This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Which Came First - The Spending Or The Debt?

Tyler Durden's picture


In a wonderfully succinct clip, Professor Antony Davies addresses the oft-cited perspective that Government has a debt problem. While correct in fact, he examines the data and summarily notes that debt is caused by deficits leaving the question of what's to blame - too much spending or too little tax revenues? The dramatic rise in spending per-capita by the government is exponentially larger than the rise in price levels over the last few decades and while so much time is spent on Healthcare costs - even that pales in significance relative to the rise in Federal Government spending. The lesson, he notes, is that we don't have a debt problem, we don't even have a deficit problem, what we have is a spending problem - leaving a tax solution impotent. An interesting conclusion on the day when the Fed once again promises to keep rates low forever implicitly supporting a government budget via its low interest expense...



- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:29 | 2374061 jcia
jcia's picture

Con artists have always lived.

The thing today though is... that they have made it legal.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:33 | 2374076 transaccountin
transaccountin's picture
'Real' trading in U.S. markets is down to 16 percent; the rest is machines


'Real' Investors Eclipsed by Fast Trading

By Telis Demos
Financial Times, London
Tuesday, April 24, 2012

NEW YORK -- Trading by "real" investors is taking up the smallest share of US stock market volumes in more than a decade, according to a recent study.

The findings highlight how US trading activity is increasingly being fuelled by fast turnover of shares by independent firms and the market-making desks of brokerages, many using high-frequency trading engines.

Though many argue that such trading lowers costs by narrowing spreads, critics insist that it makes it more difficult for institutional investors to trade larger positions, in turn fuelling a rise in the use of off-exchange "dark pools" and more complex algorithmic trading techniques.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:50 | 2374176 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Can we all agree to stop calling it "tax revenue", and start calling it "tax confiscations"?

Revenues are EARNED. I think its self-evident that the IRS has not "earned" a fucking penny in its entire, sorry existence.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:01 | 2374237 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Agree.  Also hate "The government looses $XXX due to tax cuts.."  They didnt "loose" anything.  They did not confiscate as muchs as they hoped.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:23 | 2374372 barliman
barliman's picture


On the the right track ...

Even more directly - we don't have a SPENDING problem, we have a GOVERNMENT problem.

Until we take a chainsaw to federal, state and local governments - we will ALWAYS have a spending problem.


Thu, 04/26/2012 - 02:28 | 2375778 NorthPole
NorthPole's picture

How come so many people - native speakers no less - confuse 'lose' with 'loose' these days?


Fill in the gaps: Dr. No will ____ his anal virginity tonight. His anus will be very ____.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:02 | 2374241 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

You work, they collect.
You work, and the other side that never worked a day in their lives spend it.
You work.... For them.
It's just more easy than a whip.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:23 | 2374378 lemonobrien
lemonobrien's picture

yesum masser

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:45 | 2374684 Thomas
Thomas's picture

The rich take from the middle to give to the poor to retain power. I used to hate the "rich get richer/poor get poorer" meme; now I believe it and endorse it as our biggest problem. BTW-It ain't Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, the Google boys, or any other empire builders. It's the bankers. They are a cell within our economy that metasticized. Their removal is the gruesome and very uncertain part.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:33 | 2374847 Pool Shark
Pool Shark's picture



Actually, it IS Steve Jobs and the 'empire builders' also;

They made their fortunes on the backs of Chinese slave labourers.

They became rich by exploiting the poor... 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:10 | 2374573 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



The Lucky 400 know that the Middle is Brain Washed with Dreams of being Someone and the Poor, Un-Educated Wall Mart Shoppers are too busy importing a 3rd World Living Standard thru their POWER Shopping! LOL!!


And let’s not mention the 2 Largest Lobby’s in America who collect more Government Hand Outs  and Secret Loans from the Federal Reserve!



The 2 Largest Lobby’s in America.. Collect the Largest Government Hand Outs and Secret Loans from the Federal Reserve! Those are the Numerical Facts! Bribe the Government and Get the Most Tax Dollars paid in by the Working Class Sheepeople!

(Huffington Post for those of you here that need it)

The FBI / CIA / NSA not only ignore these Numerical Facts! The FBI / CIA / NSA Promote and Support the Theft of Monies from the Working Class Outright! By looking the other way! So that when these Persons Charged with Protecting National Interests Retire from Looking the Other Way! That they may be hired in the Private Sector! High Paid Consultants who spent an entire Career, Looking the Other Way are then Paid to do what they do “O” so well!

For example!


Trustee Finds No Missing MF Global Funds at J.P. Morgan


Judge Rejects MF Global Priority Bid


The Senator Letters That Bash MF Global’s Bonus Plan


SO! not only did the Ex-FBI Chief Look the other way! He suppressed Information and then!! Tried to get Bonus Monies for his Crooked Buddies that Just Ripped Off the Working Class!


But HAY!! As long as it is not YOUR Money!!

As Long as it is someone else getting screwed!!

Those City Slickers! LOL!! When the Government is done with the City’s the Government will start the Shock and Awe! for the Middle America Cowards who sat on their hands and watched the City Slickers get Murdered!


At first they can for the Fresh Air!

I lived on the ocean.. so it didn’t affect me so I didn’t say shit!

Then they came for the Fresh Food!  

I lived in an area with a 12 month grow season.. so it didn’t affect me so I didn’t say shit!

Then they came for the Rights of the Citizens..

I didn’t like the Tea Party or the Occupy People.. so Fuck’em both! Not my problem! Dumb red Necks or Bongo playing hippies are NOT my demographic!  so it didn’t affect me so I didn’t say shit!

Then they came for my Retirement Monies, Wall Street figured out it was more profitable to NOT! pay anyone’s retirement funds back!

I have money offshore.. and I hate the baby boomers who participated in this system and brought us to the end of America! So I was happy those old sell out were being Fucked Over!

Then they came for the Guns!

I didn’t care because I could get on a slow boat and be in the Bahamas in 1 hour! Fuck the Sheep who ALL sat on their hands hating each other just like the Government Brain Washed them to do!

It is better to never agree with anyone else, be divided and lazy! That way the Status Quo can continue un-abated! Let the Poor, Un-Educated, Sheepeople Kill Each Other!

Then we can come in and dis-arm them! For their own protection! And rule them without the worry of having our balls blown off! Death is a Release! No Balls and a Quadriplegic.. smelling your own shit for the rest of you days.. unable to kill yourself is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY Worse than death!


I hate You! You Hate Me! We ALL! Hate Each Other!! And Wall Street and the Government Continue to Rob Us ALL! BLIND!! With NO!! Resistance! To the Robbery from the Sheepeople!  We are ALL! to busy figuring out ways to not like each other so that we can NOT! EVER!! Stand together to stop the ongoing robbery!

“O” Look!! Trayvon! I mean Mad Cow! I mean Dancing wiff da starz!


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:08 | 2374673 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

I gave you a plus, but "boomers who participated in this system" Huh?? Are we not victims too?? Did we not pay more than our fair share??


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 20:55 | 2375333 Imminent Crucible
Imminent Crucible's picture

We paid more than our fair share? Uh, not too sure about that.

I'm a boomer, but I know this: The SSA says the average SS recipient gets back everything he paid into the system in about 4.5 years.

"But wait! That doesn't account for inflation...and what about interest income or capital gains, or something for the 45 years they kept our money?"

Good point, but they didn't keep our money. They spent it on every vote they could buy: boomers, bankers, bums, blowjobs. It's gone.  That's the part I hate: It wasn't a retirement fund contribution; it was a "payroll tax".

And taxes are just the price of being a slave to our bankster masters. I don't object to seeing Social Security disappear, if the rapacious bankster whore govt disappears with it.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 17:36 | 2374983 Reptil
Reptil's picture

RIght. There's not a debt problem, or even a problem with balancing budgets. There's a moral problem, and that is that one part of the society is in a different position than the rest, has developed a hunger for all power without giving a second thought about accountabillity and to keep the body they now started leeching on alive. This has led to an imbalance, i.o.w. there's a corruption problem. Everything else; means to protect themselves, to feed themselves, to educate themselves (and so allow influx into the "club of privileged") has been done away with, with increasing pace. If one part of humanity is treated as void of rights the same goes for the part that pretends they do retain these. There's no middle road. This is a symptome of the problem, not the cause.


I need a drink. And it's only wednesday. :-S

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:09 | 2374288 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

We could have a voluntary tax system like in Greece.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:43 | 2374675 insanelysane
insanelysane's picture

Greece is a perfect example where the people that pay the taxes stopped paying the taxes because they see the disparity between private sector work and "public servant work."  Cash transactions are key in Greece and are not reported so it can cost you 500 Euros cash to get your car fixed or 1,000 Euros check or credit to get the same car fixed.  Greeks aren't lazy or stupid or criminals (well according to the tax police they are criminals), the tax paying citizens realized years ago they were getting screwed and stopped paying where ever they could.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:01 | 2374707 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

So its like 'the taxed' union strike to get management to show some respect. That may work here but count on another leg down for the economy as there are even more unemployed(from Fed Employee layoffs- which are probably coming next anyway).  I don't disagree with your disparity assertion see graph below: (I remember a time when govt employees were payed less than the private sector because they had a guaranteed job for life. We were the risk takers, but we know how that turned out) BTW Federal Employees salaries were frozen and will be for at least three years. Unfortunately private sector salaries are diminishing.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:31 | 2374418 TheAntiBen
TheAntiBen's picture

I'll start calling it "tax confiscations" if we can agree to start calling "public schools" by their real name, "government schools."  Deal?

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:06 | 2374562 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Make that "government indoctrination centers" and I'm on board with ya.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:55 | 2374210 Pladizow
Wed, 04/25/2012 - 17:17 | 2374953 jwoop66
jwoop66's picture

saw this done by a few different folks.  Everyone should see it.   So much for tax the rich, I guess...

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:38 | 2374075 mikla
mikla's picture

People do not understand that tax receipts are irrelevant.

Tax receipts have no correlation to government spending.

And, government spending is merely to establish control.

If the government spending were infinite, then control would similarly be infinite.

Most importantly, it is *fun* to spend Other People's Money.

When you combine that with the fact that "elected-leaders" are mental midgets (typically lacking morals, ethics, and competence), they are merely spending other people's money for self-gratification and self-enrichment.

As the video shows, there is no scenario by which tax revenue can ever be in-line with government appetite for spending.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:42 | 2374120 brewing
brewing's picture

the video should be mandatory viewing for anyone that calls themself a "politician"...

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:34 | 2374431 TheAntiBen
TheAntiBen's picture

It should be manditory for every grade in the government school system, starting from the 6th grade up.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:42 | 2374121 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

'You down wit OPM?'

'Yea, you know them'

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:47 | 2374132 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Government spending didn't get out of control until after the income tax was implemented in 1913. We can see that by looking at federal spending levels.

Now, obviously, we need to repeal the income tax on natural persons. That is self-evident to anybody who takes freedom and liberty at all seriously.

But, it does beg a chicken-or-the-egg type of question: Did the additional income tax, and the prospect of being able to loot every citizens paycheck, cause the income tax? i.e., now "the math worked" to jack up spending to the sky?

Or, was it more like a psy-ops victory-- if the people were willing to give up their liberty and become slaves to the federal government via an income tax, does that mean they were then sufficiently demoralized such that the Federal government would have the green light to impose its tyranny on a population that clearly had lost the will to fight back?

I'm inclined to go with the latter view, myself.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:03 | 2374253 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Another related event was tax withholding.  Previous to witholding, people wrote a check on April 15th for taxes incurred the previous year.  Mr. Friedman recommeded the tax witholding to increase efficiency.  that bastard created a monster.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:16 | 2374602 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Yes, excellent point.

A friend of mine is an accountant.  When he was just starting out, he did a lot of tax returns, and as a Jr. Accountant, he handled the smaller customers exclusively.

He said he spent a lot of time trying to explain how tax withholding and tax refunds worked, and why a "big refund" isn't necessarily good if you have had a lot of money taken out of your paycheck over the year.

He was amazed at how many people simply could not grasp this very basic concept. They always wanted the higher refund (i.e. more money taken out of their paycheck), and not even for any good reason other than, "but a bigger refund means I pay less taxes!"

He said he would even resort to drawing pictures to demonstrate that no matter how big your "refund" was, you'd always pay the same amount of taxes. Most of the time it was futile.

Firms like HR Block actually use this misapprehension against their clients and create further confusion in the marketplace, which would drive my friend even crazier.

Now that he's got some seniority, he doesn't deal with small clients much anymore... and now the Jr. Accountants come to him expressing the same frustration and bewilderment. He just laughs it off and tells them they are wasting their time.

Automatic withholding is positively diabolical.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:13 | 2374309 pods
pods's picture

Another use of the income tax is it allows the government some regulation of runaway inflation. 

Economy heats up, raise taxes. Economy slows, cut taxes.

Just another control mechanism.  

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:32 | 2374421 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

there is absolutely no argument in regarding which came first - the chicken or the egg?

the chicken "is" the egg, therefore, I am the 'Chicken',... simple logic for a mindless brood! 

now, let us not hear a 'peep', as i grow amphibious to this nonsense, Dr. Darwin i presume? 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:49 | 2374170 Belarusian Bull
Belarusian Bull's picture

State is a parasite. It will comsume as much as you give, not caring about it's host, sucking it dry.

When the host can not sustain the parasite anymore, you get a new bloodbath. Plenty of them in history books of any race and any nation.


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:14 | 2374314 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture


Er Yup.  It aint charity when you give away other's money.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:42 | 2374670 blindman
blindman's picture

government spending is the bond market. it is the transfer of
the value of currency from labor, production and taxpayers
to banks and others involved in looting the banks for personal
fun and profit. it is also the source of the money supply or
legal tender supply. as it is now the debt is the money, the spending
is the debt, and the "money", and this video avoids it and the main
function which if not corrected will lead the world into violent
oblivion and no one will have a clue as to why the conceptual
overlay which man is required to place on the world has turned a
perfectly good and giving world into a pile of shit and piss in
which his/her children will inevitably grovel and internalize.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:34 | 2374079 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

'We don't have a debt problem we have a spending problem'



Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:49 | 2374174 SemperFord
SemperFord's picture

Not we, the Governement has a spending problem, God I wish an algo went berzerk and just crashed this mofo!!!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:34 | 2374084 Village Smithy
Village Smithy's picture

This guy should be the chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:36 | 2374090 Buzzworthy
Buzzworthy's picture

Spending, bitchez

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:36 | 2374091 realtick
realtick's picture

Guess what will happen to tax receipts when the stock market collapses:


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:54 | 2374199 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

Shit, there is an idea.  Buy stocks you know will dive to get a capital loss and deduction from taxes. 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:07 | 2374271 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Thats right up there with not selling in order to not pay capital gains.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:28 | 2374407 Swarmee
Swarmee's picture

If only. Us mere humans are capped at $3k in losses to offset taxes in any given year, whereas a corporate superperson may claim unlimited losses each year and offset their tax liability down to zero.

That's why some corporations pay zero taxes while us wage slaves will continue to owe even as our investments are driven to zero by serial collapses.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:36 | 2374093 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

How could people afford to buy important things like iStuff if other stuff wasn't subsidized by government spending? 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:45 | 2374142 rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

They couldn't. What if those underwater mortgage squatters had to pay rent too? Nanny State!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:56 | 2374215 DOT
DOT's picture

iEBT  gets stuff for me !

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:37 | 2374094 The Axe
The Axe's picture

right on brother.........truth!!!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:38 | 2374101 narnia
narnia's picture

We have a scope of government problem.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:38 | 2374102 TideFighter
TideFighter's picture

Fuck this, let's settle this shit right now.

If you made zero to $25,000.00, you get a knife.

If you made between $25,000.01 and $250,000, you get a gun.

If you made between $250,000.01 and $1,000,000.00 , you get a grenade launcher. 

If you made more than $1,000,000.01, you get a tank.

If you are a bankster/fedster/fraudster, you get a rubber band.

Now fire that starter pistol and let the fucking games begin.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:18 | 2374797 Marginal Call
Marginal Call's picture

Sounds fun.  But I'd take a rifle every time.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:40 | 2374108 pods
pods's picture

Exponential rise in debt?

Future P=today's P+I.

Not a problem, but an inherent characteristic of the system.


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:41 | 2374116 kaiten
kaiten's picture


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:42 | 2374122 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

The current administration is trying to hid a spending spree inside a debt crisis.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:42 | 2374125 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

Before money can be spent, it needs to get into existence. The only way money gets into existence is over debt.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:02 | 2374243 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture


Everything that I know in regards to economics are things that I have either read from this site, or from Mises.  That being said, it is my understanding that in order for 1$ to be put into circulation, it will have to be created from debt. Therefore, debt will always come first

Have I missed something?

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:07 | 2374275 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

Look up "debitism". The only science on capitalism if have found so far.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:12 | 2374583 akak
akak's picture

God, please tell me that "debitism" is unrelated to "citizenism"!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:29 | 2374835 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

You have to learn about debitism before making such statements. Debitism ist just a fundamental structural analysis of the economic system. One of the books is titled "Capitalism, a system that works".

If you think, that such realization of reality must result in citizenism, then this is just your personal opinion.


Mon, 09/10/2012 - 20:34 | 2780373 PrinceDraxx
PrinceDraxx's picture

Yes, you are correct as it stands in the present situation. What Bunga Bunga and it seems everyone else whose comments I've read have missed is really simple. In 1913 the FED appeared out of thin air. This magical appearance was quickly followed by the appearance, once again out of thin air, the IRS. Thus the largest Ponzi scheme ever imagined was created. the FED conjures up money out of thin air and loans it to the US Treasury who then pays the magicians for their magic act. FED charges the taxpayers to conjure the money and if the taxpayer refuses, then the IRS will come take their shit away because they don't want to play the game.


What we need to do is borrow another 300 trillion bucks and then tell the FED, who is out nothing for the creation of the money, to piss off because we don't feel like paying it back. After all, if they complain we can always let the lamp posts be pressed into service for their major secondary use.


If that is too terrible a step to be taken, then my alternative plan would be to cut every program by 10% this year and that is after discontinuation of all cost of living increases immediately. Some of the more useless progams in our government could be defunded completely and that would help during the first year. Each succeeding year, the budget will be cut by another 10%. In this fashion,within 7 years, the government budget would be manageable and the enormous tax windfall will be used to pay off the debt. When the debt is paid off the tax revenue stream can be reduced by cutting taxes collected by the government until there is no more than a 2% overage collected. That is a plan that will work. If you live to do it.


Will we do it? Hell no, they will continue to kick the can until it won't go anymore and continue to make us pay for something that doesn't cost anything to begin with.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:51 | 2374159 bobola
bobola's picture

Can borrowed money be called debt, if you borrow fractional reserve (non-existant) money from a bank...????

Fractional reserve money doesn't really exist, until the borrower pays it back, right..??



Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:03 | 2374254 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

What we call "money" is just the sum of liabilities of banks to the public (redeemable in federal reserve notes).

On the other hand debts are the liabilities of the public to the banks.

In consequence, when all debt is paid back, there is no money anymore.

You are correct, money does not really exist.

It is just the resulting number of an accounting process, but a material illusion.   To make it the illusion perfect, "money" can be printed on government entitled "federal reserve notes".


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:53 | 2374162 Printfaster
Printfaster's picture

This is too easy:  The AVAILABILITY of credit or the ability to issue debt came first.  Then came spending, then came debt.

Go to the formation of the Fed in 1913.  It was formed solely to hide the nasty sausage of the government debt.  What happened next was the greatest explosion of government debt ever.  Before the Rothschilds, the goverments were forced to live within their means and force people into taking debt like the Continental.

After the Fed was formed, infinite government debt was pushed out into banks and the economy.  No one could use assets to close transactions.

Realize that all government debt that bears interest must default once it reaches a large portion of GDP that exceeds the ability to tax.  Mathematics prevents any other outcome.

This is like student loans:  Once the credit became available, prices for tuition ballooned, and debt ballooned.  Same for the housing crisis.

So the fed is here to hide the sausage.  Wonder what is in it?  Time for a picture by Will Banzai.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:59 | 2374166 Chupacabra-322
Chupacabra-322's picture

The solutions to most of the problems can be taken care of by banning the Federal Reserve Banking System and going back to the Constitution.

The country was not perfect before 1913, but just as soon as the bankers took over the power to create our money, the country was on it’s way to one catastrophe after another. We went from a system based on sound money to a system based on debt. So now without the government creating more debt, there is no more money to put into the economy.

Many believe that we just had to get off the gold/silver standards to be able to grow the economy to compensate for the big business and the population explosion in the years that followed, but in reality we did not ever have to go off the gold/silver coin stipulations that are laid out within the constitution.

The reasons why are…

1) According to the constitution, congress had the power to regulate the values of the gold/silver coins that were the ‘real’ currency/money and not the ‘fiat’ type we are using now, which the fed regulates it’s value by printing more or less of it.

That means that we wouldn’t have inflation/devaluation of the money like we have had since 1913 when the federal reserve was created. A nice suit, jacket, and shoes would still cost just 1 ‘one ounce’ gold coin instead of $1000-$1500 of fiat debt notes like it does now. It doesn’t cost any more to make a suit today, than it did in 1910, (actually it is probably cheaper with all the mechanical innovations that have come about since that time) the only reason you can say that it does cost more now is because we are using ‘fiat’ currency that has been devalued by the FRS.

2) The main reason why congress wanted to get off the gold/silver standard was because they didn’t want to have to directly try to raise taxes on the people to do all the things they (and the Elite masters) wanted to do. Like growing the government to it’s current monstrous size, raising their salaries and benefits packages, taking care of their corporate buddies, wasting money on worthless ideas, lining their own pockets, etc.. They knew they couldn’t do any of those things if they had to directly raise taxes on the American people, they knew their ‘free ride’ wouldn’t last long if they tried to do such things, because the people would have nothing to do with it. They would have been tossed out of office or strung up in the center of town.

3) They were sold on the idea (by the banksters) that with a ‘fiat’ currency, they could have as much money as they wanted, to do whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted, because the people would be none the wiser and they would not get tossed out or strung up in the center of town. The Fed would just print whatever they wanted and then get paid back by the American people over a long period of time. So now our children’s great grandchildren are left with the bills of the politicians of today. Now they have a bottomless checkbook and a limitless credit card, just as long as they keep voting to raise their credit limit, like they are doing right now!

They could not have done this if we were still limited by a gold/silver standard.

4) The bankers would not be in control if the congress would have not given up it’s constitutional authority to coin money and regulate the value of it. Now we are at the mercy of the federal reserve bankers who print our money out of thin air, then ‘loan it’ to us with interest attached.

What kind of morons does it take to enter into an agreement like that?

The only money that is ever created now is the money that is borrowed into existence (with interest tacked on it) by the congress.

Well where in the hell do the interest payments come from, when the only money that was created was the amount that was borrowed in the first place?

The FRS has to create even more money for the government to pay interest payments on the original loan amounts, but it too (this new money), is loaned to congress with interest attached to it.

It’s like the never-ending story of debt. That is why the country will NEVER be out of debt, unless it does default on the loan and write off the debt, along with the interest payments.

The bankers swindled the president and congress in 1913, and it has been raping the country ever since then. You can bet your ass they won’t be stopping either until the majority of the American people stand up and quit playing their games of rape, pillage, and plunder America and we kick their thieving asses out of here.

Jefferson was right, the banks are more destructive than a standing army, against our country.


END THE FED and many of the countries problems will fix themselves.


Something else to Ponder:

Persian empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
Roman Empire at its time, strongest, richest…falls.
Portuguese Empireat its time, strongest, richest….falls.
Spanish Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
Dutch Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
British Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
French Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
German Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
Italian Colonial Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
Russian Empire at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
Soviet Union at its time, strongest, richest….falls.
American empire at its time, strongest, richest….who said it gets a get-out of jail pass?

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:02 | 2374245 bobola
bobola's picture

Last night PBS started showing the first half of their 4 part series called; Money, Power and Wall Street.

It reinforces what we already know - big banks are in control.

Folks, pay off all your debt, save cash and stack PM's.

Screw the banks.



Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:15 | 2374321 pods
pods's picture

I saw part of a show on PBS last night talking about Bear.  When I heard some lady say "Nobody saw it coming" I could not watch it anymore.


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 17:12 | 2374939 zelator
zelator's picture

Then that skank Masters comes on saying she never intended her creation, CDOs, to used in for retail products such as mortgages.  What a CYA statement!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:24 | 2374381 1911A1
1911A1's picture

That means that we wouldn’t have inflation/devaluation of the money like we have had since 1913 when the federal reserve was created.

This is not strictly correct.  Prior to 1913 banks did cause inflation and deflation by hoarding or dishoarding gold, thus the desire for a bi-metallic monetary system.  This is discussed in detail in The Money Masters series on YouTube.  There were bubbles and depressions prior to 1913. 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:50 | 2374511 Belarusian Bull
Belarusian Bull's picture

A small correction: Soviet Union was not the richest.Despite having the richest resources, average soviet citizen was very very poor.

it is an important example of the impotence of central planning.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:49 | 2374172 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

If there were no banker scum there would be no national debt.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:59 | 2374229 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

Just ATM'S all over the place

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:50 | 2374175 q99x2
q99x2's picture

It costs a lot of money to control the world. The US was only being bilked for the 50 states and a much smaller percentage of Globalist monopolies in the 50s and 60s. Now that the NWO needs the US to take over the world of course they have to exclude my mothers drugs from medicare coverage.

Banksters create debt and crooked politicians spend a small tiny amount of it because that is all the scum require for their bribes M'fer.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:54 | 2374192 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

I pay 52% taxes on my wage.
And 21% on everything I buy!
Add those 2 and you start to cry when that paycheck commes in!
And my governement is FLAT BROKE!!!!
And our sp ending is just nuts!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:16 | 2374331 skepticCarl
skepticCarl's picture

Sounds like you are a successful professional and/or small businessman who typically pay the highest percentage of taxes.  We boomer retirees thank you for our SS and medicare, btw.  Keep on working!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:16 | 2374333 pods
pods's picture

So is half the economy "under the table?"

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:21 | 2374614 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

And that 21% is with previously taxed income.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:54 | 2374204 dbTX
dbTX's picture

What we have here is a FED problem.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:55 | 2374207 timbo_em
timbo_em's picture

key point about the increase in per capita spending: "...this suggests, we would have been better off to ask physicians to reform government than to ask politicians to reform healthcare"

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:55 | 2374211 no cnbc cretin
no cnbc cretin's picture

Spending has always been the problem, that applies to households too.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:57 | 2374220 Tortuga
Tortuga's picture

There will be no "debt" or "spending" help until baseline budgeting, a democrat party law, never contested by the republicrat party, is eliminated.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:58 | 2374221 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

Chicken or egg.

Chicken is when your a creationist. God woke up, felt bored to hell and created the first chicken. And while he was add it, he took a chickenbone from Chickadam en created Chickette.

Egg is when you believe in evolution. The egg came out of something that wasn't exactly a chicken.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:58 | 2374226 Peak Everything
Peak Everything's picture

As the cost of energy extraction increases it becomes more difficult for the private sector to achieve a return and thus growth is curtailed. Our ponzi requires growth. Hence exponential government spending.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:59 | 2374227 blindman
blindman's picture

we have a monetary ponzi collapse problem son. forget rearranging
the furniture, the water is on deck and in the steerage.
FRONTLINE Money, Power and Wall Street: Part Two

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:50 | 2374513 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

Frontline is always excellent. This time they have out done themselves. I highly recommend seeing this 4 part series.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:59 | 2374228 PivotalTrades
PivotalTrades's picture

So the game plan is this:

Keep rate low.

Alow Corporations to Borrow long term at historic low rates.

Now print all the money necessary to pay off all outstanding public debt.

Buy in all Treasuries and Munis.

Zero outstanding Debt.

Infaltion has tremendous positive effect on future tax revenue.

No more defectit huge surplus.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:01 | 2374240 gaoptimize
gaoptimize's picture

I will add this to my warning and "I told you so" stack of stuff.  The Left and their useful idiot RINOs are ideologically blind to the truth presented here.  They control power in the USA (having long ago passed the De Tocqueville percent Government event horizon).  Note however, that it offers no plausible path back from the abyss, and so implicitly acknowledges SHTF is inevitable. 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:07 | 2374273 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Great vid. Thanks!

Must check out the other videos!

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:07 | 2374281 Dre4dwolf
Dre4dwolf's picture

The debt has to come first, because the money to spend does not exist without the debt to back it.

Fairly simple question to answer.


Borrow the money into existence, then spend it before its worth-less = Profit, pass the cost on to the poor class/lower middle class... and call it a day.


Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:11 | 2374508 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

New money is generally either borrowed into existence by the private sector(horizontal money) or contracted into existence by the government(vertical money) The govt specifically does not need to borrow to pay off deficits. It can just print. At least Japan, US, and UK can. Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy and others cannot.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:10 | 2374296 Jason T
Jason T's picture

Going Galt 

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:36 | 2374442 gaoptimize
gaoptimize's picture

Good plan.  If I didn't need cash flow to support my family, so would I.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:14 | 2374315 verum quod lies
verum quod lies's picture

Even many Keynesians admit the following sequence (see, e.g., Reinhart and Rogoff’s “This Time is Different”):

1st Deficit spending (fiscal policy),

2nd Debt issuance to fund the deficit spending,

3rd Money printing (either direct through direct money printing or slightly indirectly through some form of ‘monetization’ of debt – monetary policy), and finally

4th Rinse and repeat the process until collapse or finding fiscal religion.

This sequence happens over and over in all countries over all time. It is about as strong a relationship as there is in macroeconomics. In fact, it is so strong and consistent a relationship your average extractive elite sanctioned economist will wince and quickly go into a form of almost mind freezing cognitive dissonance when confronted with this factual sequence.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:19 | 2374340 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

"An interesting conclusion on the day when the Fed once again promises to keep rates low forever implicitly supporting a government budget via its low interest expense..."

Thereby penalizing retirees and savers. Reagan's recovery was on the backs of the poor. This recovery will be on the backs of savers and retirees.

The rich always seem to escape culpability and responsibility.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:27 | 2374403 Pairadimes
Pairadimes's picture

The problem is not the banksters per se. It is the fact that we have allowed our government to create a financial model for capital in our country whereby earnings are privatized and losses are socialized. This, by definition, is no longer capitalism, for those keeping score at home.

This refers to more than the Fed. It holds for Fannie and Freddie and all the other activist-designed agencies that fund avarice and subsidize failure in our economy.

Imagine a mortgage marketplace where the loans that were written had to be carried on the bank's books, and there was no Fed safety net, nor agencies standing by to purchase these debts and securitize them. Under this scenario, stupid things could still happen, but they would not be consequences of design features of the system, they would be isolated cases of risk mismanagement, just as in any other industry. No bubble, no crash.

You can't fix stupid, but in this new world, you can monetize the hell out of it if you can scale it up.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:32 | 2374423 MrBoompi
MrBoompi's picture

Just another clown who thinks we just turn off the spending spigot and everything will be fine.

None of this will stop until the private sector refuses to buy government debt.  And that's not about to happen any time soon.  Any attempt to even come close to a balanced budget would most likely collapse the dollar and cause a world-wide depression, even though this is what is going to happen someday anyway.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:46 | 2374485 gaoptimize
gaoptimize's picture

"Someday".  The differential equations governing spending, deficits, debt, inflation, money supply, interest rates, contraction in the real economy, employment, and revenue are non-linear and the "jerk" that signals someday's imminent approach is QE.  Real soon now.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:53 | 2374702 QQQBall
QQQBall's picture

Actually it will be after the private sector is FORCED to buy USTs

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:00 | 2374731 Thisson
Thisson's picture

I disagree, because it WILL come soon - the private sector won't buy public debt at some point in the relatively near future.

A balanced budget will cause short term economic contraction; but it is better to not have some amount of production than to be producing goods and services that have negative value (waste).

So yeah, GDP will shrink short term, but then there will be a huge boom once government is out of the way, taxes are cut dramatically, and prices collapse.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:15 | 2374595 Jena
Jena's picture

Obama in Rolling Stone interview by Jann Weiner:  "Krugman's obviously one of the smartest economic reporters out there"


Oh, obviously.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:22 | 2374620 MBOB
MBOB's picture

In addition to the taxpayer monies that have been transferred straight into the banksters' accounts, we can still try a few things. 

Here are the savings from Cutting Outmoded Programs

Bring home 100,000 troops and modernize Cold War strategies:

$20 billion(7)

Reduce nuclear arsenal to 1,000 warheads:

$15 billion(8)

Cut Cold War weapons:

$12 billion(9,10)

Eliminate Star Wars:

$ 8 billion(11)

Curb international weapons sales:

$ 4 billion(12)

Eliminate offshore corporate tax loophole:

$ 1 billion(13)


$60 billion

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:07 | 2374755 Pairadimes
Pairadimes's picture

This is six days worth of handle-turning on the federal spend-o-matic. What else you got?

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:59 | 2374729 Marla And Me
Marla And Me's picture

Neither.  Interest came first.  It's time like these that I miss Mako and B9K9.  Once "a pound of flesh" is built into a finite system, the ultimate outcome is simply inevitable. It is really that simple.  There is a reason that all three major monotheistic religions preach against interest.  And the real kicker is that, if I can come to understand this for myself in my small part of the world using simple logical reasoning and a little help from the old pillars of what used to be the greatest Fight Club around, then I guarantee you that the old world money changers also understand this fact.  It will be impossible to make it through the bottleneck intact.  Hedge accordingly.  There is really no use complaining about it, just be prepared to make meaningful contributions once on the other side...

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:16 | 2374785 marathonman
marathonman's picture

The government spending and growth is exactly as planned.  With the privately controlled central bank there is no need to ever say no to a government program.  For politicians you get to appoint cronies, extort money, fence revenues to favored business and pocket millions of dollars.  For the private banks that own the central bank, you get free reign on the poor saps of a nation that actually have to work for a living and they pay you bonuses in the hundreds of millions of dollars.  Their income taxes get redistributed right to your freakin' bank to pay for all the gubmint programs that are only necessary because you inflate the money supply to pay for the unsustainable and ill advised programs.  And you get to spend those new dollars first to buy up real assets while the poor shlubs at the bottom of the food chain keep seeing their savings buy less and less.  Then you foreclose on them after all the inflation destroys their earning power or when the fractional reserve Ponzi pyramid gets a little shaky.  Freaking genius.  Just freaking genius.  All according to plan.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 17:27 | 2374972 OutLookingIn
OutLookingIn's picture

Taxation Without Representation.

That was a big bitch at one time. Was it not?

Didn't that lead to some concrete action involving tea?

Followed by some hot lead a little later? Think about that for just a moment...

To get into power in DC, or for that matter, any state legestlature. One must be a millionaire or at the very least, rich and be backed by the elite money interests. This is NOT fair representation.

So what is so different from the present lack of representation, to that former period where people of action took the powers that be to task? There is NO moral or high ideal leadership left in the country. Any vestage of these most rare of attributes have been done away with by the powers that be, to secure their much coveted positions of prestige and position.

Time to call it for what it is. NOT FAIR. Use any label you like - corporatism, facism, oligachy, dictatorship, elitism, ad infinitum... Time to put an end to it. Only who will lead? Where are the ones with high ideals and morals? Trading one bad idea for another accomplishes nothing. Left. Right. Blue. Red. They all speak from the same game plan provided for them.

To stop the spending and roll back taxation - one must first be in power to do so.

Will the change happen by the vote or by the gun? Change will come... it's the only constant in the universe.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 19:50 | 2375266 zot23
zot23's picture

Sorry guys, this view though succient, is much too simplisitic to be useful.  It's like saying all women cheat on their husbands because they don't get enough attention.  In the aggregate it might be true, but it leaves out so many factors as to be almost worthless as practical advice.

Take the first graph: It was good that he laid out tax revenue, adjusted it for inflation, and then even went to per capita.  But is that the sum total of all taxes paid in the USA?  Wouldn't it make sense to see from what sector the taxes came from?  Well, we can do that (the internet is wonderful):

So in 1954, the breakdown of revenue was 42.4% Income, 30.3% corporate, 10.3% SS, and 14.3% excise.
FF to 2010, the breakdown of revenue was 47.4% Income,  7.9% corporate,  35.5% SS, and 3.1% excise.

So really income tax is one of the few that has reamined unchanged.  Corporate taxes are way, WAY down (as a %), SS has ballooned as expected (aging population), excise taxes have cratered.  So even just looking at those two data points, is this as simple as the professor is laying it out?  Shouldn't corporate taxes be higher, income taxes a small amount lower, excise taxes higher to balance with the legendary 1950s?

But wait, is that even the entire picture?  What were the tax brackets like in 1954? Oh interwebs, take me away...

From this, now we see that the situation was much different than today.  There were like 20 brackets ranging from 0% (like today) up to 91% on income over $200k.  Compared to 2008 (sorry, as late as that chart goes), the top bracket was 35%  Whaa?  Shouldn't this deserve mention in the professor's speech?  Why wouldn't he mention this gigantic change on the revenue side of the equation?  The top earners are paying an insane amount less, doubly so if they own corporations and are in the top 1% of earners.

Plus, all spending is not equal.  Paying $700 million to repair highways as compared to $700 billion to balance a bank's ledger is not equal, yet it does still appear as deficit and "per capita spending" in the professor's presentation.  Is it still fair to use such simple numbers, or are we missing a massive chunk of the equation.  The point I am driving towards is not all taxation is equal and neither is spending.  Me blowing $100k on my son's college education and me blowing $100k on heroin is not $100k = $100k.  One of these "deficits" is magnitudes worse than the other.

I gave the video 1 star.  Had it been Joe Schmo, I'd have given 2, but a professor should know better.  Rubbish.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 20:10 | 2375288 koperniuk666
koperniuk666's picture

Economics 101 - Does anyone remember the "Consumer surplus' or the 'producer surplus' -  the area area under the demand (or supply) curve that reresents profit for those who trade by buying or selling things?

Not only does govt waste through incompetence and  misallocation it also DESTROYS value as the total area described above - shrinks. At higher and higher level of tax this area shrivels away to NOTHING......

This davies guy explains stuff really well. I bet even Americans can follow it.

As ever, Government is the CAUSE of the problem masquerading as its solution.

BURN the Fuckers!

David Cameron - Useless Lying, incompetent, son-of-obama,  CUNT

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 21:32 | 2375384 jerry_theking_lawler
jerry_theking_lawler's picture

Until the up and coming generations get a grip on this....they are in trouble:

1. Food does not come from the refrigerator.

2. Heat does not come out of the furnance.

3. Wealth is created by taking something useless (ie land, labor, material, etc, etc), turning it into something useful, and selling this useful item for a profit above what it took to produce it.

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