assigned to the Federal Gov and some that were not. Common Defense is. Universal Health care is not. Clear enough?

And exactly were in the fucking constitution did we the people agree to obey whatever the fuck some frenchman or kraut decides what we should do? And exactly what fucking international laws are we violating? Can you quote or are you just gonna pull it out of your nasty ass and refer me to the website? We are, by contract, sovereign people. We give our local communities and states certain authority to do our bidding. The States in turn agreed to give the Federal Government certain limited duties. I fail to see were the fucking UN leadership or any other international group of fucks have any say so on any of it. Treaties DO NOT outrank the constitution.

yeah and the .gov has spent 8 trillion dollars in crack babies and a few more trillion in bankster bonuses. Please show me were in our constitution any of that can be found. FUCK YOU TOO!!

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:48 | 657657 akak
akak's picture

SOMEBODY sure woke up on the wrong side of the bed!

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:33 | 657575 Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture

Disobeying an "unconstitutional" order is extremely difficult if not impossible to do. I think the excuse "I was just following orders" is BS.  Free thinking people - the kind you allude to when talking about the 18 delineated responsibilities - understand this better than anyone.

Many military members spend their lives on the public dole.  Whether or not the soldier is more worthy of state FRNs than another state-dependent individual is a matter to be decided at the ballot box. 

Countries can only pretend to be productive by encouraging its citizens not to produce.  The US is quite good at it, it's main export is death.



Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:44 | 657591 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

How is receiving a salary for services rendered been on the public dole? Is a fireman on the public dole? A police officer?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:51 | 657599 Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 02:01 | 657766 Attitude_Check
Attitude_Check's picture

You make no pretense of logic do you?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 13:53 | 658701 aerojet
aerojet's picture

It was a simple question with an elegantly simple answer!

All public "services" are bloated with too many employees, many of whom are able to draw large pensions upon "retirement."  I put quotes around retirement because many of those people leave one public job, collect a pension, and go right into another public job either directly or as a contractor.  It's a broken, broken system.



Mon, 10/18/2010 - 06:50 | 657845 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

In boot camp, ROTC, and other military training, obeying orders immediately and without questions IS THE PRIMARY REASON FOR TRAINING!

Anyone that disobeys a direct order with the false belief that they will be vindicated in a military courts martial is in for a rude awakening...usually in a military prison.

The very successful Roman Army feared their officers more than the feared the enemy. The same doctrine has been followed in every successful army since the Roman Empire prevailed.

Anyone posting on this topic without having spent time as a member of a modern armed force isn't competent to add comment. Entertainment, such as films, do not portray what really goes on in the military.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 13:54 | 658703 aerojet
aerojet's picture

Exactly.  Why do you think the TSA only hires the idiots they hire?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:28 | 657630 BS Footprint
BS Footprint's picture

The welfare state AND constant warfare ('foreign entanglements') not to mention a standing army are all made possible in large part by the existence of a central bank. (Not to mention that these things are all excuses to expand and strengthen the central government, which, without fiat money and control of the printing presses, would have been starved by the states a long time ago.)

Don't fall for the class warfare.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 05:05 | 657819 Boxed Merlot
Boxed Merlot's picture

What did China and Japan think they were supporting by buying all those T-Bills?  Surely they understood we were using the proceeds to pay for military expenditures.  We just made sure they were being "protected" too with our navy seeing to it their goods could arrive safely in ports around the globe.  (including ours)

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:19 | 656916 Shameful
Shameful's picture

So hows the welfare state holding up in Europe?  Sure the warfare state is also unsustainable and wasteful, but most EU countries don't have a big military budget but it seems like almost all of them are having problems right now.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:22 | 656920 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Germany and France are doing better than us despite having worse demographic problems.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:29 | 656934 Shameful
Shameful's picture

Better then is not successful.  Seems to me that they are trying to go to austerity.  Now why would austerity be necessary if that model worked? Do you think that France and Germany will make it through with without cuts to their welfare systems?  How about Spain.  They have next to no military and huge social welfare system.  That place should be a paradise right?

Neither the warfare nor welfare model work.  If we go back to it after the dust clears from this collapse we will have the same problem.  The only place it seems to work is small population countries that can exploit vast commodity wealth to fund themselves, like Norway.  The welfare system might work in the US if restrictions on commodity extractions were reduced and removed and the population was reduced to something along the lines of 30 million.  And of course assuming the world wanted the commodities we were going to sell.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:38 | 657091 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Explain Iceland.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:57 | 657106 Shameful
Shameful's picture

What about Iceland?  If this is in reference to their pop, yes it is small.  I mentioned the pop because if an economy is a resource exporter a smaller pop in nominally better to share the revenue through, after all there are only so many resources to export.  But they are not as rich in big money commodities as Norway.  I use Norway because they are the best example of a successful welfare state, but it's a perfect conjunction of things to allow that to happen.  The North Sea oil was very important to them and as it declines we shall see if they change as the revenue streams dry up.

Also fraud plays a key, as well as living beyond ones means.  I don't claim that simply the absence of the welfare warfare state will assure prosperity, far from it.  There are still many pitfalls that can befall a society, like living beyond ones means..  However three is not one instance in the history of mankind of the warfare/welfare model working for a long period of time.  The gov will get power by promising goodies to the people funded on the backs of their children and sooner or late the gov is no longer able to push the funding problem onto the children.  I love when those promote the welfare state say they do it for the children, when in reality they are doing it to the children.  It's little different then selling the future generations into slavery for goodies in the present.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:43 | 657095 Anton LaVey
Anton LaVey's picture

As someone who lives in Europe, allow me to point a couple of data points here.

1) The welfare state is "not working" because, for the past 10 to 15 years, the whole of economic policy in all of Europe has been: less taxes for the rich, less taxes for the big corporations (= corporate welfare).

2) It is a well-known fact, at least in Europe, that the European PTB in Brussels are in the pocket of big European companies and lobbyists. This is very slowly changing but, much too often, European MEPs vote in the interests of the big corporations, and NOT in the interest of the European citizens.

3) It is also a well-known fact that the French state, for instance, is not paying what it should be paying to the French Social Security on behalf of its employees, the French civil servants. According to some calculations, if the French government actually paid what it is supposed to pay, French Social Security would actually be profitable -- while it is in the red right now. And the same goes for the French retirement plans. I don't have numbers for Germany, for instance, but I strongly suspect the numbers are roughly on a par with the French numbers (not to mention Germany has been very busy deflating its economy for the past couple of years, in a transparent attempt to "beggar thy neighbour" and export its way out of trouble through the rest of Europe).

Strangely, the same people -- who are in power right now -- who refuse to allow the French Government to pay what it owes in Social Security contributions are also those who are constantly saying Social Security needs to be "reformed" (= privatized) and its benefits reduced drastically, despite the fact it is one of the most cost-efficient system in the world.

Food for thought. The same cause (= corporate welfare, less taxes for the rich) have been producing the same effects both in the USA and in Europe. Amazing, isn't it? And, hey, presto! No need for a big military budget to sink the Euro-Titanic.

I could go on and on about how European banks and mortgages are an even bigger mess than American ones (yes, Ireland, I am looking at YOU!) but it would quickly get very tedious. So I'll just stop there.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:52 | 657114 Shameful
Shameful's picture

Government always supports the big boys, always have always will.  That's because that's where the bribes and kickbacks come from.  Politicians and bureaucrats act in their best interest, which oddly enough usually aligns with the interests of the big players.  This is why the model cannot work because no matter what those politicians will be corrupted.  Hell look at regulatory capture in the US.  The regulators know better then to go after the big boys so they make their bones by hitting the little guys that are not kicking up the political donations.

I read that part of the France problem was because the corps in France got France to pick up their pension obligations.  If that's true then its yet another example of big business wielding the power of government against the masses.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:03 | 657203 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

"El que paga manda"

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:10 | 657212 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

As one living in a saner corner of Europe, I can tell you they are coming slowly to grips with the drag imposed by the Bismarckian ethos ... Germans gripe that the Greeks, French, et al protest a rise of retirement above 60/62 while Germans are expected to now retire at 67+.  Considering that the demographics suggest something on the order of 73 is more appropriate, one should ask why 73 is not being discussed in all developed countries.

But having said that, Europe is far more disposed to throwing away people over the age of 50 than the US.  As for other parts of the world, you are screwed if you lose your job over 50. So, if you are over 50 and not in the US, what do you do in the face of changes to your so-called safety net?


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:04 | 657533 Pope Clement
Pope Clement's picture

Was it the centuries of serfdom that in some Lamarckian way writ the Vice of douchebags i.e. ENVY so large and indelibly into european DNA ? How about getting to work, stop the whining and kick some ass....maybe like in pre-Roman times.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:39 | 657649 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

RE #1 - This is because, corporations do not pay taxes. They collect them.

Let's tax all beer makers $1 per can of beer. Who pays that tax? The beer maker? Nope. The beer drinker.

Now, let's tax the CEO of said beer maker 10% extra on his salary and bonus. He is in a position to raise his own salary to compensate. Who pays for this increase? The CEO? The beer maker? Nope. The beer drinker.



Mon, 10/18/2010 - 03:30 | 657792 Cheyenne
Cheyenne's picture

Fascinating post, Tony. Thanks.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:39 | 657256 kathy.chamberli...'s picture

shame, did you know you put two spaces after your period?  Why?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:42 | 657393 Shameful
Shameful's picture

Brutal English teachers.  My grammar is not very good, but I believe it is grammatically correct to use two spaces after a period.  But to be honest I don't even think about it.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:01 | 657425 akak
akak's picture

You are totally correct to put two spaces after every period, Shameful --- anything else is incorrect.  I get enraged when leaving comments on various websites that force ALL spaces following periods to disappear.

I still always resist putting the final period INSIDE of quotation marks, though --- if it was not part of the original quote, then it does NOT belong inside the quotation marks!

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:52 | 657603 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Current "major publisher" style sheets all dictate one space after a period.

Like you, however, I will NEVER comply.  Fuck 'em.


Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:36 | 657709 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture

Agree completely.  One space?  Two spaces improve legibility.  And what is the idea behind no capitalization?


Guess that may be the idea, eh?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:40 | 657487 Commander Cody
Commander Cody's picture

WTF?  The issue here, dear Kathy, is not about periods and spaces, but why is it that serfs need to hunker down while oligarchs need bigger and more ostentatious megayachts, etc.  Get real and realize that we are being scammed.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:44 | 657493 Seer
Seer's picture

Clearly, if you keep peeling it'll ALL come down to the fact that perpetual growth isn't possible.  No matter what adjustments are made to ANY system, unless that system can accurately measure resource utilization in a sustainable way it's going to collapse.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:12 | 657139 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

Germany says that multi culturalism is not shit.?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:49 | 657503 Seer
Seer's picture

While different cultures do have some bearing, the REAL friction occurs when there's a lack of resources.  When resources start to become scarce then you get TPTB working up friction between cultures- this keeps the masses fighting (and reducing population sizes), thereby allowing TPTB to continue to rule while everyone fights about stupid crap (that they've been brainwashed to believe).

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:13 | 657541 Gunther
Gunther's picture

Some 50 billion euro go to social welfare while 500 billion euro go to banker (and insurance company) welfare.

To pay the corporate welfare the average people have to pay.

That is called austerity.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 15:57 | 656970 barkingbill
barkingbill's picture

you are right on. this country has a lack of welfare. its welfare state is a joke compared to europe. the europeans however are getting richer. i dont buy bull shit article for a second. sorry, but its lame. 

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 16:10 | 656978 akak
akak's picture

Thank you for your astute and insightful analysis.

However, the joke is on you: the welfare state IS the joke!  And a very bad joke it is.


"Knock knock."

"Who's there?"

"Financial and monetary reality."

"Financial and monetary reality who?"

(Punchline to be delivered within the next couple of years.)

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:18 | 657146 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

More than once , this year, the governor of california, the terminator, has stated that he is going to cut off welfare and foodstamp payments. I am wondering what would happen there, if this did in deed take place? I think the Rodney King riots of 1992, would look like a joke.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:32 | 657164 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

"Financial and monetary reality who?"

That's a good enough punchline right there.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:51 | 657510 Seer
Seer's picture

And the Warefare state is collapsing faster.  That should say something.  Just saying...

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:03 | 657612 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Actually even that collapse is a part of the plan.

Only when the "in'effective" welfare state collapses that the giant Nannystate can rise.

When you call all the shots, you can take the story in any direction.

Remember Agatha Christie? Regardless of how much you analyzed all the "hints" the end always threw you and yet the hints were all there, all along.

Our current situation is akin to that. Not mere hints, but blaring megaphones.

Here in India, we are seeing the first implementation of a moder day Number of the beast, known here as Unique Identification Device (UID). Soonish, without UID, no services.

Me thinks big brother cometh and cometh loudly.



Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:17 | 657849 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

In the US we have had the 'Social Security' card (OASDI), with a number corresponding to an individual since 1935, when the act was signed into law. The SS law specifically forbade the use of the 'SS number' from being used as an identification number for individuals. Of course, this 'law' was ignored.

What is being implemented in India now was implemented in the US 65 years ago.

Big Brother where? 

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 22:29 | 660182 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Big Bro is here there and now pretty much everywhere.

I did not know that SS was being illegally used. Not surprised though.


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 16:40 | 657003 TheGreatPonzi
TheGreatPonzi's picture

"you are right on. this country has a lack of welfare. its welfare state is a joke compared to europe. the europeans however are getting richer. i dont buy bull shit article for a second. sorry, but its lame. "

Welfare makes people richer? Lol.

PS: I'm French and I live in France, the most welfarist country in the world. Where you don't have to work at all to live a decent life (you can earn around 1200 euros - 1675 USD - a month doing nothing and being single, and up to 3000 USD if you have two children).

The State gives you 800 euros a month for life (RSA), and the local collectivities give you around 400 euros. You can even get the State to pay your rent for you.

The more children you have, the more you get. Some bums have become millionnaires this way, and whithout any fraud. You get three wives, make them 10 children each, abandon them, and then ask for financial help. Cases like this are more common that you would think.

It's not rare either to see people on welfare driving Ferraris. Of course, they do some drug trafficking besides, but neither the State, neither the police will go bother them. Allowing drug trafficking brings peace in the poor suburbs.

Many people are seriously considering living their entire life on welfare. What's the point of working when you can get 1675 USD a month sitting on a chair, watching porn and drinking soda?

To finish, I must say that welfare has not brought happiness or richness to our country. We have one of the highest suicide rates in the world, and inequalities are going to the roof.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:02 | 657042 midtowng
midtowng's picture

"Allowing drug trafficking brings peace in the poor suburbs."

I see that you know nothing about drug trafficking. Something tells me that you know very little more about who is actually on welfare and why.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:07 | 657048 Oracle of Kypseli
Oracle of Kypseli's picture

The problem is that when the goverment goes bust, all these uneducated ruffian children who are unemployable and perhaps immigrants and/or muslim, you are done as a country.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:10 | 657052 Conrad Murray
Conrad Murray's picture

8 minute video, Muslim Demographics. Worth a watch(12 million+ views already):

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:23 | 657152 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

Its getting pretty bad now. France is not France anymore. The Netherlands is not Dutch anymore.  England is not England anymore.  When does it stop.  When does it end?

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:47 | 657184 robobbob
robobbob's picture

When national identity is erased from all the land and the NWO extends its loving and peaceful hands around the throats of all the desperate survivors

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:44 | 657397 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Give me a break.

There has not been a single time in history when immigrants, the poorest and least politically influencial people in a society, wasn't held up as the root of evil. At one time it was the Irish. Then the Italians and Germans. Then the eastern Europeans. Then the Mexicans and Chinese.

Now its the muslims.

Are you seeing a pattern? Every time it was supposed to be the end of our country. Each time the warnings were based on prejudice and nothing else.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:13 | 657437 Clancy
Clancy's picture

How many nations can you name that have been demographically annihilated?

I can think of several.

The Manchus used to be large and powerful nation with a distinct language and culture.  Numerous and strong enough to dominate all of East Asia.  The last Manchurian speakers on Earth died within your lifetime.  They are now gone forever.  They went from a position of dominance to total annihilation in just a little over a hundred years.

They weren't conquered or murdered, they were merely absorbed by the more numerous and culturally dynamic Chinese.  It's the only way a nation can be destroyed permanently.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:27 | 657632 robobbob
robobbob's picture

Why do you think South Africa attempted the "Homeland" fraud. Or Israel is even considering providing a Pal homeland? The demographics bomb is clear for any to see. Their only chance to maintain the trappings of democracy was/is to expatriate their growing unwanted populations. You can look at the Celts or Normans. Neanderthals if you like.

Displacement of indigenous populations by growing sub groups can and has happened many times throughout history. It is a foundation of colonial expansion. In fact, distasteful as it may be, the US sits on such a foundation. For gosh sakes, the UK Labour party had a secret memo released that they INTENTIONALLY were allowing immigration in order to transform the electorate. The Daily Mail, a mainstream newspaper from a modern civilized democratic country

This is the UK equivelant of the NYT outing the DNC or GOP over the Mexican border, after it had worked of course. A smoking gun of the highest treason. And the reaction of the sheeple? Yawn

You missed the point of what I was saying entirely. My assertion is that current displacements are not a natural occurrance, it is not the "poorest" doing this but the power elite. They are intentionally driving this to create fear and conflict to advance their agenda. You better drop the conditioned reactions and at least acknowledge the possibility. In the upcoming years you can at least be aware of the signs and at least think about it.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 02:10 | 657771 Attitude_Check
Attitude_Check's picture

9/11, 7/7, formal death threats by religious leaders about a book (Salmon Rushdie in the 80's), Cartoons (recently in Denmark)and the riots about those cartoons.  These all imply a REASON why Muslims are considered evil by some.  You are comparing apples to oranges - or maybe kumquats.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:49 | 657406 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

Righto. They don't want such silly ideas as natonionalities, nationalism, race consciousness and white western european culture. This is why, what appears to be common ordinary politicians both here and in europe look the othe way, while illegal immigration is allowed and condoned and now the populations of these lands are starting to wake up and realize this multi culturalism doesn't work and is not in their best interest. It may be too late now. Perhaps some of you have been to Paris lately. I rest my case. Muslims are used as a cultural battering ram in Europe and in America, they use the Mexican and to a lesser degree, Muslims here as well. Of course this sort ofthing does not bother the rich. They live in mansions in gated and guarded communities and get to choose who they live next to. In my opinion though, this willful neglect will backfire on the because the walls in those gated communities are not high enough to keep hungry and angry people from getting in when the days of the troubles do arrive. Needless to say, all of this was planned from the start, just like the financial crisis. It is all one big move, divided up into various parts that work together for the whole and that is the one world government that is coming fast now, at a trot. This is why I believe that the land we call America , that we have known all of our lives is for all intents and purposes ,now dead. It is a shame too really. Some of our founding fathers warned us time and time again, but I guess we just didn't listen.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:54 | 657412 Conrad Murray
Conrad Murray's picture

this multi culturalism doesn't work and is not in their best interest

German Chancellor Angela Merkel joined her country's increasingly acrimonious debate about immigration over the weekend, declaring that multiculturalism in Germany had been a "total failure."

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:22 | 657450 flacon
flacon's picture

Good for Merkel! I believe strongly in "national/ethnic identity". 

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:33 | 657644 robobbob
robobbob's picture

But now enters the most dangerous period. The elites introduced these policies. They blocked any opposition. Smeared any dissent as racist.

Now as the crises starts to build, the question is: did they introduce the immigrants because they wanted them, or did they just want to cause the reaction to them? How do you defend your culture and country without falling into the PTB trap?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 00:21 | 657686 Milton Waddams
Milton Waddams's picture

the problem is not one of multiculturalism -- to the money and political elite -- because at the highest reaches those of different cultures assimilate into and adopt the culture of the elite. otherwise they never would have received an invitation.

it is a "street level" problem because the common man does not adjust well to, nor does he naturally accept, new cultures. beyond humanity there are no -- obvious beyond the overtly obvious and self-esteem-impaired -- common bonds. "we're all slaves?" tough sell.

this is a round-about way of saying there is a money and power culture that successfully assimilates all because to belong one must seek the shared agenda that lies beyond simplistic human divisions. put simply power and money is greater than nationality. however there is a more common culture that rejects the assimilation because it is a culturally threatening, and in some cases, forces the culture into a perceived downtrend.

in the most simplistic sense-- imagine you are in a population of people all "getting rich and powerful". do you really care what the next man or woman, withing your population, looks like? no, because you share an objective and have a common bond and, importantly, you have demonstrated success at achieving said shared objective.

this phenomena does not exist at levels held by the common man. it is your culture that has defined your survival and the assimilation of new cultures that threaten your own are naturally -- almost primal, as would be argued by the elite -- interpreted as an attack. unlike the money and power philosophy of those whom you protest against, you do not share a common cultural bond with whom assimilation is forced upon you.

there are those who recognize this and leverage the phenomena as an act of covert war, namely divide and conquer.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:29 | 657858 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

Explain Japan.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:27 | 657158 Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture

C'mon man.  Muslim immigration does mean Muslim governments will follow.  But I get that churches - like governments - need to engage in fear-mongering to justify their existence.  This video depicts a common if not perfect enemy.

That said, the video did help me consider why the US has been lax on immigration.


Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:13 | 657338 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

Really? So what happens when the majority of a population in a specified political region (state or country) is Muslim and demands Sharia law? Are "democratic" systems going to say "Oh so sorry, but we will not enact the laws you are asking for?" No way. It will start with Sharia in family court and small claims. Then for civil litigation and finally for full blown legislation. And once you go sharia, you never go back!

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:49 | 657350 Shameful
Shameful's picture

We can only hope they will demand gold and silver money like in their holy book.  Love how the most radical among them still won't use sound money.  If a bunch of fundamentalist Muslims want to stage a massive march to "End the Fed" I would be remarkably cool with that.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:30 | 657861 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

Count me in. +1

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:38 | 657582 Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture

I hope you are kidding.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:49 | 657271 barkingbill
barkingbill's picture

have you not noticed that your country is above the U.S. in individual wealth? 


look for yourself....its up there with alot of other "socialist" countries with big "welfare states" HA!

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:51 | 657283 kathy.chamberli...'s picture

do you know my friend hank barlow? cause he says the same thing. it is unemployable and has never worked a day in 18 years. he wife works or rather heard she just cut back. 18 hour days. oh they live in france, too.


life sure is curious.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 21:56 | 657516 Seer
Seer's picture

"The more children you have, the more you get."

Actually, Australia did this once upon a time.  They were trying to get "native" whites to breed more because they were afraid of being displaced by Asians.  Morons, they only ended up adding to their already overpopulated country.

I'll agree, paying for folks to have more children in these times is sure suicide.  But, what gives the "rich" the right?  Figure that the majority (esp in the States, where upward mobility is actually LESS than that of Europe- was a shock to me!) were handed down wealth, didn't earn it (ruling families continue to rule).

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:26 | 657856 chrisina
chrisina's picture

I don't know where you get your numbers from. By cousin  in Paris receives exactly 412 Euros a month from the  RSA as a single adult and Zero from the local collectivities. Just renting a small 15 sqm studio in Paris is 600 Euros a month. The only way he can survive for now is because I am letting him use my flat in Boulogne as I am away on travel most ofthe time. He is not all all considering living like this for the rest of his life, but after having been fired at the age of 51 after his employer went bankrupt, he has been searching for a job for the last two years but has been told that he is either too old or over experienced. 

I think your analysis is horribly biased, maybe 1% of RSA recipients are happy that way, the 99% rest live in dire conditions unless they can get help from family or friends.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 17:59 | 657122 Squid-puppets a...
Squid-puppets a-go-go's picture


i disagree with tyler here. Are you really suggesting that with all the 'labour saving devices' invented since the industrial revolution that we dont have the resources to meet everyone's basic needs?

The only shortfall exposed here is that we cannot afford both the welfare state and the elitist gravy train/pigs troff.

I dont see scandinavian countries on the top list of european debt zombies.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 18:11 | 657136 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

"Tyler" didn't write this article -- or did you not see that.  It comes from Bill Buckler of The Privateer.  And this is only a small part of the recent issue.  Taken as a whole it is quite striking.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:54 | 657288 kathy.chamberli...'s picture

see i am starting to notice these kinds of thing to Rocky. tyler wrote the intro paragraph kind of a reflection of his about the piece. summary maybe, i sure admire tyler.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 20:47 | 657403 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Actually Bill Buckler's article wasn't all that controversial. It was Tyler's comments that were added to it, about blaming the poor for our troubles, rather than the wealthy fucks who are ripping off the nation, that has stirred people up.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 01:10 | 657738 Glass Steagall
Glass Steagall's picture

Yep. I've seen a pro-establishment slant more in the last few weeks. WTF?

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:01 | 657847 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Expansion usually follows several stages.

In the US popular culture, this is well illustrated (think of any gangster movies)

Stage one is when a guy thinks of a ponzi scheme for which he requires participation of others as more participating means more for himself (think of a mastermind mustering a team for a heist)

Stage two is when the ponzi scheme is drying out. Participation of many means less for all, especially the guy who started the scheme.

This is the time to discuss who is a true member of the gang, who deserves a share of the loot (think of double crossing gangsters stories)

Stage one is dying off, we are entering stage two. To determine who is a real member of the gang and who deserves a share.

German emperor welfare story is drivel to divert from the coming of stage 2. 

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:45 | 657870 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

Stage 1 is when a local strongman demands extortion (protection money) from local businesses.

The cops are supposed to provide protection, since their salaries are provided by taxation, but they get a cut of the 'protection money' so they look the other way.

Government finally decided to stamp out most 'protection rackets' since they found that they could extort more through taxes/fees if they forced the cops to do their jobs.

"Between 1950 and 1951, the Kefauver Committee, officially the Senate Special Committee to Investigate Crime in Interstate Commerce, held all of America's attention. It was the first committee made up of senators from around the country organized to not only gain a better understanding of how to fight organized crime, but also to expose organized crime for the conglomerate empire that it was.[1] However, in a major mistake, they focused only on Italian gangs, and ignored other ethnic groups, such as Detroits Purple Gang, and Mickey Cohen's entire California operation, among others."

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 10:30 | 658104 Bitch Tits
Bitch Tits's picture

"Stage one is dying off, we are entering stage two. To determine who is a real member of the gang and who deserves a share."

I disagree. I think we're at the stage where they cannibalize each other.


When it comes to crime and big money, there is no such thing as a "friend" or "member". It is every man (and dime) for himself.

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 19:25 | 657230 fightthepower
fightthepower's picture

Why would we want to "meet everyone's basic needs" if they are either too lazy or too stupid to meet their own basic needs.  If you care about people, do you give them a fish or teach them to fish? 

Sun, 10/17/2010 - 22:02 | 657527 Seer
Seer's picture

2/3 of the world's population lives on $3/day or less.  Are you calling ALL of them lazy and stupid?  It's a matter of the situation under which you were born.  The overwhelming majority of "rich" people today inherited their wealth.

And... what good is it to teach the poor to fish when it's the rich who are fouling the waters where the poor are supposed to get their fish from?  Oh, and come to think of it, the OVERWHELMING majority of "poor" people actually know how to grow/raise and cook their food; I assure you that the "rich," in comparison, don't have a clue.

Mon, 10/18/2010 - 04:18 | 657807 Squid-puppets a...
Squid-puppets a-go-go's picture

the reason we want to meet everyones basic needs is so that they have less od a sense of existential injustice and thus are not so incentivised to rob you, bash you, or vandalise your comfortable little world, dude. The reason we are in this mess is because the rich forgot about the concept of enlightened self interest

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