This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
How The Federal Reserve Is Purposely Attacking Savers
Submitted by Chris Martenson via Peak Prosperity,
There's something we 'regular' citizens wrestle with that the elites never seem to: a sense of moral duty.
For example, following the collapse of the housing bubble, many people struggled with mortgages they could no longer afford to pay, fearing the shame of default. Many believed defaulting was wrong somehow; that it was their moral obligation to pay their mortgages, no matter how dire their personal situation. And of course, the mortgages lenders did their utmost to reinforce this perception.
In a perfect world, we would honor our debts and obligations, every one of us. But the world is an imperfect place ,and moral obligation is something that almost never enters into the decision matrix of our society's richest. Or the banking industry.
For them, the number one (and two, and three...) rule is that whatever is expedient and makes the most money is the right thing to do.
For the bottom 99%, it’s like playing with a stricter set of rules than your opponent: you’re not allowed to hit below the belt, and they’ve brought a baseball bat into the ring.
Note how this guy had to fight through his middle class conditioning before coming to a sense of peace over his decision to enter into a short sale on his house:
How a short sale taught me rich people’s ethics
Sep 29, 2014
The closest I ever came to acting like a rich person was two years ago when I short-sold my primary residence. I might have been able to keep it but strategic default made life easier. I owed about $400,000 on a house that short-sold for $150K. The bank lost more than a quarter of a million dollars, and I lost at least $80K in down payment and property improvements.
I was taught growing up to “keep my word” and that your handshake “meant something.” Yet businessmen and individual wealthy people make decisions that are far less moral than a short sale. People “incorporate” so they can avoid legal responsibility for individual actions.
It works great. You can stiff creditors, declare bankruptcy, pollute daily and raid pensions to enrich individual executives. If it all goes wrong, like it has so often for Donald Trump, you can keep your mansions and individual fortunes.
I entered the shark-infested waters of high finance with a short sale. It was the worst ethical decision, but the finest, most profitable business moment, of my adult life. It was an informative, even transformative, experience.
(Source)
This poor guy has a very bad case of ‘middle class morality’. It's a very real phenomenon. All our lives, we are all taught (programmed?) to stay within the true and narrow groove of middle class life, pay our bills, and be on the hook should things go awry.
Not everybody holds that view, however. As he continues in the piece, the author discovers something important along the way:
I always knew business was getting over on me, but I had no idea the extent until I started looking to short-sell. I first learned all I could aboutprivatehome financing. I called up some shady investment groups around town and questioned them at length. I didn’t end up using them, but they were frank, informative and unashamed.
“Who would pay 11 percent on a home loan?” I asked.
“Rich people,” said “Bill” from the legal loan-sharking company. “The rich have terrible credit.”
Rich people = bad credit: Just let that sink in.
Bill told me in roundabout ways that rich people never pay a bill if there is any way around it. If something goes wrong in an investment or a business, they always preserve their own assets first.
Rich people have terrible credit. They know that there’s a system and it has rules. And, for them, these rules can (and should) be optimized for their own benefit. So they do anything and everything that works to their advantage.
There’s a reason and a logic to that which I can appreciate, but it makes me wonder where the rest of us obtained our deep-seeded beliefs about duty and responsibility towards debts.
Similar to rich people, banks do not have any entangling moral restrictions on their behaviors. That absence allows them to get away with extraordinary misdeeds, none more obvious and damaging than those that the Federal Reserve has perpetrated on the nation, specifically, and the world, more broadly.
To understand why, we first have to discuss something called Financial Repression.
Financial Repression
In my recent interview with Daniel Amerman, to whom I will credit much of the concise thinking and for unearthing the sources that I will weave throughout the remainder of this piece (please read his excellent article on Financial Repression here), the truly immoral intent of the Fed's policies really sank in.
In response to the Fuzzy Numbers chapter (18) of the Crash Course, reader JBarney pondered the following:
Thanks for putting this update together. I think one of the problems is there are so many moving parts, so many manipulated numbers it is difficult to get a clear picture. The way it is organized here is helpful.
However,I can't help but wonder about all of the implications of these numbers for the real economy and people's lives. One of the sections which really hits home was the impact inflation has on all of this. If these are the numbers now, what will it be like when things really start to change?
The answer is that while inflation always steals from savers, it really does its dirty work when the central bank and government conspire to create a condition of pervasive and unavoidable negative real interest rates.
This is the heart of Financial Repression: an environment in which you literally cannot save money without paying a penalty.
The main takeaway of Chapter 18 on Fuzzy Numbers is not that the government fibs a little now and then (okay,all the time) merely because that's politically expedient, but it does so in service to a larger and more pernicious aim: forcing people to accept an inflation rate that is higher than either their income growth and/or the market's safe rate of return.
As soon as you are locked into a negative interest rate regime, your capital is losing purchasing power. But simple accounting rules dictate that loss of wealth had to go somewhere. So where did it go? To somebody else.
Negative real interest rates transfer money from every saver to every over-extended borrower. This is especially true with the government (largely because of its special revolving door relationship with the Fed, which both issues the money out of thin air and then buys government debt forcing rates into negative territory).
It's really that simple. The Fed has openly and actively suppressed rates -- not to help the credit markets, as they claim, but to engineer a condition of Financial Repression. Because that's what the government needs to stealthily take your wealth to pay down the prior debts it accumulated.
Thus 'negative real rates' are the essential component of transferring wealth from the many to the few, with the 'few' being defined as the government, Wall Street, and others who exploit leverage and liabilities at sufficient scale to be on the right side of that wealth transfer.
This well-known phenomenon is a thoroughly accepted and well-described practice of governments and central banks everywhere. One of the better descriptions of it comes to us courtesy of the BIS in this working paper published in 2011.
From the abstract:
Historically, periods of high indebtedness have been associated with a rising incidence of default or restructuring of public and private debts.
A subtle type of debt restructuring takes the form of “financial repression.”
Financial repression includes directed lending to government by captive domestic audiences (such as pension funds), explicit or implicit caps on interest rates, regulation of cross-border capital movements, and (generally) a tighter connection between government and banks.
In the heavily regulated financial markets of the Bretton Woods system, several restrictions facilitated a sharp and rapid reduction in public debt/GDP ratios from the late 1940s to the 1970s.
Low nominal interest rates help reduce debt servicing costs while a high incidence of negative real interest rates liquidates or erodes the real value of government debt.
Thus, financial repression is most successful in liquidating debts when accompanied by a steady dose of inflation.
Inflation need not take market participants entirely by surprise and, in effect,it need not be very high(by historic standards).
For the advanced economies in our sample, real interest rates were negative roughly ½ of the time during 1945-1980. For the United States and the United Kingdom our estimates of the annual liquidation of debt via negative real interest rates amounted on average from 2 to 3 percent of GDP a year.
(Source)
Let me decode that.
- Step 1: Governments get into trouble by borrowing too much.
- Step 2: Rather than pay this down honestly via cutting spending (unpopular) or by defaulting (even more unpopular), the government conspires with the central bank to slowly liquidate the stack of obligations by forcing negative real interest rates on everyone.
- Step2b: Hang on one second...it wouldn’t work if people could dodge the Financial Repression, so a ring fence has to be built out of capital controls and explicit rate caps on and across the whole spectrum of interest-bearing securities.
- Step 3: Sit back and wait for everyone with savings to contribute their purchasing power to those who issued the debts, be those public or private entities.
And this is exactly what has happened. All of the talk about the Fed focusing on unemployment or inflation or whatever are red herrings. What the Fed is really trying to do is to create a set of macro conditions that will allow the federal government to slowly crawl out from under a pile of debt and entitlement obligations that it literally can not pay by honest, above board means.
I guess if we were to imagine a "Step 4" in the above process, it would be to wait for the head of the central bank to come out and deliver a speech in which she expresses a grandmotherly concern for the wealth gap that naturally results from all this, but to deflect attention away from this being a direct and understood consequence of the Fed's intentional goal of financial repression and towards some failure on the part of those who have been targeted to donate to the cause of bailing out the profligate and rewarding the borrowers.
Oh, wait. That did just happen. Here it is, Step 4, courtesy of Janet Yellen last week:
Why Fed Chair JanetYellenis “greatly” concerned about growing inequality
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen on Friday expressed deep concern over widening economic inequality in the country and called for tackling issues such as early childhood education and encouraging entrepreneurship to help narrow the gap.
[Comment:Oh boy...must contain my emotions...did she really just deflect the consequences of the Fed's policy of financial repression towards 'early childhood education? Yep. That's like a burglar saying that we need to invest in better metallurgical processes as the means of preventing doors from being kicked in so easily.]
In a speech at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Yellen said steady growth in inequality over the past several decades represents the most sustained rise since the19thcentury.Living standards for most Americans have been “stagnant,” while those at the very top have enjoyed significant wealth and income gains, she said.
[Comment: Glad the Fed finally noticed that those at the very top have been making out like bandits! This was something I said explicitly would happen as a consequence of future Fed printing back in 2008 in the Crash Course, before the printing even started. How is it that I knew that this would happen back in 2008 and the Fed is just now noticing this observationally? Is my research department better than theirs? In fact this is a very well known and easy to understand process. That the Fed is feigning ignorance speaks volumes about how ignorant they believe we all are. This is a sure sign that we are trapped in a dysfunctional relationship with an abusive partner.]
“I think it is appropriate to ask whether this trend is compatible with values rooted in our nation’s history,among them the high value Americans have traditionally placed on equality of opportunity,” Yellen said in prepared remarks.
[Comment: Once we accept that the Fed is openly and specifically creating the wealth gap as a matter of active and ongoing policy, which it is, then it's actually more appropriate to ask if the Federal Reserve is compatible with values rooted in our nation's history. The answer, obviously, is "no."]
The problem of inequality is an unusual topic for the leader of the Fed, if only because the central bank’s ability to address the issue is limited.
[Comment: Stop right there Washington Post! You've just inserted an assertion that might as well have come straight from a PR press release from the Fed. I, for one, refuse that claim and reject it completely right here and on grounds that hardly have to be substantiated, but I will just for fun. When the Fed buys 'assets' (really debt instruments) from major financial firms using freshly printed money they are,by definition, buying those assets at steadily increasing prices which means that those who hold the largest amounts of these assets get the richest. When the Fed secondarily targets the stock market as something to 'go up' and the top 5% own 82% of all stocks, then the Fed's role is anything but 'limited.' It is direct and proportional and they are 100% responsible for any and all gains that accrue to the top via the 'miracle' of asset inflation. Period. End of story. See also any of the innumerable charts plotting the S&P 500's rise along with the growth in the Fed balance sheet for further confirmation. Sorry Washington post, assertion denied!!]
Yellen listed four factors that can influence economic opportunity: investing in education for young children, making college more affordable, encouraging entrepreneurship and building inheritance.
[Comment:OMG. She just blamed the victims and did it in a very let them eat cake kind of way. How aggravating(!). According to Yellen, if people are finding themselves getting poorer what they need to do is stop scrimping on their kids, become an entrepreneur and then somehow go back in time and have rich parents. This statement of hers calls for pitchforks and torches. Literally. Without a shred of decency, she has shifted all blame from the Fed to the victims. How corrupt or morally adrift does someone have to be to blame their victims? In a criminal case this would be used as evidence of sociopathic if not psychopathic behavior and used by a prosecutor to call for a maximum sentence to prevent a dangerous individual from running loose in society. And rightly so. Such individuals are poor prospects for rehabilitation.]
Yellen did not address in her prepared text whether the Fed has contributed to inequality.
[Comment:No surprise there. Ted Bundy never acknowledged the harm he caused either.]
(Source)
At this point, based on Yellen's testimony, I think it's time to say what everybody is already thinking: the Fed Chairwoman is literally displaying psychopathic tendencies by blaming her victims. I'm serious: if the Fed were an individual, we’d have no problem identifying its behaviors in psychologically pathological terms.
I understand that some, or perhaps many, will excuse this last point by saying that the Fed cannot possibly state the truth because doing so would create loss of confidence or public anger. But I submit that the so-called "white lie" defense is utter nonsense.
A greater harm is done by lying than by telling the truth. You can get away with small lies for a while, but they never actually go away, they just sit there corrosively undermining the very foundation of trust upon which civilized society rests. Large lies just do more damage over a shorter period of time, and that’s exactly where we are today. This explains much in terms of people’s general sense of unease despite an apparently reasonable economy and awesome living standards (by any historical measure).
Here's what truth would sound like if I were to re-write Yellen's speech:
My fellow Americans. Decades of poor fiscal restraint and accommodative monetary polices have brought us to an uncomfortable juncture.
My intention today is not to cast blame – there will be plenty of time for that later – but to take stock of where we are so that we can all decide on the best course forward, openly and honestly, as should be the case in a democracy.
There are no easy choices at this point, only a rather poor range of options spanning from somewhat unpleasant to potentially catastrophic.
The heart of the matter is simply this: the US government has built up an extraordinary amount of public debt, and an even larger pile of unfunded liabilities.
There’s simply no way for those to all be paid back under current terms. And given recent trajectories in play with respect to economic growth and deficit spending patterns, those debts and liabilities are only growing larger with time.
Quite simply our choices are these:
- Pay down the debt by taking in more revenue than expenses. This is also known as austerity and given the size of the debts and other obligations, several decades of severe belt tightening would be required. This program would be extremely painful for nearly everybody and would require massive tax hikes coupled to major spending cuts.
- Default on the debts and obligations. This simply means not paying people, investors, institutions and countries what we have promised to pay. Down this path lies the potential for massive destruction of our financial and political systems, so we have chosen to not entertain this path any further than to mention it exists.
- Do nothing and wait for a fiscal and monetary accident to happen. This is a guaranteed disaster that could result in the sudden and permanent decline of opportunity in this country that would be so painful we cannot even predict the possible outcomes.
- Engineer conditions where negative real rates of interest slowly allow the government’s obligations to fall relative to inflation. Over the span of decades this is the least painful route and our country has been down this path before.
We’ve selected path #4 as the least bad option. Since 2009 our policies have been geared towards #4 and we see no alternative besides staying on that path for as long as necessary. The alternative is the literal bankruptcy of our nation and we cannot and will not allow that to happen. Not on our watch.
While path #4 is the least objectionable of them all, it comes with its own share of unfortunate consequences and injustices. At its heart, negative real interest rates are an effective tax on savers and those whose incomes fail to keep pace with the inflation we are creating as an overt act of policy. This generalized and widespread loss of purchasing power takes a little bit from everyone, rather than a lot from a few systemically important institutions such as your federal government, which spreads the pain widely, and therefore causes the least disruptions to our daily lives.
Path #4 has a name: Financial Repression. This policy combines negative real interest rates with various forms of capital controls and tax policy to assure that nobody can evade it.
Obviously this is not fair, nor is it in alignment with our national narrative of prudence and hard work being rewarded because, truth be told, it rewards the profligate and those who produce nothing of real value but can play the game of high finance well. Yet here we are without any better options before us, and so we reluctantly chose Financial Repression.
One other distasteful ‘feature’ of the program of financial repression we’ve been putting you all through is that the rich get richer. Until or unless there is a massive change to the taxation and wealth re-distribution programs of the federal government, the Federal Reserve’s program of Financial Repression will continue to deliver an ever-larger gap between the wealthy and everyone else.
Such is the nature of the compounding function combined with the inequity of who gets first access to the newly created funds we make available in order to drive the interest rate curve into negative territory.
Are there any risks to this program? Well, the largest of them really needs to be discussed. Financial Repression has worked in the past, but it has only worked because we experienced both inflation and economic growth in equal measures.
Today, for reasons that we are still studying, neither the wage growth necessary to incite the sort of inflation we need nor economic growth have arrived as we thought they would.
If economic growth does not return, then the entire program of financial repression could well fail, and fail spectacularly. Everything depends on a return of economic growth sufficient to service the vast increases in debts that will result from the program.
But if that growth does not materialize? If the world is now stuck in a ‘New Mediocre’ of low growth then one risk is the possibility of a crisis that will be rooted in a permanent loss of confidence in debts of all forms, but government debt specifically. Down that road lie currency crises, and a wide variety of related financial upheavals the final result of which is what most will experience as a massive destruction of wealth.
We are working hard to assure that these risks are well contained, but you should be aware that they exist
After all, this is all of our futures that we are experimenting with and we do not have a playbook that we can follow here in 2014. We are in wholly uncharted territory. The exact arrangement of conditions we see across the global landscape is brand new.
We’re sorry to have to be in the position of engineering Financial Repression, but we felt there were no other options before us and we hope that you agree that a slight yearly discomfort to almost everyone is preferable to a major disruption to our way of life, our political system, and the possibility of worse things.
Is this fair? No. Was it avoidable? Yes. Is there anything we can be doing differently today? Not that we are aware of. The choices are between bad, worse and utterly terrible. We're choosing the bad path, and we hope you’ll agree that this is the best we can do at this point.
But you deserve the truth because it’s already completely obvious and available for anybody with access to a computer. Since we are all in this together and we’re all being asked to sacrifice in some way, it's much better that we all agree on the treatment plan.
It’s not a perfect plan, far from it. But considering the alternatives, this is the best one on the table.
If you want to make it more fair, more equitable, and with an eye towards building to a future in which we can all share some hope, you’ll need to turn to your policy makers and ask them to work from the fiscal side to correct what they can. Without a profound realignment of priorities, we’ll just get more of the same and, truth be told, eventually more of the same turns into a fiscal and monetary disaster about which nothing can be done except absorb the pain and loss that it will bring.
Conclusion
Context is everything. The growing gap between the very wealthy and everyone else is a consequence of Fed policy.
Whether you decide to be shocked, angry, or scared by Janet Yellen’s recent speech is up to you. Personally, I'm pissed off at being lectured to that falling further behind the super wealthy is my fault for not investing enough in my kids, not being entrepreneurial enough, and not having wealthy parents.
That level of ‘blame the victim’ is psychopathic, utterly appalling, and I reject it on every level. Worse, the level of trust destruction that happens with such a tone-deaf speech stains our entire national leadership. It is the modern version of Let them eat cake.
Once an institution, be it royalty of old or the Fed today, gets so far off the rails that they cannot locate their own role in the misery they see around them, it’s a sign of a huge problem for that society.
Ms. Yellen should not be allowed by anyone to get away with such a patently and provably false set of arguments. She should have been soundly booed off the stage and the President should be asking for her resignation immediately.
But we’re so far down the rabbit hole that almost nobody blinked an eye at the speech, and thought it perfectly normal.
For you personally, you need to be aware that the debts, deficits and liabilities across the entire OECD world are continuing to grow at a far faster pace than GDP, and far faster than oil production and discoveries of low-cost oil reservoirs (those schooled in net energy understand this to be the real issue), and that the most likely outcome, someday, will be an extraordinary financial accident.
It will be called something else -- a period of wealth destruction -- but for those who can see it coming, it will actually be period of massive wealth transfer.
And we'll keep up our efforts on how to see clearly amidst the intentional obfuscation, to help those aware to the situation avoid ending up on the wrong side of that transfer.
[/rant]
»
- 45025 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Motherfuckers! My mother is 90, has $50,000 in cds and these shitheels see to it she looses money EVERT fuckin' year. Damn them to hell.
Fiat is all about stealing money from "savers".
RIPS
Saving fiat...think about it.
Every single time someone short sells a house, or a subprime borrower defaults, it is the prudent honest saver who pays. The value lost has to come from somewhere, those holding fiat are the final souce of value to pay for others mistakes/corruption.
This will end when no one is willing hold fiat any longer, and as a result there is no value to steal through false inflation anymore. It is a leason humanity has learned many _many_ times before.
Long anything not connected to fiat: gold, real assets, bitcoin, pb.
Attacking, murdering, mauling... It's all the same...
as my great grampa said before he died at 92..
'BANKERS, THOSE DIRTY ROTTEN PUKES'...
WITH A VOICE SOUNDING LIKE HE WAS CALLING THEIR MOTHERS WHORES...
this was in the early 70's
SAME AS IT EVER WAS!
If for but the briefest of moments I can derive some pleasure in stating that Ben Shalom Bernanke is a real fucking cunt.
Reply to this post with the same statement: "Ben Shalom Bernanke is a real fucking cunt" and let's see how deep the sentiment goes.
that and my GGP said..."I HOPE ALL THOSE BANKER BASTARDS DIE IN HOUSE FIRES!"
g grampa definitely had an opinion about bankers...
I TOOK OUT 100 CREDIT CARDS WITH 20k LIMITS. I'M RICH!
“On average, each household with a credit card carries more than $15,000 in credit card debt.”
http://wallstcheatsheet.com/personal-finance/7-things-the-middle-class-c...
Create the bubble with easy money. Collapse the bubble with successive int rate increases, all the borrowers go under water enslaving them to you, many default allowing you to capture those assets people have worked their lives for, for nothing more than paper. the tentacles of the fed, their franchises, the banks, get swamped with all these assets, the owner (the fed) creates an equivalent amount of money to the bubble it created in the first place and "buys" all the "bad" mbs its tentacles have now acquired, both devaluing their debt slave's savings by that amount and capturing all those yummy house assets for the feds true owners/creators. the system called federal is working perfectly for its owners, and i know none dare call it treason but someone really should. on a side note, if the fed is a private corporation, and it is, why doesn't it pay taxes? Must be a religion like apple.
Ps the tentacles (the tbtf) has used all the new money to buy the market with zero risk zirp funds, which is clearly the only thing driving the market.
You could really fuck them over, by taking a lot of unsecured debt...think credit cards...buy up a bunch of useful shit that you'll need eventually, whether it is food or generators or gasoline or guns or precious metals...and then default on the credit cards.
Sure, your credit rating will be low then (the HORROR!!!) but at least you've gotten a little of that wealth transfer for yourself.
Caveat: make sure you aren't going to need another loan for a while and that you have your other debts in order and paid off. Then have at it. Two (hundred million) can play this game.
Whoever is in charge of retail lending product design at a tier 1 US bank: If you can figure out a way how to make credit debt a syndicate revolver like that for large corporate clients, that will be the next big thing in finance and NINJA loan origination.
Be sure to call them Dudren loans, just so ZH has stuff to write about well after the new neutral becomes the "volatility games" in 6-months and everything from pricing forward capital outlays, new issue pricing and overnight spreads will soon require edo-math approximations for overnight swings in both currency and vol.
On another note, Novozymes had a valid point: since biofuels have a implied tax break and fuel requirement component for additives to fuel, as farmers shift crops from cereals to corn/sugarcane to capture these gov. mandated price floors in the US & Brazil, will deflation hit everything except food inflation, which realitive to deflations in growth and market returns, will the "oil tax credit" be wiped out due to the realative inelasticity of cereals & corn-based products and shrinking discretionary incomes ? Could this be the reason why people are not buying Coke, if Coke, realitive to household budgets is outside their purchasing power since mean wage (or EBT) can't afford a 2L with the same low-opportunity cost of a 2L in 2006?
Would love to see some work on this, likely would explain why the consumer is not "spending" anymore.
final insight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDqayC1sR7g#t=104
bcc: Super Mario.
Ditto x 10 to the 3rd
This article should be required reading in High schools and as part of the citizenship process.
Also make every MBA, Economics and Federal Judges read this and sign the bottom saying they understood it
No. It should not!
Escrava Isaura;
I can't see your position here. you are baiting people into discussion.
Clearly, If you lived in Fascist Spain, Fascist Italy, Fascist France, Fascist Germany, or studied Fascist Roman Empire... you would support education about CB, about the FED, about Wall Street, About Robber Barons, about Anti-Trust Legislation...
WTF?
Bill Still
G. Edward Griffin
Don't take the bait. It is not worth it.
Why not take option #2? Sure, we give up the "full faith and credit" that the US has earned over the past 200+ years, but we've been pissing that way for a good 30 years or so anyhow. So why not just say to everyone, "Look...we fucked up. We promised too much, took too much debt, we're reprobate assholes. But, we'll toss out the motherfuckers who started all this, and we'll get our shit together. We'll do better. You'll need to penalize us with higher interest rates. Hyperinflation is gonna suck. But, we'll be adults about all this, sell the cancer, and buy the car crash. In a few years you'll see that we've stopped spending all our fiat on hookers and blow. You'll see we're actually making mortgage payments. And you'll start to trust us again. Maybe we can be like Iceland. We'll do our damnedest."
X.inf.capt
Your grandpa had no idea what he was talking about.
Banks on the 1950's and 1960's were regulated.
No you stupit twat they were kept honest by silver coinage and brennton woods. It was a leash. They are of that leash now you apologist swine! Get your nose out of your ass!
and he would talk about j.p. morgan...
he was alive during the era of the 'robber barons'
i didnt hear much, my gramma had her hands over my ears ALOT!
silverserfer
Silver coinage and (I think you meant) The Bretton Woods system at the same paragraph?
You have NO clue, either.
I love Brenton Wood! "Oogum Boogum"!!!
Escrava Isaura;
You are a foreigner to the US. If you remind me I will try to post more links to documentaries... about the USA.
But glad you are here. Are you Portuguese or Spanish??
You read English pretty well, but there is more info. Sorry if it is mostly video. Is Text better than Video???
You probably know the same videos... so maybe it is just a discussion of what the videos mean. So easy, right?
TeethVillage88s
I think Chris Martenson does a great job education and informing all of us. However, this article that Martenson wrote misses the problem completely.
The Problem is PRIVATE-MONEY and INTEREST!
That’s why you see debt (serfdom), inflation, hyperinflation, deflation, and depression.
Let me give you the best explanation that I found.
The Difference between Debt-Free Money and Interest-Free Credit
Nature of debt money [dollar], specifically that created by hypothecation:
The hypothecation mechanism takes the borrower’s credit and assigns it to the banker. The banker then creates bank money, even though the debtor provided his asset or future labor. Banker’s risk is also low, as the debtor’s assets can be foreclosed.
This banker money splits into two parts at birth: A debt instrument is created i.e. loan documents, mortgage or some sort of debt claim. Simultaneously, the banker creates ‘his new’ money as a output of the loan. This money is called banker.
However, the instrument may travel a path different [where this fraud/loot gets in high gear]… The two entities may be disallowed from returning to each other, and hence they cannot cancel out. This is a clear danger…These two paths, and disallowing is not comprehended well by economists.
In the case of Germany circa Versailles treaty, a three way triangular flow was created. The allies had to pay back dollar denominated debts to America for war material borrowed. Germany in turn was put on the debt hook to pay dollars, gold, pounds or Francs to the Allies.
The U.S. didn’t allow much in the way of German goods importation, so Germany could not acquire dollars in trade to pay allies, who wanted dollars to pay their debts. Ultimately, Germany borrowed (more debt) from wall street to pay into the triangular flow. This triangular flow led to the hyperinflation, and ultimately a populist (Hitler) being elected.
Germany issued bonds to create credit money in Wall Street. Credit dollars found their way from Germany and ultimately to the U.S. treasury, as if they were going from one U.S. pocket to the other. However, Germany, England and France all had dollar debts that were outside of their legal system. They had difficulty acquiring the dollars to satisfy the debt instrument outside their country. This ultimately led to WW2.
It should be a cardinal rule in economics; never let your debts point outside of your legal system. How many need to die before this rule is learned? Debt money, even without usury is dangerous if not kept under control.
Lately, the U.S. has used debt instruments to create empire. A foreign country. lets say Bolivia, is hooked on dollar loans. The dollar denominated debt instruments are attached to the whole country and population. The BM [Bank Money] soon leaves the economy as much of it becomes bribe money for leaders, and the rest goes overseas to buy the power plant, or road construction machinery, etc.
The rosy economic picture of the World Bank projections never materializes, hence no dollars are available in local economy to cancel the debt instruments. Bolivia does not have enough dollars and the Bolivian currency comes under pressure.
At that time bear raiders [speculators] borrow BM money into existence and attack, causing the local money to collapse. Predators [US banks] can then enter with dollars and buy up the country, leading to Oligarchy. Or, dollar zone countries (U.S. with its military) may go in and demand their pound of flesh, i.e. resources such as oil extraction, in exchange for the debt relief.
So, usury turbocharges the debt problem, as there is not enough money to pay off the instruments. But, also there is a big problem of path, where the BM [Bank Money] is not available… it has disappeared. -- REN, at Real Currencies.com
http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/the-difference-between-debt-free-money-and-interest-free-credit/#comment-15232
from nakedcapitalism.com.aig trial, hank paulson and the bankster gang..who got the $$ and savers got the bill..sad ZH will not cover this, bought off or told you will be the next brietbart.??
"They abandoned the diversionary asset purchase plan shortly after the sweepingly broad legislation was passed. The focus on toxic mortgage paper, rather than the real intent, equity injections, was presumably to distract Congresscritters and the public from asking: “Whoa, if we are providing equity, what control and upside do we get?” This was a way to avoid inconvenient questions like “Why don’t we cap pay? Fire the top executives? Replace the board?” and other things that are normally done with failing or failed institutions.
Here is the critical part of the testimony (you can read it in context starting on p. 158 of the PDF at the end). Q is David Boies, attorney for Starr, and A. is Alvarez:
So you can see Alvarez stating, under oath, that TARP was designed from the very outset as a way to buy bank equity. Even the reference in testimony to buying debt, in context, clearly means buying debt issued by the bank, as in having Treasury lend money in some form, say by buying newly-issued bonds of the financial institution, as an alternative to an equity infusion.
You’ll notice that the concept revolved entirely around the liability side of the balance sheet. There is nary a mention of buying bank assets, even though that was the misleading label put on the bill. The bait and switch was so egregious that Paulson was offering up explanations in October, barely after the bill had finally passed. From a 2008 post, quoting a New York Times article:"
The only way around it is Gold. Which is why that is manipulated also. Can't leave the sheeple any way out now, can we?
Actually, gold is a terrible hedge, esp for the long term, because whatever capital you tie up in it produces nothing.
Far better to invest in a property that actually produces something of value.
Note that the stock market, while currently overvalued, is not 'fiat.' Yes, it is denominated in fiat, but for that very reason, it is an excellent inflation hedge. It has far outperformed gold.
It is also the single easiest way to lose what capital you may have accrued.
(for context, see the last 20 years)
Sure, your gold will not "work for you" but in a perfect world (where paper gold can be printed to oblivion) would reflect the debasing of the currency.
And in reality, it DOES. You just cannot see it yet. Of course, by the time you do see it, it will be too late.
I will be happy see how fiat valued stocks do versus gold when this blows. And with 100+ TRILLION in liabilities for the USA, it most certainly IS going to happen.
pods
And stocks leave you totally open to malfesance/hft/con jobs/Corizened/Cohened (SAC). The stock market is a con game made by those people who can invest and not worry about the fact that they loose all the money. Those people that are the middle class do not fit into that category. Look what happened in 2008...I know so many people that had to go back to work. This is a bullshit no win game. There should be rioting in the streets and shithead Yellen should be strung upside down and beaten with sticks....her, the con artists that run the system and all of the damn bankers.
And about gold, if the system fails, which it most likely will, I would rather have a Golden Eagle than a pile of rotten paper. Even property has been devalued and houses. So you put your money into a house and you loose. We are being screwed by the system and this can go only so long.
Plus 1, global insecurity. US lost it's reputation as a Safe Financial Market.
Americans are so spoiled. Asian Markets saw many financial crashes and fraud from financial managers. Some of "us" had faith in US Markets... But Asia, EU, and US Citizens are not "faithful to the US Markets", not any longer.
2008 was a historical event with many historians.
Soaring property taxes, homeowners insurance, maintenance, delinquent tenants, destructive tenants, etc has broken many a Landlord these days. And don’t tell me “you can pass it on to the renter” ‘cause in many areas you cannot.
Hyping all aspects of the RE industry has lost its shine. Many people have wised up to the “Home Ownership” illusion and realize unless they have a huge cash cushion, an ultra stable job, plus 20% down, it’s better off to stay very mobile and rent.
The Chinese who tied up all their hard-earned money in RE are about to get a painful lesson in RE history -- that ALL markets run in cycles and they're now just beginning their down cycle as their housing market begins to revert to the mean.
Handful of Dust
Because these Chinese are NOT familiar with the word: "In the US you borrow, borrow, borrow until it collapses.
So, you’re right about these Chinese are for a painful lesson.
The other painful lesson involves how incredibly illiquid RE is, especially when everyone suddenly wants to sell to stop their losses.
There's nothing like sitting on a dead peice of wood waiting for someone to come along and buy ... all while the meter keeps running [taxes, etc as you say]. I'm seeing some of that where I live; nice houses brand new but some cannot afford them and others got a sudden transfer across the country.
Son of Loki
Good observation. I would like to add this:
Because real estate does not produce anything.
Real estate became just another vehicle on this financial Ponzi scheme of ours.
Wow...... "people don't want to buy" that's right. So they pay me $400-$500 a month PROFIT to own and maintain a nice house for them to rent.
Just in a few posts I see why I don't trust much of what I read in the comments section of this site. You people DON'T KNOW WTF you are talking about. A house "produces nothing"? Really. A roof over your head is NOTHING? "Can't make money"? Not if you don't know WTF you are doing, or are trying to rent slums. Like everything, there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it and if you don't know the right way (or at least A right way) you will get killed.
Seriously, I make 15% minimum on my cash with houses. It's some work and not everyone could/should do it, but to claim it doesn't work or can't work is ludicrous. It's been working for me for years and frankly after looking at all the options there really aren't that many places I'd care to put my money. I wouldn't put a cent into the stock market, they can and will crash that baby by 40=50% sometime soon probably and you cannot get out in time. I have some PM but I'm not putting 25% of my net worth in that either.
Y'all go ahead and pontificate and meatime I will make money doing what actually works.
Slow Implostion - I agree but for those that go for it remember it is a barbell economy so higher and and lower end are where the demand is and better margin. Then shop frugally, look at forclosures, call divorce attorneys tell then you an investor. There are other tricks. Do your homework and use a business plan like any other business.
Which part of my last paragraph “Real estate became just another vehicle on this financial Ponzi scheme of ours” do you have problem understanding?
How do you earn money?
Rent (usury)
How do banks make money?
Interest (usury)
Let me give you an example about the problem with Usury:
Margrit Kennedy on interest rates [serfdom]
If Joseph the father of Jesus would have invested one penny at his birth at 5% interest, and Jesus would have returned to the same bank in 1990 - at the time of the German unification - he would have been able to buy, with the money accrued in the meantime, 134 billion balls of gold of the weight of the earth, based on the official price of gold at this time.
This shows mathematically that the continual payment of interest and compound interest over a longer period of time is practically impossible. And explains why we have economic and social breakdowns.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.converge.org.nz%2Fevcnz%2Fresources%2Fmoney.pdf&ei=YEUlVJKWN9CUsQS8qoG4Cw&usg=AFQjCNE5OvSWx2rSJhlyngc1nFrJFgV_1w&sig2=JFevCL8UtTx3uDHNC-ScJg&bvm=bv.76247554,d.cWc
TeethVillage88s
That's why Asia has lots of dollars 'saved'.... Ironic, compared to what you hear in many post here.
I gave you a point since yes, Asia knows more about Crashes and the danger of foreign investment dollars plus excessive hubris.
FYI, I think it was Chase that defaulted on their corporate building in NYC.
They apparently don't like it when their mortgage customers do the same.
A beautiful home in 1950's Detroit may be a rotting crack house in 2014. Location is everything, but locations can become subprime.
You should read FOFOA. Gold doesn't tie up capital.
stopthejunk1
You're right about gold.
You're right about "Owning something that produces value"
You're wrong about paper assets
Only until it crashes then, it is gone, gone gone.
No.
The money ("value" you say?) was already lost when the loan was given to the subprime borrower. The default or short sale only is the official realization of that folly.
I stopped reading as soon as it became clear that the author doesn't have a clue as to what selling short means.
In a real short sale you'd promise to sell a house you don't own, for occupancy by the buyer now (if you could rent the house from someone else) or at some point in the future, receiving $400k for it today.
When it came time to deliver, if you were right on the direction and the house had dropped in price you could buy it on the open market for $150k and give the keys to the original buyer, keeping the $250k difference. But if you were wrong and the price had gone up, you would still be on the hook to buy it for, say, $650k and give the keys to the buyer, losing $250k in the process.
What the guy in his example has done is not in any way a short sale. Instead, he freely entered into a contract, then stiffed his counterparty when things didn't go his way. And the author holds him up as an example in a whiny, self-justifying article about "moral duty". Please.
She shouldn't need it much longer.
Nice Fred. Hope to see ya at the 'festivities".
Did you just invite me to a party? Where and when?
Yep. Concord, California. DateTime: Your convenience. RSVP. There's an adage that says.....never fuck with an old man. If he's too old to fight you, he'll just......well, I'm sure you can figure it out.
Peace, bro.
Fair 'nuff. Back at ya.
The "truth" is just not appreciated anymore.
Neither is class, decorum or restraint, apparently.
Hey, I am 49 and fucking worn out. Can't imagine being 90. My grandparents all died in their late 80's and were ready to go, pretty much begging to go. Hey, I just had a killer martini and I guess no one has a sense of humor.
I had one, but the Fuku radiation killed it.
Fuku didn't get it all
So stick with the martinis
Spelling's not easy after a quart of VTs.
Sure it is. See that little ABC over the check mark?
she can give you 10000 a year with the govt blessings, and you can buy humana stock. and not from a broker or other manager. from the humana .com link for investors.
It is $11,000 now.
Grab every one of the elite, corrupt bastards, sandpaper their overprivileged skin off, bury em in ebola contaminated salt then throw them out in the middle of the Nevada desert along with the corrupt beady eyed weasle faced fossilized harry dickless reid. Include the liar in chief while ur at it as well as botox face, hair dyed dumb and dumber than a box of shriveled cat turds peloshit.
My mother is 85 and I had her cash in her € 95K savings
into Gold & Silver 80:20 back in 2008. She
does not trust the banksters and would see PeterSutherland
IRL happily publicly lynched !
the only sensible thing to do with savings is to put them in tangible and hopefully appreciating assets. PMs fit this description, and the convenient aspect of it is that one can buy varying amounts at any time. land is good too, but I see land as a place to put my profits once the PMs beat the crap out of fiat. it might take a while, but I have the time.
No shit.
Can't spell "Fucked" without the "Fed".
You still buying men drinks in bars?
I still do, though not as often. Times are tough and my debt to societly is probably close to being repaid by now.
Are you serving time?
By debt to society I meant guilt over government subsidized student loan I've received back in the day. Like any government grant it amounted to bureaucratic generosity at the taxpayer's expense. I later pledged to spend money on those the government robbed on my behalf. Buying strangers drinks was a part of that pledge.
Should have said yes. More street cred. :)
pods
JuliaS
Your student loan had nothing to do with taxpayer money.
Escrava Isaura
Well if you look at Federal Reserve Charts it is only $770 Billion, but if you look at Total it is over $1 Trillion.
So what is the Difference?
Student Loans
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FGCCSAQ027S $770 B Federal government; consumer credit, student loans; asset, Level
What?
TeethVillage88s
Not sure where you see $1 trillion, but it doesn't matter for this point:
Student loans are debt (back by the Fed) and not paid by government taxes because the US government has been running deficits since the 80’s. Actually, the last balanced budget was either in 1957 or 1958.
2013 Deficit: $679 billion dollars
US GDP, US growth, are mostly debt; financed by the Fed and foreigners.
And the Fed can only get away with US asset inflation.
US Private Debt (Not including financials and government) = $ 40.435.5 trillion dollars / 316 million Americans = $127 thousand for each man, woman, and child.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/Current/accessible/l1.htm
I like several structural points in your reply.
I don't agree with all your posts or points. The US government usually expresses debt in several ways (to camouflage the total liability), think 12, debt to the public, total public debt, total debt held by the public, and total US Debt.
Federal Debt: Total Public Debt
2014:Q2: 17,632,606 Millions of Dollars GFDEBTN, Updated: 2014-09-05
Total US Debt
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TCMDO ($59.398 T Exponential Growth, All Sectors; Credit Market Instruments; Liability, Level)
Foreign Owned Assets
Here is a look at Exponential Growth (2004-2008) of Foreign Owned Assets in the USA from the Department of Commerce.
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/intinv/iip_glance.htm ($26 Trillion foreign compared to $22 for US) (This is very interesting as Big Banks are growing strongly, but the number of total us banks is dramatically decreasing, like someone is gaming the system, Commercial Banks in the U.S. - FRED - St. Louis Fed)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ROWFDN... ($3.16 Foreign Investment USA)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GPDI ($2.69 Private Domestic Investment)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FDHBFIN
Federal Debt Held by Foreign & International Investors
2014:Q2: 6,013.2 Billions of Dollars (+ see more)
Quarterly, End of Period, Not Seasonally Adjusted, FDHBFIN,
I haven't updated the number for like 6 months... so foreign owned assets now being expressed as liabilities by BEA are over $28 Trillion. Sorry.
Student Loan Debt Exceeds One Trillion Dollars : NPR
www.npr.org/ 2012/ 04/ 24/ 151305380/ student-loan-debt-exceeds-one-trillion-dollars -
Apr 24, 2012 ... MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: The nation's student loan debt burden is massive. It now exceeds a trillion dollars. That's more than the nation's credit ...
Student-Loan Debt Tops $1 Trillion - WSJ
online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303812904577295930047604846 -
Mar 22, 2012 ... Total student debt outstanding appears to have surpassed $1 trillion late last year , said officials at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, ...
TeethVillage88s
Thanks for the links and your 'Quick Explanations'.
Anyway,
First: You should not agree with anyone’s points. The goal is for you to discover it yourself. At you own pace.
Second: Student loan (debt) is ‘just’ another symptom of our disease (exploiting others). And, we Americans, through our ‘corporate capitalism,’ are very good at it….. without even realizing it.
If no one in a country saves any money, then you aren't attacking anyone.
But to be fair, they should really teach kids at a young age that "saving is bad" and that "spending is good", and that buying stuff NOW is better than Saving and buying stuff later.
Stupid parents always trying to teach kids to "save their money" , really the grand conspiracy has always been that the older generation is trying to trick the younger generation to "save" so that the older generation can SPEND their savings before they ever get a chance.
Don't save, Spend.
Thats what Americans should be teaching their children, because thats how this system "works", for all intents and purposes, the people "saving money" might as well be saving toilet paper, split those plies! roll that shit up! SO GRANDPA CAN USE YOUR COTTON TOWELS TO WIPE HIS ASS.
Its not really "a dollar today is worth two tomorrow" (when you word it like that, it makes you think that receiving a dollar today is better than recieving two dollars tomorrow), which is pretty much wrong, you are actually . . . . better off receiving two dollars tomorrow if you have a choice.
Its more like, "two dollars tomorrow, is worth one today".
You are better off-loading that dollar RIGHT NOW than waiting for tomorrow to make that purchase you have been waiting for.... because chances are you wont be able to afford what you want . . . come tomorrow.
Monetary policy has destroyed the "time value of money" and has literally turned it on its head, why do you think your banks loves it when you miss a payment or pay slightly late???? because they DONT WANT YOU TO PAY EARLY.
Im just respondin to the first part..about savings.
Parents arent teachin shit. They got nothin to save after payin just to live.
I thought It was kinda clear these days.
Ot: TLDR article. Carry on.
So war you're saying is - you prefer to teach your off spring to be white cap wearing, shell suited, jobless chavs living in social housing with no education. Ummm maybe I missed something about cotton but it wasnt towels.
dont be dumb.
saving does not have to be in fiat currency.
saving is good, useful, and important, but needs to be done wisely - save in gold, silver, real estate, and productive businesses.
This financial repression satisfies two goals. One is wealth redistribution as described but the second and more important is absolute financial dependency. In a society where no one has savings to fall back on, there is only ONE source for survival in times of stress. Debt is dependency and government debt tied to the notion that a federal default would destroy our economy further reinforces this dependency. We are in a cage. Everything is about incentives. The continued punishment of savers is a disincentive to save and no damned accident and will never pay off their debts but WILL eventually eliminate all savings and ensure absolute dependency on our governing masters.
Dre4dwolf
How many martinis did you have so far?
No surprise here...
http://www.globaldeflationnews.com/the-creature-from-jekyll-island-the-e...
Savers are suffering from these low interest rates.The leading edge of the massive Boomer generation knows that every dollar spent is a dollar it cannot re-earn or replenish. The logical thing to do is hoard their wealth. Boomers have little choice but to, keep the car for an extra 50,000 miles, cancel remodeling projects, and make the grand-kids fund their own education. With less interest income they are purchasing a lot fewer electronic gadgets and spending vacations in the backyard. As a result of these low interest rates this "recovery" may be greatly delayed. More on the subject of how lower interest rates have a hidden cost in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/03/low-interest-rates-and-their-cost.html
Well said. It gives savers very few sane options, and you can't trust prices of any durable goods.
The effect on many of us, is simply to put large projects on hold..., but for how long?
And those engineering these policies are not stupid. Every consequence is planned and desired. The downward spiral we are experiencing feeds their power. They can only control us through fear. Fear of direct violence or more effective and efficiently, fear of financial failure. As our economy weakens our fear and dependency increases. We demand even more from those who are perpetrating this on us, even while knowing this but having no other choice.
I doubt it. Maybe some do. But as long as they pay cash, they have great credit with me.
I don't doubt it, but I wouldn't make that assertion based on one phone call. Many rich people are self-centered and think that they are above the rules. And they think that because they are.
To paraphrase my Grandfather: Some people you can treat like regular people- do the work, send the inovice. Most you take a check when you show up to do the work. The rich, you get cash up front. They never pay without a fight.
Or the short version: They can pinch a quarter so hard it'll spit out three dimes.
Ma always points out that people will work harder and do more stuff for the rich while getting paid less / being bargained with, as compared to what a regular person would pay.
Something about the allure of working for the rich so you can temporarily experience or at least see the riches first hand, or something like that.
It's a mentality that goes way back to the days of the king/lord's palace.
I knew a sucessful self-employed custom homebuilder in Southern Cal. who finally thought he hit the big leagues when he built 2 homes almost back to back on Lido Island in Newport Beach (John Wayne lived there), one for a doctor and the other for a 'name' lawyer.
He almost had to declare bankruptcy and between the two of them got stiffed for over $200,000 in extras and overtime because HIS lawyer wanted the deed to his house to file suit and he wasn't going to do that.
He said when he built homes for regular working Joes he completed them on time and under budget because they knew that changes were going to cost them so they thought long and hard before pricing everything out. They were happy as hell with the work and paid on time.
In 20 years since then, he built only 1 one house for a doctor again,
his son in law.
Many of the very rich are self entitled in their own minds and the working Joes simply don't matter because getting over on someone who can't afford to fight them is just a game they like to play.
That was his point in the conversation.
There's them, and you. And you don't matter. Simple as that.
Obviously all people are not the same. Many people desire and use money as a weapon, some for defense and others offense. If you have the money to hire the right lawyers the world is your oyster when it comes screwing the little guy. I work for mostly all rich to very rich people and have had very few issues over thirty years, but I know of many who have. Its especially bad in construction as wealthy people will build very expensive homes and use relatively unsophisticated subcontractors which can be manipulated, intimidated and ultimately screwed. And general contractors can be their lever as the GC's work for the client, not the subs. Many subs see the GC as their ally but they find out differently in the end. Same as it ever was big fish eating the smaller ones.
shovelhead
Building or remodeling for doctors are fine. Lawyer can be very tricky.
Sound like your son in law needed more business experience... and he did learn it the hard way.
Doubt you will get a reply or see an honest effort here. Seems like some people think in black and white cognitive distortions.
- Some people don't see a need to build coalitions or gather support, maybe the just want to enlist people like themselves, so why listen to academics or people that read?
- what use is history or philosophy to people that have all the answers?
Exactly my experience with them.
FORWARD SOVIET!
Exactly my experience with them.
FORWARD SOVIET!
" a sense of moral duty"
What morals?
Most people in the usa don't have any morals.
Those were all lost after the fraud of 911 and the war on terra...
Mom's basement dweller/occupy tyler wrote this, didn't he?
Martenson is extremely sloppy in his generalizations, even by ZH standards.
Not all rich people are evil. Not all poor people are ethical. His pieces lack organization and coherence, and all seem to be rants.
it's a fair criticism, re: his generalizing about rich people; it should be more clear that he is talking about the psychopathic elites, and not those who are "rich".
however, martenson's pieces are far more than just "rants", they are informative and educational, and lay out clearly what is going on, why the fed is pursuing the policies that it does, and why there are no good alternatives.
the referenced interview with amerman was very well done, check it out if you haven't already:
http://www.peakprosperity.com/podcast/88132/dan-amerman-will-our-private...
+1 kaiserhoff
The idea that being rich is inherently evil is just as moronic as the idea that being poor is inherently virtuous. It's just stupid.
that is not the idea, don't mis-state it.
you took the ball from kaiserhoff and ran with it, without really verifying that that's the case.
if you know chris martenson, he is absolutely *not* anti-wealth; he supports intelligent investing and wealth-preservation.
there is a real, actual problem with the ultra-wealthy not because of the level of wealth they posess, but because they use their wealth and power to dishonestly extract productivity from the rest of us, mainly through a corrupt government and captured officials.
I never mis-state anything. You'd be wise to read my posts. This article was stupid. I'm surprised that Chris Martenson put his name on it.
Use your common sense for ONE minute. Do you really think that poor people and middle class people save money and the rich do not? That is idiotic.
Read your last sentence again. Good Lord, man. The free shit army is taking way more from you than the so-called evil rich.
You are extremely sloppy in your generalizations, even by ZH standards.
Not all Martenson articles are the same. Not all parts of this article are full of sloppy generalizations. Kaiserhoff's pieces lack organization and coherence, and all seem to be rants.
End the FED!!!
When a DHS hollow point bullet goes through the window of Federal Reserve. They'll know their gig is up.
Hollow points don't go through windows.
They are made do destroy tissue and cause maximum internal damage.
I used to shoot hollow point .22's into trees and they would impact on the surface.
You have never actually fired a real gun, have you? Yes, hollow points do go thru windows. Yes, the economy does increase slightly due to said broken window.
A hollow point will go thru a window,esp a .40
.
No point in saving, so I don't. Get all cash and spend it, put a bit in a coffee can for a rainy day but that's about it for me. The banks can go fuck themselves.
By screwing savers the fed is shooting itself in the foot and dooming America to an ugly fate. Balance is important and like so many things in life when it comes to economic policy it is very important to balance the markets reward when it comes to savings and debt. Savings plays an important role in the economy and has been shortchanged, this will come back to haunt us.
The idea of being frugal and living within our means has not been given due credit, living by increasing debt is far too acceptable. When we find it necessary to discuss savings we are back to basics and it is a sign we have strayed far off course in our economic policy. More below on the important role savings plays in a real economy.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2014/09/savings-and-role-it-plays-in-econ...
One of those lost functions is investing rather than speculation.
I even feel silly writing investing.
The word has as much relevance today as a hand cranked phone.
Spent 30+ years being frugal and living within my means, then the Ex. Wife took half of it, then Washington and Wall Street the rest - along with my faith and trust in the nation and society.
There's relief in letting go.
Yellen is a thief.
"For the bottom 99%, it’s like playing with a stricter set of rules than your opponent: you’re not allowed to hit below the belt, and they’ve brought a baseball bat into the ring."
That in a nutshell is what the problem is, we are playing by a different set of rules.
I notice this in protests as well. The cops are allowed to play by different rules and the protesters allow it. If the thugs can beat you, mace you, taze you and kidnap you.....you should do the same back !!
We are stuck playing a game of "Heads they win, tails you lose."
This will continue until you end the Fed.
Funny how some people always seem to be able to come out on top.
Chapter 18, worldwide debt orgy sums it up perfectly.
The fucking criminal Tribe, changed the rules in the middle of the game, moved the goalposts and then spiked the Golden Goose and broke his fucking neck. I'm taking names and waiting ...You should be too.
1.7% for COLA !!!! Who are these motherfuckers trying to kid ????
Who gets COLA?!!!
Vetrans Affairs Beneficiaries...
Social Security Recipients...
The stipends are increased annually with a Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA)
It is based on Inflation. Obviously this is less than the Inflation Rate of true essentials (Food, Rent...Energy.) which are not included in the calculations of the Inflation Rate.
But we all know that Grandma and that Maimed Veteran down the road have so much more expendable cash over the sustinance levels that they are going out of their way to buy the newest iPhone, iPad, Computers, and other non essential items.
Besides...they can lose some weight. Maybe they need to go without heating or air conditioning...like the rest of us. And who needs a house or an apartment anyway? Think of the freedom that the streets have to offer.
1.7? Decimal point in wrong place
No. Those benefits must be decresed somehow. This how you can cut it by 10% without calling it a cut. This has been going on for years.
The Nation cannot afford to take care of the soldiers that it sent overseas to get maimed by bullets, mines and shells.
Join me in calling for the military to make drone strikes on the FED, a "domestic enemy".
Joined and sign my name as big as John Hancock.
and what name would that be?
please provide name and address so that your local friendly NSA reeducation officer can quickly come and assist you.
Thomas O'Brien
12223B Woodside Avenue
Lakeside, CA USA
Looking forward to it.
What? Nobody else with any balls?
Too fearful of losing something?
Rather keep your chains?
neg real rates are a function of Treasury rates AND national budget deficits/borrowing. There must be both.
We need a class action lawsuit against the Federal Reserve Bank. It is a private company and guilty of harming the entire population. I am an engineer and am calling out to any lawyers that know how to go about this. I will help fund it. Anyone else with me?
Where’ve you been? It’s Ron Paul’s baby – “Audit the FED”. Send cash to him….
Or, are you trying to create another warm, profitable pocket of profit like he did? Good show!
no sure if this is info. was s/?
5th Circuit Court of Appeals-if you get that far the suit will be dismissed.If that don't work.SCOTUS will not hear the case.Lawyers have been trying-1000's of suits against ALL of it have been dismissed for failure at show cause or failure to establish standing.The suits must continue.regardless.
Plus one, it is more than I know.
I guess I should do a search. Would think we would see more courts than just the 5th Circuit, but maybe that is New York?
5th Circuit Court of Appeals-if you get that far the suit will be dismissed.If that don't work.SCOTUS will not hear the case.Lawyers have been trying-1000's of suits against ALL of it have been dismissed for failure at show cause or failure to establish standing.The suits must continue.regardless.
Even if the government choses number 4 they *still* have to stop overspending which they are not doing. The path they are on will lead to true hyperinflation which gives them the worst of both worlds - riots everywhere and worthless currency.
and that's why it's so hard to proceed with a class action lawsuit in the ussa:
americans have no class!
I'd rather lack class than lack my testicles.
For those choosing to be a gelding...well...that is up to them.
"I entered the shark-infested waters of high finance with a short sale. It was the worst ethical decision, but the finest, most profitable business moment, of my adult life. It was an informative, even transformative, experience."
First we are taught and then we are tested. I do not agree with the statement: "When in Sodom, do as the Sodomites do".
In the very big scheme of things monetary wealth (much less fiat wealth) means very little... unless one wants to live forever in perpetual childhood.
Anybody who saves in fiat is deservedly copping the FED's treatment.
When they did it to everyone in the very beginning it could be considered a necessity to get the wheels of the economy going.
When they continued it, it was considered theft.
But after all this time, the fact that it still goes on thanks to compliant savers, then it can only be considered willing enslavement.
Whoa, brutal. I read the article. I noticed a straw man tucked here and there.
The topic is complicated for sure.
What’s the solution? The article opens with, ‘middle class morality’.
In simplest terms, non-producers outnumber producers.
We need to implement euthanasia programs right away. Euthanizing the non-producers won’t pass ‘middle class morality’.
Once the non-producers are shrugged from our backs, we’ll all be better off.
doesn't need to be euthanasia.
just stop feeding the blood-suckers...when that happens, they will be forced to become producers, or to die off; either choice they make is ok by me.
The 'blood suckers' as in the bankers? Wall street? All the state and federal bureaucrats? Then, yes. I agree.
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1994-10-13/
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2010-12-28/
Gold... ummm..... bitchez...