This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
What Mitt Romney Also Said: A Glimpse Of The Endgame?
By now everyone has heard the infamous Mitt Romney speech discussing the "47%" if primarily in the context of how this impacts his political chances, and how it is possible that a president "of the people" can really be a president "of the 53%." Alas, there has been very little discussion of the actual underlying facts behind this statement, which ironically underestimates the sad reality of America's transition to a welfare state. Recall Art Cashin's math from a month ago that when one adds the 107 million Americans already receiving some form of means-tested government welfare, to the 46 million seniors collecting Medicare and 22 million government employees at the federal, state and local level, and "suddenly, over 165 million people, a clear majority of the 308 million Americans counted by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2010, are at least partially dependents of the state."
Yes, Romney demonstrated potentially terminal lack of tact and contextual comprehension with his statement, and most certainly did alienate a substantial chunk of voters (most of whom would not have voted for him in the first place) but the math is there. The same math that inevitably fails when one attempts to reconcile how the $100+ trillion in underfunded US welfare liabilities will someday be funded. Yet the above is for political pundits to debate, if not resolve. Because there is no resolution. What we did want to bring attention to, is something else that Mitt Romney said, which has received no prominence in the mainstream media from either side. The import of the Romney statement is critical as it reveals just what the endgame may well looks like.
In response to an audience question:
Romney: [The] former head of Goldman Sachs, John Whitehead, was also the former head of the New York Federal Reserve. And I met with him, and he said as soon as the Fed stops buying all the debt that we're issuing—which they've been doing, the Fed's buying like three-quarters of the debt that America issues. He said, once that's over, he said we're going to have a failed Treasury auction, interest rates are going to have to go up. We're living in this borrowed fantasy world, where the government keeps on borrowing money. You know, we borrow this extra trillion a year, we wonder who's loaning us the trillion? The Chinese aren't loaning us anymore. The Russians aren't loaning it to us anymore. So who's giving us the trillion? And the answer is we're just making it up. The Federal Reserve is just taking it and saying, "Here, we're giving it." It's just made up money, and this does not augur well for our economic future. You know, some of these things are complex enough it's not easy for people to understand, but your point of saying, bankruptcy usually concentrates the mind.
Source: Mother Jones
And that is how the Fed effectively took over control of the United States, as without it, it is game over. This is also why the ongoing presidential election is a farce, and has absolutely no bearing or significance for the future of the US, whose true ruler does not reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but instead holds America hostage in a powerful Stockholm Syndrome grip from the deep recesses of the Marriner Eccles building located, paradoxically, on Constitution Avenue.
Don't worry though: like any "true democracy", the real "leader" of the nation will never be eligible for popular vote. Ever.
P.S. It appears that Paul Krugman has promptly taken offense to the realization that Bernanke is "monetizing 75% of all debt." He has even promptly penned an article "Misinformed Monetary Mitt" proving the Noble prize-winning economist really has little understanding of the dynamics of debt monetization.
Here is the reality: under ZIRP, all bonds with a maturity inside the guaranteed 0% envelope are essentially cash equivalents. This means all bonds 3 years and less, which as is to be expected for riskless paper, have a coupon of roughly 0% (except Fed counterparty risk of course, because the only reason they should trade above 0% is if the Fed loses control of inflation and ends ZIRP prematurely before its announced end date now sometime in 2015). When the Treasury issues them the buyers takes on ZERO risk, thanks to ZIRP. This is also the reason why the Fed sells $45 billion in short-end paper each month, as part of Twist sterilization. In essence the only debt issuance that matters for the US Treasury is that of longer-dated issuance. This amounts to roughly $45 billion per month in the 10-30 year window, and is virtually all the debt that the Fed monetizes on the long-end as part of Twist. This is also knows as Flow as we have explained repeatedly, but we don't except someone still stuck teaching 1980s economics to understand this (Goldman explained this here)
But this is not news: back in February we noted that Under Twist the fed has monetized 91% of all LT gross issuance.
Between Twist 1 and 2, the Treasury has not auctioned off one dollar of gross LT debt to the private market, as evidenced by the total inventory of 10-30 year paper which has remained fixed at $650 billion. It is this liquidity limitation that forced Bernanke to monetize not more TSYs, but to commence buying Mortgage Backed debt.
The fact that Krugman does not get this simplest fact about the nuances in the Fed's monetization activities demonstrates just how dangerous it is to assume that just because someone has been awarded a Nobel, they automatically are an expert in something, anything, especially involving numbers.
And because we enjoy spreading knowledge, and for the benefit of even the most math-challenged Economics professors, here again is a simple clip showing how Romney is actually lowballing the real number of relevant gross issuance, which is nearly all in the critical 10-30 year ballpark, and where the Fed will soon be virtually the sole marginal market player.
»
- 81351 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
The biggest deficit the USA and the rest of the world are facing is the mental deficit which has ordinary people as well as bankers screaming for more from the government's poison chalice.
We are all intellectual and spiritual pygmies and when the fat lady screams we will deserve everything that follows.
We fucked with the commonsense of the market for too long and fell for the lie that fiat toilet paper could clean up the shit that excessive debtand excessive spending created.
If by "fooked" you mean we will experience civil unrest/war, mass starvation, famine, diease, pestilence and a zombie apocolypse then yes, were indeed "fooked"
Just as long as all the Internet porn sites work, there will be peace in our time.
Revolt or cop it sweet.
Upswaller
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWRxPDhd3d0
Long, guns and ammo.
Long guns, and ammo
Give Mitt a Chance.
"We're Fooked!" -Upswaller
I recently arrived at this conclusion after years of furious research and changed my avatar to mark the occasion. It's great isn't it?
Ladies and gentlmen, please put your head between your knees and place your hands over head.......................
Indeed...the perversion of the bond market dwarfs the perversion of the equity market...and has far more serious consequences.
An astute observation, Cdad.
And the perversions of Wall Street, the FED, the government and the invisible money sitting in havens, are even greater still.
ah yes, but a bet on equities is a bet on more perversion, and we can alway count on more perversion, the ponzi will continue, we have 1.2 billion chinese to sign up for SS, then the rest of Asia, and selling SS & medicare to Africans is easier than selling pork to congress.
You neglect the perversion of the educational system.
Depressing. And how few people even realize this?
there's a reason so few know this...
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
Henry Ford
Missiondweller wrote..."Depressing. And how few people even realize this?"
+1
What's really depressing is that not only so few realize this, I'd bet the vast majority of them couldn't read this article and understand it.
If that sounds egotistical on my part, so be it.
Mitt has this annoying habit of apologizing every time he gets any criticism from the liberal-statist press. Generally, that criticism comes any time he sounds like a conservative.
Mitt! Get some guts and just say what you believe! I am a libertarian but I even respect Bernie Sanders for at least being an honest socialist!
"liberal-statist press"
Jaysus, are you a moron.
With 5 interlocking corporations controlling the bulk of the American Corporate non-media, and only two actual progressive media outlets out there:
Bonnie Faulkner's Guns and Butter (KPFA, Berkeley),
and, tuckradio.org
No doubt you're the only idiot who believed the oil people at Pew Research Center and their claim for America's "liberal media"?
They are a "progressive-statist" press sarge. When is the last time they critized O'Barry or bore into any of the inane things he says or more importantly...the actions he's actually taken against us?
I actually agree with you IN EFFECT on this--overall, the press has been VERY kind to Obama. And he certainly doesn't deserve it.
But in my view, they were pretty kind to Dubya before him, too. There was a very loud anti-Dubya contingent which shut up the minute Obama took office, and that demonstrates a lot of hypocrisy, but there's an equally loud (perhaps a bit smaller, hard to say) anti-Obama faction today as well. Just as the anti-Bush folks didn't have the reins of the MAJOR media, the anti-Obama folks are equally shut out of most mainstream publication.
And for certain, the mainstream ain't "progressive." It's all about keeping the game going exactly as it is. That's STASIS, not progress.
The 4th estate wields tremendous political and social power and makes a ton of money.
Why would they ever want ANYTHING to change?
I believe you're touching on something here, which I agree with.
When you say Fourth Estate, few recognize it (Constitutionally) for what it is/was, having grown to assume as much power as it presumes to itself. It may have been true in the past for Columbia journalism grads etc. but not anymore.
Its my opinion that they are playing the run out the clock pension/salary game without a starting lineup. Much like everywhere else aside from media. They pretend to speak intelligently, pointing out insignificant facts around the edges. I have as much disdain for a Peggy Noonan/George Will with her/his sniffing high brow presence as I do Diane Sawyer/George Stephanopoulos obvious feigned approach.
Whatever happened to PJ O'Roarke and why is he so marginalized?...aaah yes, stasis...don't push too much...lol.
Yep. One way or the other, *most* advertisers don't want to be the facing page to an article that just pissed 40 million people off.
Sarge and Blunder--
Good grief, open your eyes. The MAINSTREAM MEDIA is Obama's lapdog. CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, the NYT, the WAPO, and most other major media outlets refuse to even consider the possibility that even one Obama policy, decision, or action is subject to HONEST criticism. Occasionally, one such outlet may pretend to allow criticism, but the outlet immediately attacks the critic and resumes the "all is well in Obamaland" mantra. The reporters have "thrills running up their legs" and other such weird thrills at the very mention of Obama's name. The MSM helped create the Obama Cult of Personality, is 100% committed to it, and, being fully invested, will only continue to promote it.
FOX News appears to try to offset the MSM, but FOX is hopelessly NEO in its politics and woefully weak in its influence. The alternative media--talk radio and rational internet sites--does what it can, but it has an incredibly limited audience and merely preaches to a very small choir.
With respect to Bush, anyone who believes that the MSM treated Bush in any way well or respectfully, ever, is insane. From the moment the Supreme Court turned down Al Gore's sad and pathetic challenge to the election results, the MSM was in full-on attack mode. All sense of propriety went out the window. Some would say it began with the impeachment of Clinton, as the MSM resented the fact that the Republicans had gained enough power to impeach one of the MSM's stars. In any case, the MSM hated, and still hate, WBush. It is the MSM that allows the tired Obama lie about "it's Bush's fault" to continue to support Obama's own ineptitude. WBush may turn out to be the only American President who, when he is buried, is still hung in effigy in the MSM. Don't be ridiculous--the MSM lived to destroy Bush, and they still use their hatred and even their old lies to fight Romney as if he were Bush.
The MSM is STATIST, PROGRESSIVE, LEFTIST, and SOCIALIST. It is all of those things, sometimes all at once. It promotes the State, and the larger and more in control of our lives, the better. It is "progressive" because it supports 100% the ideas and agendas of the self-styled "Progressives." It is Leftist because it embrances and promotes every Leftist cause, from ridiculous measures like Dodd-Frank and Obamacare to free breakfasts, lunches, and daycare for its constituents. And it is Socialist because it promotes a Socialist agenda for America, and has for decades. The MSM will not be satisfied until it has won a Soviet style government with the MSM as the Pravda and Izvestia.
I personally cannot stand what WBush did to this country. I resent him and his absurd Presidency. Frankly, I resent all of them and their absurd Presidencies, from at least Lincoln forward, and maybe from Adams forward. But when I look at the pure, unadulterated evil perpetrated by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Holder, Napalatano, Clinton, Geithner, and his other cronies, and I watch the little, pissy MSM lapdog lick their boots then crawl up into their laps as they sit on their thrones, I want to be sick.
You can hate WBush. There are lots of reasons to do so. And you can, in a stretch, say that Obama and Bush are both part of the same "stasis." But please recognize that Obama has done more within what you want to call stasis to damage our chances of succeeding than Bush ever did--than he could even have imagined. And please recognize the evil that is the primary voice for this horror--the MSM. It is Obama's VOICE.
Standing in partisan-land gives a far different perspective, that's all.
I'm afraid the moron/idiot is you. Are you really so clueless that you can't even grasp the fact that corporations can push an agenda of liberal statism? Are you this ignorant on all topics or just this one?
You probably watch MSNBC and think Pravda was a beacon of truth, right? Seriously, get a grip. What percentage of the Press do you think is democrat versus voting Republican?
So start a media company. If there is a market, you will succeed. Don't have enough funds? Sell yourself.
Arabs thought the US media was too Israeli-centric, so they started al Jazeera. Russians wanted some polite post-Cold War fun taking digs at the US, so they started RT. Blacks said Hollywood didn't write good parts for them so black writers finally started writing. Asians said the same, so Asians finally started writing. An ex and banned Wall Street type wanted to expose the inner machinations of the Street and the banker class, so he started Zerohedge.
Defeated before you start? It's easy being a victim, not so easy to overcome obstacles. Complaining gets old.
Lady Gaga's got bigger balls than Mittens
But, I'd wager that she also has better underwear.
I'd wager hers hasn't been bought from the proper holy sources and blessed by the Moron Bishop.
Meat balls.
Agreed. She sings better, too. Sometimes i think Romney thinks he is going to get elected because he's such a nice guy and looks good on TV.
If he gets elected I think it will be more because Obama and the economy are so bad that many will hold their nose and vote for him...not because he stands for anything particularly inspiring.
As a middle class guy(not living in US mind you) I 100% support what Mitt said about the 47% I don't even think it's offensive or un-tastefull to state a mathematical fact
if you come to Europe you'll find countries where anywhere from 50-90% are in some way dependent on the government, and I can tell you this - it absolutely sucks to be a taxpayer here
it starts with the government giving you an option(to help) than it ends with it forcing you under penalty of prison accept it's help
I think Mitt lost any chance he had of getting elected it's 4 years of Obummer more, prepare accordingly
Azinmouth says,
" I 100% support what Mitt said about the 47% I don't even think it's offensive or un-tastefull to state a mathematical fact"
Oh wow, guess you missed out on arithmetic when you were in school, huh, dood?
You may wish to read up on taxes, the American tax base, and some stats sometime, sonny.
Mitt the Twitt got even that simple stuff wrong, but since you agree with him, why not contact him and urge him to pay his taxes.
Anne Romney says: Mitt doesn't need the job (the presidency).
The job certainly doesn't need Mitt.....
"...urge him to pay his taxes."
Now Harry...you're gonna have to prove he hasn't. The IRS says he has or they would be leaking to Diane Sawyer (who instead of saying..."öh, look they're recycling" staring at empty water bottles in a can in Japan...would be saying, oh look, Mitt is a tax cheat, Timmy just faxed this over...lol.
Anne Romney is a fckn cu.t
lol, you have no idea about, well, anything.
but enjo yyou rfant ansieZ
-nED
Ann Romney is a cult?
We need to get Geraldo on that.
Moronism is a cult.
Presented as a public service for what it's worth:
http://mormoncult.org/
Doom:
Well, then, I'm a'guessin' who's side you b on, oh, no, therez no guessing involved.
Almost any of the sergeants who I've had the honor to work with have had integrity and strength to their oaths and their men (and women).
They didn't "need" the job, otoh, the "job" certainly needed them, with their integrity.
and the kids certainly needed them
gotcha'
- Ned
Beware clever-stroke lies:
He refers only to Federal Income taxes on individuals, not corporations.
Of the so-called 47%, many defer taxes by contribs to IRAs, etc, thus owe the taxes later.
Also, those who get Earned Income Credit apply that credit directly to taxes due and sometimes there is no tax balance due.
Note: Married couple w/o child dependants can earn about 30,000 without paying taxes until later [IRA withdrawals,etc].
Mitt is shouting "47% !" in a movie theater.
Please. The point is that way too many Americans are collecting taxpayer money simply because it is a convenient way for the politicians to buy their votes. The Democrats have secured, through such handouts, something close to, or exceeding, 50% of the electorate. The Republicans have not been as successful, as they relied not on buying votes through direct payoffs to individuals, but on buying votes of individuals indirectly through corporations. The Republicans appear to have lost. If reelected, Obama, with a willing Republican House, will secure the future of the Democrat Party in power by buying 20M hispanic votes by making 20M hispanics legal.
Short history of the U.S.
--Founded on mostly great ideas, but upon a Constitution whose language permitted abuse by Statists.
--Change inalterably by Lincoln, whose war established, once and for all, that the Central Govt was the SOLE real power.
--Fell onto a path to doom under Wilson, the Fed, WWI, and globalism.
--Fell further on that path when FDR seized nearly total power and promoted his Socialist vision, nearly securing it forever.
--Statist future, and Democrat power, locked in with LBJ's immigration "reform," which guaranteed a population designed to hold out hands for the "gifts of government."
--Became the all-powerful State under Obama, whose Obamacare established, definitively, that the State and taxation (thanks Chief Justice Roberts) know NO bounds.
This is simply the reality. Can a Romney Presidency somehow take us off of the path to doom? Almost certainly not. But at least we won't have to live under the worst our nation has seen in at least 70 years.
In your history, you forgot the coup by The Oligarchy of Nov. 1963, Vietnam, the huge budget deficits and military spending programs of the 1980-1992 period that led to America's current bankruptcy and the 9/11 False Flag Adventure.
At least Romney ADMITS this. You'll never hear Obama admits this in public.
/even if he wanted to, saying so would probably start the end game right then and there
Drudge has this video as his top headline last night. It's from a speech Obama gave in 1998, but was just uploaded to Youtube yesterday.
Obama: "I Actually Believe In Redistribution"
QE is also redistribution of wealth. It's just bottom up redistribution.
The Welfare programs Mitt talks about are just a small give back to keep the poor in line. The 52% who pay taxes and are not in the top 1 % are the true victims......
Why is the middle class still falling victim to this plutocratic-marxistic lie?
QE is a redistribution of wealth from the WORKING PEOPLE to the parasites at the bottom and at the top!
Those who live from welfare and social security do NOT PAY the system.
Please, ahrd working middle class people, when will you realize, that you are robbed by BOTH sides?
Have you ever read any Sam Francis or CHRONICLES magazine?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_T._Francis
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/
Francis, now deceased, spent much of the last ten years of his life discussing the Middle American Revolution that must come if there is ever going to be hope for a restoration of the United States of America, as it was meant to be.
he has done an excellent job redistributing the country's money to tptb......that is his job...everything else is bread and circuses................
I assume you are talking about the current occupant of the White House, who has presided over the largest theft of wealth in the Nation's history, all for the benefit of the Banks?
Mittens shit-lipped about auditing the Fed for a few minutes. Obviously fishing for Ron Paul "write-in" voters like me.
That may be a bit like hoping to do ones' own autopsy, I suppose.
Mitt Romney: It's time to audit the Federal Reserve
Ha ha. Sure the Fed can audit itself!
Sorry Mittens, I'm still writing in Ron Paul because you are full of shit.
dude, u b talkin' to u-sef. I'm here to hep ya, I say.
and no, you say you are writing in RP, and please go ahead. But it has nothing to do with any quality that Mitt has or perceives to have.
Depending on the state where you live (if you are indeed a US voter) your vote will be acknowledged with either a) yawn, or b) thoughts of "useful idiot" from the O-Camp.
You might be well served to look up the provenance of the history and various uses of the term "useful idiot".
Then you could look into a mirror and, as RP always says, find the reality.
Or not.
- Ned
It's my fake vote and I'll pretend it counts any way I like thank you very much.
Ron Paul just pooped his diapers...
Voting in Nov has meaning other than Pres puppets.
One good example is where I currently have residence status.
Two VERY important issues up for vote,
one concerns kicking Monsanto in the teeth, the other with slapping down disco-era governors tax increase.
Defeating both would be a step in the right direction
(and hey, long as I'm there in the booth .... might as well write in Ron Paul for good measure).
Give Gary Johnson a try. It could make you feel better about casting that useless vote!
The GOP deserves to lose. It cheated, maligned, ridiculed and marginalized the one candidate it had who was popular and who could have beaten Obama. Romney or the GOP could have insisted on decent treatment for Paul at the convention or even made some kind of deal that would have had Paul as VP or SecTreas or something. However, any of those courses of action would have required deviation from the state capitalist neocon screed that is the GOP platform, so no dice.
Not a bad idea.
I held my nose and voted for McCain at the last fake election.
John McCain Sells out on Audit the Fed
John McCain & Lindsey Graham Justifying The NDAA Bill
Heck, I've been a "useful idiot" for a while and even voted for Perot and his "giant sucking sound".
In hindsight...NAFTA/GATT has been a huge success. pfffft
All politicians know this. None dare admit it in public, with the exception of Ron Paul.
And just to be clear...Romney did NOT admit this "in public". Do you really think he would have said that had he known there was a camera rolling and the footage would go public?? Please....
There's always cameras . Sarah Palin is the other politician (Paul first) who keeps talking about this and the disaster of crony capitalism. The media won't go near it; now it's Gotcha, Mitt, but he can run with it and force the discussion. Does he have the guts?
I say lets light this puppy and the fuse is tax credits.
No susidies for corporations, Palin again. No wonder the GOP establishment hates her and the Tea Party.
Correct, nothing should be subsidized.
This is the way it works...greenies loves dem some a dat ethanol. But you can't squeeze an ear of corn into a gas tank, it don't work like that. Greenies (and now big agri-biz "farmers") say...ooohh uncle sweetness pass a law so there is a market.
Enter stage left...pandering imbeciles needing votes to retain salary & pensions, proclaiming...Let It Be Done!
Enter stage right the refiners...who state quite practically (after consulting with their engineers & accountants) that yes, we're kinda sorta set up to refine crude oil to produce gasoline, we will have to re-tool which will be a major cost & a drag on our profit and efficiency.
Re-enter the pandering know-it-alls who have now committed to "green energy" and helping the blood on the scarecrow agri-biz farmer.
We proclaim ALL parties producing will be subsidized and ALL consumers will subsidize them...Let It Be Done!
Brilliant...the greenies go batshit crazy because big oil is subsidized just like their beloved ethanol and the consumer pays the price of ALL the subsidies...AS ALWAYS.
Its time for the consumer to go batshit crazy.
Well past time for that my friend. But we have to lose our shit all at once and hang together, or we'll surely hang separately, or something. Where have I heard that before??
It was Lincoln I believe. I still think we're gonna be ok as they are pretty much fucked and they know it.
But hey, if we all hang together, we'll still be in the best of company ;-)
I thought it was Franklin.
Still valid and relevant. Funny how wisdom is like that.
How is that Obama has not come to grips with this reality? Just yesterday http://lonelyconservative.com/2012/09/obama-to-letterman-national-debt-not-a-concern-in-short-term/
I personally have come to the conclusion that his plan is to overload the system with debt. This is right out of the radicals playbook. Destroy the currency. He said he was going to be transformative and this would be all that and more. Clearly we are at a crossroads in this country.
Google Cloward-Piven sometime.
Yep.
Didn't he think he was saying this in private to his donors? Is that an admission, after he was caught?
... er ... this is McNews data and stories.
- Ned
I thought that you can only admit that, before you get into the White House.
After that you are effectively signing over the ownership rights of yourself, to the machine, before becoming their official window dressing.
Why on earth does he sound like someone who heard that for the first time in his life? Shouldn't he have known that a long time ago?
And I still think Mitt had a chance - if he simply had kept his mouth shut the whole time.
@lol----so he admits this.....means not a thing...more talk...romney has openly vowed manlove for bernanke time and time again........romneys masters are the same neocon/banking puppteers that have given us present day america......
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?id=N00000286
............romney is pining for ron paul voters to return to the fray, nothing more..........obamney is a shill for the globalist, stateless bankers who have no loyalty to any ideal except moneyyyyyy and power over the entire populace.......
watch this, think for a sec, and hopefully you wake up......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FLrK9NmfM4
You're on a roll kito. Interesting to see who's backing RP.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00005906
It is interesting that the top donors are military. It is disappointing that the total contributions are less then 1 million. With over 2 million soldiers in all branches, I would have thought it would be a much higher donation number then under $200,000.
And I know money talks but what is RP doing taking donations from JP Morgan or Wachovia? Principle counts and that is what attracted many to RP. Someone who would stand on principle.
members of the military are tired of fighting bullshit wars................
that they volunteered to fight, and are paid to fight, and hope to get benefits from taxpayers to fight.
sorry, I understand this is a terribly unpopular stance, but please let me know if it's not truth.
It is the the truth...sorta, I think it still requires around three in support for every one actually doing the fighting...however...
...Sandra Fluke (or her parents)" volunteered" to pay a tuition at Georgetown Law of fifty thousand dollars per year, yet, she doesn't want to pay (or any others to pay) a measly ten dollars a month for birth control pills to fight off the consequences of "öther" her other voluntary actions...she and O'Barry want the taxpayer to pay for it.
I know this is an unpopular stance with you...but it is the truth.
The prospect of her being forever childless is tempting to me...but I still don't want to be forced to pay for it.
How should insurers decide which prescription drugs they will cover and which they won't cover in your opinion?
No diversions from the topic introduced by Cat. This sub thread is about voluntary individual actions & those consequences vs involunatry government mandates with applied force...and goes much much deeper than that.
You and I can get into what we think individual businesses (insurers) will do with the opportunities presented to them by the free market for hair transplants and boob jobs...later.
You don't have to run off. I don't expect a good argument and I'm not gonna fight over it, I'm just trying to see if there's any issue there AT ALL. It doesn't seem there is.
I get that people like to bash Fluke, but what's the *flipside* that she's so obviously wrong about? Isn't that a simple question given how incredibly wrong she was?
there's some backstory re: Ron Paul & the Sanctity of Life proposed constitutional amendment, which I called into libertarian question earlier in the year. . .
grudge match attempts have cropped up ever since.
The flip side is just below...scroll down...I don't do other peoples homework...get your own conclusions.
BC pills were $10 per mo in the 70's. Not now. And yes, if she can pay $50K per yr in tuition, she can afford BC pills.
Babies are cheaper right?
Then we have coverage on the old boner pills.
That's the yin & the yang of it. Cause & effect. How many against BC & the blue diamonds are celibate?
If men could be knocked up, birth control would never have become an issue.
yes indeed, "Sandra Fluke" is an equivalent argument to a voluntary military that expects multiple types of benefits over many, many years for their service to. . . erm. . . wut. . .huh. . .
you're transparent, and boring.
Who is Adam Mutterperl and who paid for his trip to europe with his girlfriend Sandra Fluke who wants ME to pay for HER birth control pills for HIM spreading her legs?
Better question, what does Adam's dad do for a living and what is his past?
Now, go be bored.
So it's a personal thing. That's honest.
I think he's sweet on her and is jealous that somebody else tapped it.
How does an anecdote about one person compare to an entire profession/industry? You are terrible on lots of things. Here's one more.
Forward!!!...let the looting of the public continue...lol...she goes to Georgetown, pays 50 grand a year to do so, takes vacations to Barcelona and Pompei and dates the son of...drum roll please and OWS participants take a valium...A ONE PERCENTER.
(Audible gasp)
She's not fucking anyone for her country (she and others like her) are trying to fuck over an already broke country...with the larger meme of a womans right to choose being used as a ring in your nose with a rope tied to it and O'Barry (and the left) leading you around.
Next you'll no doubt want us to subsidize her travel expenses to europe under the slogan...Join the parasites and see the world!!!
What a bunch of fucking hypocrites...rant & rave about subsidizing banks and how the rich must pay their fair share and quit stealing "from society" all day long then turn and defend it and them.
Simply amazing.
Asking for your health insurer to cover birth-control pills isn't "looting" anything. Your emotions have once again overwhelmed your thought-muscles.
We're talking about government FORCING religious universities and hospitals to cover birth control pills and abortifacients...haven't you been keeping up with O'Barry's Executive Orders?...he thinks he's a friggin dictator.
The result? They will drop insurance coverage for their employees rather than accept a government mandate and compromise on their principles and beliefs.
And how is it not looting when O'Barry announces its "free"? Your thinking these corporations make pills, package them up and pass them out for free?...lol...sure, and I got a bridge to sell.
Maybe you should use your thought muscle rather than your jaw muscle.
We're talking about government FORCING religious universities and hospitals to cover birth control pills and abortifacients...
No, actually, but I understand why you'd want to phrase it that way.
We're talking about health-insurance requirements that would apply to ALL BUSINESSES, and if those businesses happened to be owned by religious organizations, it would be *their* problem to find a way to deal with it.
So let 'em drop health insurance for all employees. What's wrong with that? If this is a matter of principle, it can't be about MONEY. The Christian Scientists don't seem concerned.
If my religion declares that white southerners are subhuman and I refuse to hire them or do business with them, would you be crying when the Feds stepped in and told me I would have sell my products to your or your kids?
It really is all some kind of personal thing. Which is fine, but it's no basis for policy.
First, I mispoke...it was not a Executive Order it was a decree by his Department of Health & Human Services...same difference, Kathleen Sebelius wouldn't have done this bit of vote pandering without his blessing...but I'm a stickler for the truth and correct myself. But lets remember, "if you like your insurance plan now, you can keep it."
Well you can't, not if you force the one providing it as a benefit (its not a right by the way) to the employee to include coverage they don't want & in fact find extremely repulsive. Where was this hew & cry for nuns to be covered for birth control? I must have missed it...lol...there are nymphomaniac nuns running amok in our society and the MSM missed it?
"We're talking about health-insurance requirements that would apply to ALL BUSINESSES, and if those businesses happened to be owned by religious organizations, it would be *their* problem to find a way to deal with it."
So, you accept the notion, of the supremacy of an unelected ruling class (a bureaucracy...HHS) over the individual, the people do you? You will find this very troubling for yourself in the future I guarantee it...the tearing down of the wall between church and state does not come without it consequences.
It hasn't been a really big personal issue for me but I think I'll make one of it...when the "regime" changes I will be one of the ones trying to add wine to health care coverages (they say its good for the heart ya know) with the expressed purpose of pissing off the Alcoholics Anonymous types among us.
So, you accept the notion, of the supremacy of an unelected ruling class (a bureaucracy...HHS) over the individual, the people do you?
Nope, that's why I'm an anarchist. Since my dream hasn't yet come true, I choose not to run a business, and I hate ObamaCare.
So what? That hasn't got anything to do with whether health-insurance SHOULD or SHOULDN'T pay for birth-control, and it's got even less to do with Sandra Fluke. I can maintain a bit of a distinction amongst all that.
As for wine, this just shows how far removed you've gotten from the actual point of DISPUTE. Wine isn't a prescription drug. But I'm all for eliminating the minimum drinking age, because I don't think it's government's business.
How 'bout you?
So, you accept the notion, of the supremacy of an unelected ruling class (a bureaucracy...HHS) over the individual, the people do you?
"Nope, that's why I'm an anarchist. Since my dream hasn't yet come true, I choose not to run a business, and I hate ObamaCare."
/////////////////////////////////////////
I call complete & total bullshit blunder...YOU JUST SAID...
"We're talking about >>>health-insurance requirements<<< that would >>>apply<<< to ALL BUSINESSES, and if those businesses happened to be owned by religious organizations, it would be *their* problem to find a way to deal with it."
In an anarchists world there is no "supreme entity" (in this case a government bureaucracy) that steps in between the employer & the employee and REQUIRES (that is, MANDATES) anything between two parties engaging in work agreements.
An anarchist would be outraged, not saying no biggie...just deal with it...so there must be something more to it with you. First its, no biggie nmewn, Dictator Bloomberg and Big Gulps hahaha...trite little man you are nmewn, there are so many bigger things than this to confront.
Now this.
Just because its a fight between religion and the state this time, doesn't mean the state can't & won't turn its attention toward you the next time...so don't scream like a stuck pig when it happens and expect any empathy from me.
You won't get any.
Why do I even bother?
Listen carefully: I was asking you to explain the ISSUE that you perceive with Fluke asking for birth-control to be covered by health-insurance. First it was that you hated her boyfriend, then it was that religious-owned businesses shouldn't be forced to violate their principles.
So it sounds a lot like you really don't have a solid grasp on the underlying ISSUE of BC pills (a prescription drug) being covered by health insurance.
As for me, I ask these questions NOT because I support ObamaCare or because I believe the Feds SHOULD be mandating how health-insurance is handled, but because I'm interested in trying to understand how the obviously different and error-prone brains like yours FUNCTION. I think we (as a species) can find a better way to live with each other, but obviously it's going to require that the smart folks who can discuss these things rationally are able to communicate with the folks who can't isolate the points of debate.
Why do I bother?
"I was asking you to explain the ISSUE that you perceive with Fluke asking for birth-control to be covered by health-insurance."
Its not that she asked, its WHO she asked. She asked the government to use its monopoly on FORCE, on private businesses (who may or may not agree with BC or abortion or sterilization) AND the churches.
Whats so hard to understand?
You already said you don't agree with ObamaCare (for what reasons you don't say)...so here's one more reason. I find it hard to believe that people wanting "ä certain type of health insurance policy" can't find one in the open market. So its not about birth control pills is it?
Its about people control.
.
You and your facts are way off and worse yet you know it.
aint my facts..........facts dont belong to anyone...........unlike obamney.............geez, another senior member on this site, and yet still asleeeppppppp............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....................
I should have been more specific ... here is what I have a problem with ...
romney has openly vowed manlove for bernanke time and time again........
He has said over and over again that he would get rid of Bernanke.
If you want to win the game, don't talk about the game or the rules or your next move. -- Unless you are either very unintelligent or the other players are furniture. Mr. Romney is quite confident of his intelligence.
The problem is that Obama never says anything in public that isn't rehearsed. That's why he's so fucking boring.
Romney screws up.
A lot.
That makes him 'Mr. Excitement' in my book.
Looks like it really is time to "disrupt" our system in the USA.
Disruption is dominating everything else. Why not the WHOLE system. That is the path to prosperity, or at least progress.
You're masturbating again.
Somethings take care of themselves.
High PM price will all but guarantee that infrastructure gets stolen by the thousands of daily reports I now ignore in my mail filter. All to be smelted and sold back in an internal trade balance deficit the likes have never been seen.
Individual states doing the trading are going to be in big trouble once an accountant sharpens a pencil.
Dood, you've gotta get out to more places. The system is already in total disrupt mode.
That's why there are so many malls without anchor stores. That's why there are so many "For Sale Foreclosure" signs on nice houses. That's why the specialty foods you used to buy at the store aren't avaliable anymore. That's why so many people you sort of know don't seem to have a decent job anymore.
We've hit ourselves with multiple disruptor blasts and she's startin' to rip apart.
I said it before and I will say it again. QEternity = Economic and Political COUP by the Federal Reserve.
+1
Sneaking Past CongressReport: 'Fat-Finger' Trade Led to Oil-Stock Price Swings
Yeah, MY FAT FINGER caused the price swings.
Read between the lines foxbidness.
You know, maybe we could meet the Fed's paper with rocks or scissors...trillions of rocks or scissors.
EMP
The path of debt deflation was chosen over a debt jubilee. Everybody on both aisles voted for this path.
Because they were advised to print before default in order to save the payemnt system(Big Banks).
Buy Tungsten!!! Errr, I meant to say Gold. Whatever--same thing I guess these days...
what a retarded tool. if there was no fooking fed there would be no fooking debt. we are where we are because of the likes of goldman sachs and jpm.
i said god damn! god damn the pusher man
Peak Moochers, Bitchez.
you are right, romney is a moocher
Hey folks here's the story 'bout Mittens the Moocher
He was a lowdown hoochie coocher
He was the roughest toughest FAIL
But Mittens had a Swiss bank account as big as a whale
Hi dee hi dee hi dee dough...
Unwind This
***So who's giving us the trillion? And the answer is we're just making it up***
Nobody in this country wants to pay any taxes. A lot of them can't and the rest won't. So what the hell, let's go all in! Why not just borrow it all from the FED? WHEE! No more taxes. Party on...for a while anyway until the SHTF.
why would the fed ever stop buying treasuries?
The FED will stop buying treasuries when there is no money to be made for their shareholders. My guess is they will stop buying when inflation exceeds 10% and the inflation is destructive to the big bank's bottom lines.
if they are threatened with an audit...they will retaliate by not buying any more Treasuries.
It's called "having the country by the balls".
"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes the laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild,
you can tell somebody doesn't kno what the fuck is going on when they believe auditing the Fed actually means something.
Let me give you the audit-
Assets- all money everywhere
Liabilities- none
Reserves- infinite
done.
I always thought that the surest sign of someone who doesn't know what the fuck they are talking about is someone who is certain they know everything.
But thanks for the clarification.
Talk like that would have got you assassinated ten years ago, maybe they know the end is near and don't give a fuck anymore. Like the fictional aliens in Independence Day it seems that the Federal Reserve, having completley stripped mined the world can move onto another planet. One sure fire way to know that their is life on other planets is to wake up one day and find the asshats at the Fed loading up a in space ship with an old Heidelberg press.
Ron Paul admitted the same and look where it got him. Just saying
There might not ever be a gradual hike in rates the 30 could go from 2.8% to 4 then 6 and up OVERNIGHT. The Fed's dreamy powder is just dust and everyone will know they don't have any control at that point in this game.
That's when the real fun begins.
Keep your powder dry my friends
barack hussein is not my president. i would sooner urinate on him than vote for him
Did you not read the article? It doesn't matter what prez is in charge the Fed runs this bitch.
yep........until the military is!!
Homeland security just bought 200 million more rounds of ammo this week!!! Thats a bullet for every adult in America, and they have a couple billion already stockpiled!!!
@azzhater, youve been a member of this site for over 2 years....and you are still comatose?????? holy crap........
He might like that.
the good news is, amrka is not your "country" either, so save your piss AND your vote!
It's more like 100% since corporations are people too. How about getting rid of every fulking govt sub? The R and D is the most backward game there is. How many times will you here an R rail agains't that? They are more than eager to pass our hard earned funds out for there pet projects as well.
Yeah, and the War on Terror/Drugs are pet projects ;o)
Guess the housing market hasn't bottomed yet.
Bernanke is literally king of the world.
Am un-elected Princeton Ph.D, with no real world experience is running a world-wide real time experiment. Whatever could go wrong!
Ever watch a Road Runner cartoon?
I think Evil Scientist (BB) chasing Bugs (economy) is a good likeness.
"Come back here you raa-bit..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS0kFhrd4DI&feature=youtu.be&t=8s
"That's All Folks!"
No. No one has ever seen the roadrunner, nor the coyote.
I did meet the Roadrunner once...at Bilderberg...
The Bernak has strings too.
Bernanke is king of the world because this president has no solutions. He had zero votes for his own budget. Any man who is president and cedes the power of the presidency is doing it because he has no answers. This president has been a failure and now because he can't solve the crisis with a growing economy he expects Bernanke to bail him out again. Now it's game over. A simple reminder : when Obama came into office the US debt to gdp was over 60% and now it's over 100% in a little more than 3.5 years.