This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

One Small Voice

Tyler Durden's picture


Via Mark J. Grant, author of Out of the Box,

"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious."
                  -Thomas Jefferson
The drums roll. The cadence quickens. We are a scant three weeks away from the fiscal cliff. The markets react to each breath taken by people on both sides of the aisle. Rumor fuels rumor and the media is abuzz with the testosterone levels of each key player. Swords and shields are brandished with equal repartee and, to date, we are nowhere close to any resolution. “Tax the rich,” the mantra of the moment of the Democrats, is but a trill sung for the townsfolk as the differential here is one week’s worth of government. One week, maybe eight days, and this has been the focal point of public concentration. I have seen no serious proposal to date to deal with the real issues and not the fantasy enlarged for public consumption by a Democratic leadership still engaged in running for re-election. The Republicans have been somewhat better, not a lot better it must be said with honesty, but at least there have been proposals that are directed at reducing the entitlements that the country cannot and I say again CANNOT afford.
"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions. If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress. ... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
                            -James Madison
I prefer simplicity to complexity. You may wave the flag as you wish but the bottom-line, basic truth is that we have passed social programs and welfare plans that can no longer be paid for by the people who are paying. The capacity has been exceeded and the spending must stop. America now has 47.5 million Americans on food stamps which is 14.4% of the people in this country. This, in my mind, is a travesty because I just do not believe that this many people in America are entitled to this hand-out and these kinds of programs should be examined and curtailed which is not something underway or considered at all by the present administration. The United States is not Europe and the socialization of this country must end before the price to be paid by this generation and future generations sinks the country into a quicksand from which no extraction is possible. The Fed prints, the Fed buys back bonds, probably some $90 billion a month by the end of the day, and that which is created from thin air is all that supports the nation’s economy and the markets now as the sleight of hand is effective for a time but not for all time and woe to those citizens that discover what happens when the time runs out.
“Freedom is lost gradually from an uninterested, uninformed, and uninvolved people.”
                 -Thomas Jefferson
As an American, as one person with a small semblance of a public voice, I find it depressing to watch our nation’s leaders squander their time and my money and yours. We have somehow lost not just any leadership in our country but we have lost our common sense. The way ahead is not that complicated either as some would propose. The process is begun with the amount of money that the country can afford and still pay our bills. Then you take the military spending, the cost of running the government and you arrive at a figure that is agreed upon as what the country can pay and you divvy it out to the various social programs and a conclusion is reached that is within the boundary of a self-sufficient and a self-sustaining America. To date I have seen no discussion, nothing resembling what takes place in every household in America, where the income is paired up with the bills and what can be afforded is a known and agreed upon figure. On the left side of the sheet of paper is the income of the nation and on the right side is the bills we absolutely must pay and what is left is all that we have and that is it.
"But with respect to future debt; would it not be wise and just for that nation to declare in the constitution they are forming that neither the legislature, nor the nation itself can validly contract more debt, than they may pay within their own age, or within the term of 19 years."
                    -Thomas Jefferson
I say to both the Democrats and to the Republicans; where is this number? Bring the American people this figure and then we can work backwards from there to fill in the blanks.  We only have what we have and the creation of money and then the handing out of it to people that could be functional but are not either as their own poor choice or the choice of those in Washington D.C. to use social programs as bribes for votes must stop. Elections have come and gone and now is the time, now must be the time, to bring common sense back to our President and back to our Congress as I remind everyone in Washington that one plus one still equals two and that the bastardization of that principle is no longer acceptable. It is just me, it is just my own small voice in a large wilderness but I will stand and say, “Bring the American people the number and then let’s get down to work before you destroy the very fabric of our country.”
“There is not a more important and fundamental principle in legislation, than that the ways and means ought always to face the public engagements; that our appropriations should ever go hand in hand with our promises. To say that the United States should be answerable for twenty-five millions of dollars without knowing whether the ways and means can be provided, and without knowing whether those who are to succeed us will think with us on the subject, would be rash and unjustifiable. Sir, in my opinion, it would be hazarding the public faith in a manner contrary to every idea of prudence.”
                                  -James Madison


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 12/11/2012 - 14:53 | 3052593 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

There is no number because the politicians don't know the exact number it takes to buy off the population to stay in office.  Shit in one hand.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:05 | 3052632 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

"2 + 2 = 5"

Radiohead, Hail to the Thief

"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."

--George Orwell

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:16 | 3052658 smlbizman
smlbizman's picture

man you guys are crazy...dow up 100+....made a gazillion on the aig deal..what more do you want?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:35 | 3052725's picture

It's not what we want but what we don't want.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:35 | 3052727 michiganmaven
michiganmaven's picture

How did we make a "gazillion" on AIG.. we loanded them money that has added to our deficit... so the "profits" we have will be lost very quickly on those interest payments...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:02 | 3052840 Woodyg
Woodyg's picture

There's the ones that should pay the bills -

the same damn ones who are profiting off the numerous Free Trade Deals that stole our Job base.

And the ones that profited off the bailout of aig -

In Fact - I'b be willing to bet that easiest way to find the criminals are by looking at the Private Entites that profited.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:10 | 3052857 smlbizman
smlbizman's picture

i refuse to use the sarc guys and gals should be able to recognize it by now....come on man...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:24 | 3052894 Woodyg
Woodyg's picture

I recognized it and was agreeing w you - which you should get also -

Heres a few historical photos how this has played out in the past

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 21:38 | 3054155 smlbizman
smlbizman's picture

i think in fight club, rule # 8 is ."no sarc tag needed", ......right after rule # 7..."no grammer nazis"...

woody their must be something wrong with my lap top....all the pics are upside down....

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:08 | 3052636 trav777
trav777's picture

what is this author smoking?  None of any of that matters, those old DEAD WHITE MEN...anything that is majority or all-white is ILLEGITIMATE by definition these days.

HISTORY is therefore illegitimate.  It will be scrubbed and sanitized away like 1984; watch- they're already doing it.

And nobody cares about income and expenses; that's for people who run out of credit.  For as long as they've been alive, there's been a handout/bailout or something from uncle sugar.  Just press out another kid and raise your monthly check.  Get your sister or mom as 'childcare' and suck that credit up too.  It's been a scam a day since the 1960s.

The 60s were the takeover of what you THINK of and REMEMBER as "America."  That country was conquered in the 1960s and it no longer exists.  The powers in charge now are going to expunge that nation's past from the history books and are still fundamentally transforming it into something totally different.  There are some clueless holdouts who still haven't figured out that they lost the war.

Look at the demoncrat party in Congress...they brag about how female, minority, gay, etc., they are.  That coalition, aided by idiot yankees and their ilk, formed a coalition and seized power.  They have used 40 years of immigration policy to just solidify their grip.  There is no "opposition" party...could you even imagine the conservatism of the 1950s now?  They'd call you a nazi.  ANYONE who appeals to that bygone era is sneered at by these people as an obsolete bigot.  Nevermind that the founders compared to a 50s conservative are so far right they look like Atilla the Hun

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:16 | 3052660 fonzannoon
fonzannoon's picture

Trav you have been gone for a while. This author sends this garbage out once a day. He goes for the title to get you to start reading and then it's a bunch of quotes. He offers no insight into anything and just like to hear himself speak. 

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:34 | 3052691 LouisDega
LouisDega's picture

What author? The heading does not say guest post. I assume its an in house post

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:36 | 3052729 redpill
redpill's picture

"Via Mark J. Grant, author of Out of the Box"

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:39 | 3052749 fonzannoon
fonzannoon's picture

Thanks redpill

Anytime you see a dramatic title followed by someone who sounds like they are twirling their cigar in their scotch while lecturing their nephew and then cutting and pasting quote after quote you know who you are reading.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:40 | 3052750 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

A man who obviously needs to get much farther out of the box. I don't even think he's got the flaps open.

Is it really that hard to identify criminal elements these days?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:46 | 3052755 LouisDega
LouisDega's picture

Mark Grant. Hmmmmm, I see

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:42 | 3052760 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture

Is this the guy that always tries to remind us that his book is now 20% off at amazon.  Or am I thinking of Of Two Minds.

 I can't keep my damn guest posters straight, but at least it is Simon Black.  He's probably negotiating a gold for land deal with malaysia as I type this.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:16 | 3052871 redpill
redpill's picture

I think you're thinking of Charles Hugh Smith.  Or maybe the guy that rehashes The Fourth Turning every other month.  Some of them get a bit repetitive/plodding to be sure.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:40 | 3053248 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture

Ah yes, he's the one.  They sure do, but they mean well.  

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:35 | 3052690 Getting Old Sucks
Getting Old Sucks's picture

Yup, and going back is the only way forward.  Too bad it'll take a decade or two of pain and suffering before that happens.  Unfortunately, it will probably be just another 100 year cycle that brings our great great grandchildren back full circle because the same people who ruled the world for the last thousand years will rule the world for the next thousand years.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:30 | 3052703 Joe Davola
Joe Davola's picture

You forgot the part about them owning SLAVES!!!

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:38 | 3052742 thedrickster
thedrickster's picture

Right on Trav.

I discovered this five or so years ago when attempting to have a discussion with seemingly reasonable, well informed people. The retort was stunning, "who cares what Jefferson said/thought, he owned slaves".

The genius of those old white men has been squandered, 51% rules with a predictable result.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:52 | 3052806 trav777
trav777's picture

interestingly, most other groups' history CANNOT be deprecated, despite that they all owned slaves too.  Witness Israel.  They are by conventional wisdom "entitled" as original possessors of the land they squat on presently.

This is DESPITE the history of genocide and slavery that litters their history work (Old Testament) and the fact that they only came into possession of the Holy Land by admitted conquest and slaughter!  They will not tolerate having their history altered nor questioned.  Likewise, you cannot question the "wisdom" of natives of any land, despite their record of sacrificing 10s of 1000s of people in one event to some God-who-does-natural-events.  LORD HELP YOU if YOU should appeal to some kind of deity's moral authority on any question.  But it's ok for other cultures to appeal to rain gods and wind gods when they actually sacrifice humans in brutal fashion.  If you reject this premise, you are a bigot.  YOU are the one with the problem.

Yes, I know the Aztecs owned slaves, but that's ok, because they're nonwhite.  The Zulus did the same things as the Aztecs, minus the early bronze age technology.  Basically, everyone did.

The people who constructed every facet of what we call civilization DAILY permit their own history to be crapped on; they have acceded to their own destruction.  He who controls the past controls the future.

Even on this very site, we see nationalists referred to as "nazis" simply because they "bigotedly" refer to THEIR OWN country as THEIR OWN country and desire to keep it as such, but this is ONLY the case when the country contains a white majority.  If it contains a colored or zionist majority, you CANNOT question its right to remain ethnically pure at any cost or else you are a nazi who wants to kill 6 million.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:08 | 3052853 Woodyg
Woodyg's picture

Trillions for the banksters that are .001%

And a few hundred billion yearly to keep 50 million from starving at 150 per month but its the SNAP participant that won?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:17 | 3053138 forexskin
forexskin's picture

a few hundred billion a year to buy votes and keep the cracker fest going for the .001%. bread and circus fool - get your head out of your lap.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:40 | 3052752 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

trav, what you are describing is in reality a global cultural war

and one of it's battlefields is marriage, or, better, divorce (and it's siren call)

we are fighting the same here in europe, btw, with slightly different results

the problem you guys have is that your conservatives are quite at loss about how to respond, and way too fragmented in easily defeated parcels

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:00 | 3052833 ronaldawg
ronaldawg's picture

Marriage is the big social battlefield?

I could care less if gay people want to lose everything in divorce (like I have TWO times). 

So what is the real battlefield?  Abortion?  Contraception?  Seems silly in the grand scheme of things....

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:47 | 3052996 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

your themes are a perfect example for what I mean: why do US conservatives care so much if gays marry or not and meanwhile don't realize that the institution of marriage - or better family - is crumbling?

you had two divorces - how much did this cost? both in monetary and human terms? how much do you have to run more in the threadmill because of that?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:09 | 3052852 trav777
trav777's picture

Fighting?? LOL. You invited them in!!

WTF did you think was the cause of africa being africa and central america being central america?  Miasmas?  Did you really think they were going to become tanned versions of you?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:54 | 3053033 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

I'm not talking about race, I'm talking of the effects of exchanging a conservative regime with a liberal one in society

you see? obsessed with part of the issue

lol - our (and your) missionaries thought that they could become tanned versions of us - I know a few examples that did indeed

too broad you brush, methinks. Just one example: Mexicans

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:31 | 3052918 Seer
Seer's picture

"It's been a scam a day since the 1960s."

Hidden bias?

And I thought that you understood that the REAL underlying cause/current was due to perpetual growth on a finite planet.

You're a poor white boy.  Get used to it.  Join the overwhelming majority of humans who are poor.  Or, you can continue your not-so-subtle attacks on anyone who isn't white (via your viewing it all as an attack on whitey).

There's always a better time period.  Go back to the 50s and there sure as hell will be lots said about how things were better in previous days.  Keep rolling it back...  Those who aren't wearing blinders will realize that when there is "plenty" there is a smaller chorus of "the good old days."  The "better days" were ALWAYS about over-stimulated growth and bubbles.  The "bad days" are ALWAYS about the consequences of those "better days;" so, yes, in a way you're correct about the 60s, but due to your incessant xenophobia you miss the target.

But yeah, YOUR problems are due to hippies and colored people, who, we "know," are ALL on the dole...  Now then, let's all kick these deadbeats off our backs and get on with cranking up growth so that we can finish what we started...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:40 | 3053197 forexskin
forexskin's picture

all in all, a nice rhetorical device, like zeno's paradox, to "prove" that there is no such thing as a declining arc in this civilization. romans also took solace in that particular conceit.  furthermore its always been a problem of infinite growth on a finite planet. remember malthus?

don't ever mention the reason for the necessity of perceiving infinite growth - which is to pay the interest on money created out of thin air by the bankster parasites and other assorted non - productive elements. which is to say, being unproductive is forgivable if you're not white or stratospherically rich.

carry on... with fooling yourself about how liberal kindness keeps the blinders on for all the happy slaves. you've got plenty of examples in the 20th century on how that worked out.

enjoy another down red.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 14:56 | 3052595 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Ummmmmm.....Congress doesn't work for "We the People" and never really did. It was just easier back when the good times rolled for us to delude ourselves into thinking otherwise.

Time to wake up Neo.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:26 | 3052677 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture

I agree and disagree.  

In founding times being a legislator was a civil service, not a career.  If I remember my public school education correctly, most congressmen had other means of income.  They served their term, and went on with life.  

Somewhere between then and now psychopaths realized that they can make a career out of imposing their will on the public while placing themselves on a pedestal for all to see with a title of congressmen that used to mean so much more than it does now. If the founding fathers could take a look at modern politicians, bankers, and the lawyers that have helped them pollute the system that they created, i feel they would be planning another revolution.   

I could be terribly naive, but I just feel society was purer back then and corruption wasnt tolerated. What say you Cog Dis?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:42 | 3052762 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

It was better, like any government, only in the sense that it was more decentralized. It was still a predator in any area it had teeth.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:27 | 3052800 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I guess it depends upon whether or not you believe the (state run) school book version of American/World history. I for one do not. The "founding fathers" mythos is exactly that, carefully manicured and beautified mythology. This is not to say we are told outright lies, just carefully groomed "truths".

The deliberately created fallacy many of us labor under is the false need to "know" that an alternative view is in fact "a truth" (usually by way of experts) before rejecting any "truth" we were originally indoctrinated into. This fails the critical thinking test.

One doesn't require answers to when or why in order to first question who, what and where. To me this is ass backwards. I do not need to know why certain people are doing something before I will consider gathering facts and information.

Wasn't it Boneparte who said "History is a set of lies agreed upon"?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:35 | 3053222 forexskin
forexskin's picture

you seem to overcomplicate things sometimes.

if the ethos of Liberty and the enlightment is some fairy tale, none of this has much meaning.

history is dividing on different fault lines as we speak. the old left right paradigm is giving way to a control / freedom paradigm. that is where the battle will be fought - guaranteed.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:45 | 3053272 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture

Thanks for the well thought out response.


Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:55 | 3052818 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

Lobbys. a bit of them is fine and improves politics, like salt.

too much of them and you spoil the results

that easy

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:40 | 3052962 Seer
Seer's picture

"In founding times being a legislator was a civil service, not a career."

Maybe because they hadn't gotten enough momentum to create the basis for "career" payments?

Rackets take a bit of time before starting to pay off.

Those who legislate are looking to get others to DO.  It's as simple as that.

Nothing magically (or horribly) changed.  It was ALWAYS there.  It's about POWER.  "Civil servants" have the capacity to kill you, don't ya know?  Pay your taxes or be killed. (didn't the British say this?)

Revolutions are about a new crop of victors carving up the spoils.  Back in the days there were LOTS of spoils to be carved up (just get kick some British butt [those are some LONG supply lines] and wipe out some pesky Injuns), very few people to share in the pie- INSTANT WEALTH!  What a script!  Wrap it all up in some nice language (that excludes lots of people and stuff), a nice flag, add some good music, allow people to believe that "God" has ordained it all- viola!  you have a basis for establishing long-lasting control.

Sorry, but I'll vote that you're naive.  Not giving you a down arrow because I think that your heart is in the right place: I'd really like for it to be so as well, but the actual facts just won't line up so.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 14:54 | 3052597 unwashedmass
unwashedmass's picture

this would all be nice indeed, but......we might also consider stopping the forever wars, and ending the massive massive giveaways to the banks as well. 

somehow you hear a lot about the peasants sucking on the nation's tit....and nothing, not a peep, about the money being flushed away on the elites' special projects. 

before i ask some old lady to eat cat food, i'd like to see jamie give up some of the profit he's going to make on the new $45B giveaway tomorrow....and for Dick Cheney to forego those sweet war time divvys.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:06 | 3052631 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Complain all you want about the system. After's a free country.

Just never ever question the system itself and all its supporting lies and deceit. That might just get you two to the back of the head if you're of sufficient influence or threat.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:43 | 3052766 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

"Who put the price on his head?"

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:28 | 3052680 tickhound
tickhound's picture

"before i ask some old lady to eat cat food, i'd like to see........ FILL IN THE BLANK"

Thank you for that.  As if going through the "little guy's" take-home bennies with a fine-toothed comb would accomplish anything.

Take a hatchet to the bloated corporate welfare klepto class and go from there. 

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:42 | 3052757 unwashedmass
unwashedmass's picture


thank you. 

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:57 | 3053048 Seer
Seer's picture

Like I'd been saying, no one put a gun to the heads of the banksters and told them they had to make shitty loans.  Always the refrain was that was the free-loaders ("illegals" a favorite target of the xenophobs) scamming the poor innocent system.

No shit, it has been people all across the board.  It has to stop, and it will!  However, "leaders" are supposed to set the example, in which case the greater "punishment" should be given to those people.  The System punishing itself?  Ha!  So, it's really left to us to find our own way, find the moral compass and allow this to all drift away to sink on it's own.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:42 | 3053247 forexskin
forexskin's picture

no one put a gun to the heads of the banksters and told them they had to make shitty loans.

wrong again. it was collusion between the banks and govt (targeted gov't home ownership goals) with sovereign backstopping, heading for a crisis where the banks could pass failed loans upward, understanding there would be a huge increase in gov't control and power consequent. lets call it fascism. paid for with EBT bread and circus.

as long as the great unwashed are fed and entertained, the power is safe where it is. who is going to punish whom? learn some history - this has been done before.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 14:57 | 3052607 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

A few weeks until the clif, but the debt ceiling might have been taken out today.  Any word on that Tyler?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:35 | 3052728 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

USA debt clock = $16.366 Trillion

Current debt ceiling = $16.394 Trillion

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 14:58 | 3052610 cossack55
cossack55's picture

All the people quoted are dead.  I don't think they will be able to provide much help.  They should have thought ahead and limited all their speeches/writings to 140 characters or less.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:44 | 3052777 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

I was going to reduce a quote to text-speak, but alas, I'm not a texter (nor a poser).

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:58 | 3053054 Seer
Seer's picture

How about: "You're free, don't fuck it up!" (oh, and "no entangling alliances with government")

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:01 | 3052618 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

I guess one small voice just isn't enough...............

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:01 | 3052622 SV
SV's picture

To date I have seen no discussion, nothing resembling what takes place in every household in America, where the income is paired up with the bills and what can be afforded is a known and agreed upon figure.

Where is this "every household in America"?  Crap rolls downhill and the government models off the hand-to-mouth crowd or vice-versa.  I think it's a much more accurate statement of households in America, "they spend to get what they want, when they want it, consequences be dammed."  And we're somehow surprised we're here both in our personal lives and government?  NOT!

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:08 | 3052642 maximin thrax
maximin thrax's picture

Your placing a quote up top keeps the system from allowing me to give you an UP arrow. So this is it. And, nice 'fro.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:01 | 3052623 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

Who was it in Europe said "we know what needs to be done, we just don't know how to get reelected after we do it."


But over here. 

It's not that they don't understand, it's that they FULLY understand.  It means their dismissal from the offices of power next election after they do it (or sooner).  They're in a box.  Nothing left to do now but wait for events to cause change (in a very messy way) because THEY WILL NEVER CHANGE ON THEIR OWN.  NEVER.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:51 | 3052805 SKY85hawk
SKY85hawk's picture

-Jean-Claude Junker

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:06 | 3052627 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

When the public sees the wealthiest getting away with looting the system with no recourse whatsoever, can you blame them for wanting a piece of the action? I'm not big on welfare , but for cripes sakes can we at least start with the corporate welfare and work our way down the ladder?



Edit....OT I am getting a lot of ads for Barska scopes. They look pretty reasonably priced ,,,anybody out there with any hands on experience with them?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:10 | 3052647 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Barska = Russian garbage. Do not waste your money...........

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:28 | 3052696 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

Or.... maybe it was the wealthy who drew their "government feeding trough" inspiration from poor welfare recipients.  Ever think of that?

(Just messin' with you.  I agree.  Way too many people with their hands out up and down the spectrum to ever support.)

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 19:35 | 3053624 JohnnyBriefcase
JohnnyBriefcase's picture

"When the public sees the wealthiest getting away with looting the system with no recourse whatsoever, can you blame them for wanting a piece of the action?"


That is the beginning of the real shit, once everyone realizes this and agrees to look the other way because it's all a scam.


That's also why entertainment has been made so easily accessable through portable devices. Bury their heads in the sand whether they realize it or not.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:10 | 3052644 jal
jal's picture

The financial system has failed.

A new financial system has not been debugged.

They will keep kicking the can down the road until a new financial system can be put into place.

The enemy is the old financial system.

The central bankers know, just like all generals, that there will be collateral damage in this conflict between the old financial system and the setting up an operational sustainable new financial system.

Change is already happening.




Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:25 | 3052684 CvlDobd
CvlDobd's picture

The next financial system will be worse. I'd bet anything that it will be a cashless, all digital, 100% track able system.

Learn black markets and how to barter. It will be key.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:46 | 3052785 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Agreed. Though I'd say "financial" system.

Are we there yet?

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:09 | 3053092 Seer
Seer's picture

Of course it'll be worse.  We're on the roller-coaster ride to hell.  That was ALWAYS the ride.  We either continue the ride or we get off.  Problem is... did we just hit the peak and it's a LONG way off, or do we wait to get closer to the ground, at which point we'll be moving at an incredible rate of speed?

Learn how to operate on a more sustainable foundation.  A good place to start is by understanding that the physical world is the one that's real...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:10 | 3052646 Madcow
Madcow's picture

if you accept that governemnt employess are sociopaths -

then it makes sense why the folks in charge are TRYING to destroy civilization. 

thats how sociopahts roll 


Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:48 | 3052794 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

The scariest thing is, many of them believe in the "goodness" of their destructive tendencies.

You know, Stalin's "useful idiots."

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:13 | 3053116 Seer
Seer's picture

And maybe, just maybe, "civilization" isn't sustainable and is therefore not within our ability to save?

Find me a "civilization" that's not predicated on perpetual growth and I'll show you a "civilization" that won't be recognized as being "civil."  Such a "civilization" would be an impediment to "progress," it would likely inhabit "valuable" land and resources, land and resources that REAL "civilized" "civilizations" require (by "friendly" means of "trade").

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:13 | 3052656 PaJoad
PaJoad's picture

" ...basic truth is that we have passed social programs and welfare plans AND DEFENSE SPENDING that can no longer be paid for by the people who are paying."

There, fixed it for ya.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:32 | 3052719 maximin thrax
maximin thrax's picture

No, you just messed it up. The concern is with programs whose cost increases geometrically. Defense spending, regardless of what you think of it, was 6% of GDP in 1980, and it is right there today. But Helthcare spending has gone from 2% of GDP to 6%, now equalling defense spending. That's why Medicare is a ticking time bomb. Welfare spending tracked at 2% for a while but peaked at almost 3.5% under Obama. Between healthcare and welfare the budget increase equals almost 5.5% of GDP, or about 3/4 Trillion dollars.


Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:25 | 3053167 Seer
Seer's picture

"Defense spending, regardless of what you think of it, was 6% of GDP in 1980, and it is right there today."

Ha ha!

One sees what one wants to see.  Or, rather, what isn't seen is what one doesn't see...

Does "health-care" (and no, I won't argue that expenditures aren't going up- one need only look at demographics to back this up) have off-sheet costs, costs that are of"national security" importance, figures that we cannot see?

"Health-care" cost are a cover to The controlling Food industry: must have food to keep the "workers" working.  "Defense" costs are a cover to???  Ponder it a bit...

BTW - Basing a percentage on an increasing number means that things are OK?  That's kind of a slight-of-hand.  "Defense" spending is STILL increasing, which means MORE demands on the future (people and planet).  It's still spending based on the exponential function; it still is in defiance of physical laws.  Without addressing the underlying causes nothing is going to resolve our problems.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:15 | 3052659 Vashta Nerada
Vashta Nerada's picture

It isn't even the point that the social welfare programs have bankrupted the country, it is that none of those programs could ever pass constitutional muster, and shouldn't have been put into law in the first place.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:30 | 3053196 Seer
Seer's picture

But corporate welfare programs are OK?

It's MEANINGLESS when we started with a system that is NOT sustainable.  Not only NOT sustainable, but was based on THE unsustainable- growth.

But, yeah, as resources start getting tight it's pretty common for the animals to start attacking one another...  Deception being highly evolved in humans allows us to trick one another into believing that we're in a world of infinite resources (if that were the case then death would be a silly point of life, no?).  While telling everyone that there's ample resources, so they get complacent, we pounce to get MORE...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:22 | 3052678 Bastiat009
Bastiat009's picture

Gold is having trouble climbing the cliff while stocks are not falling.

OK, bring it on. I am having fun here.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:40 | 3052751 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

here's hoping they beat the gold and silver price down some more so we can all BTFD....

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:08 | 3052681 alfred b.
alfred b.'s picture


      There is no more goverment, just sleeze and fraud headed by the bankster cartel!

  Buy physical gold and silver.


Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:34 | 3053215 Seer
Seer's picture

"There is no more goverment, just sleeze and fraud headed by the bankster cartel!"

Actually, there's TOO much government, that's how these folks managed to protect themselves.

Power IS sleaze. (except for the idealized stuff, such as unicorns, gods and "good government").

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:31 | 3052708 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

As soon as people realize that congress is nothing but the board of directors and majority shareholder of the Fortune 500 Corp, and care about nothing else, then maybe things might change. Until then, we're obviously fucked.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:24 | 3052897 SKY85hawk
SKY85hawk's picture

You are correct, but there is something every American should do, soon.  That is, stop calling for tax law changes and use the tools that are available.

There's an easy way to legally avoid increasing taxation on retirement income. 

Start transferring your IRA or 401-k money to a Roth-Ira.  If you're not working your deductibles will allow sizable transfers at no cost.  Even FORBES has described this technique.

I've been transferring 20,000 each year.  You have to figure what works for you.

Then there's the question of how to invest the money.  I move between Long and Inverse ETFs.  When the market goes down the Inverse ETF rises in value.  These positions will run for months.  June 1 was a good time to go long. 

Currently, the market is trending down and the Inverse ETF is rising in value.  Take a look at Energy(ERX is long, ERY is short) or Financials(FAS long and FAZ short).

Withdrawals after age 59.5 are not taxable at all. 

Keep in mind there is/was a 5 year rule on starting withdrawals, so get started!


I think the next step of confiscation might be to change signup rules. I'm thinking of the Soc.Security eligibility rules that are based on age.

You've done something good if you and your descendants are 'grandfathered' from future rule changes.   I think Congress Appropriating existing retirement money is somewhat unlikely.


Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:32 | 3052711 wonderatitall
wonderatitall's picture

obama and the nazi left cant add...teachers cant stfu and give yor mony...proud democrat

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:36 | 3052736 new game
new game's picture

Mr Mark Grant,

Are you just realizing that it may just be hopeless.

Because, the very people that control THEIR destiny are surely not going to change that.

Of course we are talking about term limits and complete and unabashed campaign contribution

reform and coporate taxation of foriegn profits to reflect the need for return of domestic production.

No, we cant anymore of that damn Americanism craparound here anymore; cause WE ARE IN CONTROL and

further more, the corporation has done more for me than YOU CAN IMAGINE...


Signed; riding er out...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:41 | 3052753 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

Why is everyone picking on Social Security and Medicare.

What about taxing all of the Overseas profits of Companies that are headquartered in America.  If they earn profits overseas tax them here.  Do not let them run an end run around our Government and Taxes.  If they employ people overseas instead of the US, charge import fees on the products.

How about all of the aid we are sending to Governments overseas.  Why?  Why send Aid to other Countries when we need the Money for our own people?

Why do American Citizens have to Bail Out the bad behavior of the Banks?  They are the ones that caused the Debt.  Let them pay to get the Debt down.

What about all of our Military.  Why are we paying the Military and all of their Medical bills for life to defend the interests of the Corporations overseas.  Why are we defending the interests of other Governments.  The Governments only Job is to defend OUR BOARDERS. 

There are so many other ways to cut spending but they will not do what is necessary.

Maybe we should ban all Lobbyists.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:46 | 3052784 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

Because they are by far the biggest items in the budget.  And Medicare is completely unsustainable with unfunded liabilities estimated at over $85 trillion.  See debt clock....

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:40 | 3053245 Seer
Seer's picture

It's ALL unsustainable because it's ALL based on GROWTH!

Will you "small govt" people get it through your heads that the problem isn't with government so much as it is with the System of growth.

Shrink govt and it'll pop back up as long as the premise is one of supporting growth.  NO GOVT = NO ABILITY FOR ANYONE TO ABUSE A SYSTEM; it also means no energy loss.  Sigh... I suspect that "small govt" people are asking for their own tribes to control everything; tribes - OK; dictating what others NOT in your tribe should do - NOT OK.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 15:53 | 3052811 GernB
GernB's picture

Voters just sent a message to washington, and the message was "don't worry about the debt." Or maybe more accurately: "we believe you that the rich aren't paying their share and that this can be solved by taxing the rich." I can't see how you can expect to overwhelm the message just sent by voters with a completely contrary message just a few weeks after the election.

Wed, 12/12/2012 - 09:13 | 3055249 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

At one time the "infallible" majority thought that the sun revolved around the earth.  Check yer premises.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 16:12 | 3052863 Eddy Vluggen
Eddy Vluggen's picture

Aaah, yes, the argument that feeding the hungry is bankrupting the nation.

Not a word on the defense-budget.

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:56 | 3053316 Seer
Seer's picture

Ultimately that "defense" budget WILL be used to acquire food... Oh, wait!  That's BEEN the case!  1/3 of the world's protein is traceable to the use of fossil fuels; and, well, there's those wars "for democracy" all about...  Anyway, there's the hidden linkage...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:40 | 3053255 mumbo_jumbo
mumbo_jumbo's picture

what you are describing is a direct result of the EXPORTATION OF ALL THE WELL PAYING JOBS. in 1914 Henry Ford raised many of his workers wages to $5 a day ($110 in 2011 dollars or $13.75 an hour), he knew he needed customers and that was a way to do it.  now we live in a world where the Henry Ford's want it all for themselves and nothing for anyone else so is it any wonder we have 47 million on welfare? it is afterall the plan...or so it seems to me.

most jobs being created in this country pay less than Henry Ford paid in 1914....and THAT is the unsustainable part of the equation.


Tue, 12/11/2012 - 18:03 | 3053335 Seer
Seer's picture

Unsustainable in a flawed premise perhaps...

Ford was ALL about expansionism.  About GROWTH.  He was no more exempt from getting caught up in this rat race than the less noble folks (who might have paid poor wages).

How come Mr. Boeing didn't advocate high wages such that His workers could buy airplanes?

It was ALL marketing.  Ford did it well.  It continues to provide a nice carrot even up to these days...

What salaries should be paid when resources are so high as to make the cost of production astronomical?  Oh, wait!  I've already provided that answer with my Boeing comment above!

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:44 | 3053267 riphowardkatz
riphowardkatz's picture

I find it funny when people say the country cannot afford something. Of course they can afford it there is tons more wealth to be redistributed to be able to afford. 

And you think it isnt complicated? Go tell the lady in PA making 29k with a take home of 69k that she no longer gets that, then go tell to doctor makng 400k that his salary needs to be cut in half after you have told the californians beurocrat that 200k is just too much money, oh yes and all those kids that worked so hard for that high school diploma can no longer borrow 100k to go party it down while learning about mesopatamian climatology. 

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 18:17 | 3053387 Seer
Seer's picture

Of course it's all silly.  It's numbers!

The question should be weather people can afford the REAL costs of the resources and production energies that went in to something.  Remove the govt and you're likely going to be in the same situation (and, based on real numbers and history and nonsensical stuff like that [see my note below] it'll be "worse," though it's really only a matter of time).

BTW - Go tell the 4+ billion people on the planet that exist on $3/day or less just why YOU, the lady in PA, the doctor etc. are "worth" more.  Oh!  And tell them thanks for allowing us to exploit them and their resources- and to have a nice day!

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 17:54 | 3053303 Seer
Seer's picture

"As an American, as one person with a small semblance of a public voice, I find it depressing to watch our nation’s leaders squander their time and my money and yours."

Been meaning to comment on this one...

When nearly everyone here believes (and I will offer no argument to the contrary) that government doesn't produce anything, then how can it be expected to do anything other than squander time and money?

But we note here, parsing his sentence, is that what comes first is Grant's "money*."  Mr. Grant, what exactly have YOU produced that's essential for life?  You're perfectly on target calling the government fucked up, but that's as far as it need go lest you start looking like yet another lobbyist looking for more of the teat.

* Isn't he free to stock up on PMs?

It's like being told to not wear red shoes, when the REAL problems is that we're dancing naked (except for the shoes).  Growth always ends up with expansionary policies/actions; and, that which cannot be "bartered" for will be taken by force (wars are always about resources).  I do not buy into the thought (wish?) that changing shoes is going to keep us from marching off to war, naked.

In my unencumbered idealistic world Mr. Grant would actually have to do REAL work.  But for now we'll just have to be distracted by red shoes...

Tue, 12/11/2012 - 20:02 | 3053728 Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch's picture

"at reducing the entitlements that the country cannot and I say again CANNOT afford." Although the US ( I no longer say we, because it has nothing to do with you and I, it's them) can afford three going on 4 trillion dollar wars. Never seems to come up in the debate. The US invades countries and obliterates societies and China goes into Africa and offers 4 schools and 5 hospitals in trade for their goods.  Hmmm, I wonder which way is more effective.

Wed, 12/12/2012 - 07:54 | 3055130 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

I just wish they would stop calling Social Security and Medicare Entitlements.  They are not.  People paid into the program.

Now as far as Welfare, Medicaid.  Those are entitlements.  No one payed anything into those programs.

Wed, 12/12/2012 - 02:38 | 3054906 nastaking
nastaking's picture

The Samsung-manufactured i699 10 is a thin and lightweight device with an exceptional screen and a competitive price.

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