The Collapse of the World Economy is at Hand.

Abstract: The national debt is soaring with out-of-control government spending. It will rise from 12 trillion to 20 trillion in just a few years. The interest on the national debt is now at $7,519 per year for taxpayers who pay federal tax. We have no idea how big the pool of toxic assets might be. The banks continue to hold on to this stuff and use federal funds to keep solvent. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac might hold 5 trillion in bad loans and that would be $80,000 more per taxpayer. The banks may hold 5-15 trillion in more bad loans or leveraged debt and that could be as much as $250,000 or more per taxpayer.  Nobody knows what these toxic assets are worth until they start selling at auction and that has not happened. The banks keep silent on this issue and just hold like busted bluffers in a poker game.  The Fed has an outlay of some 7.36 trillion dollars already on its books somewhere to fight the debt-driven inflationary spiral we are mired in. The far left will use the depressed economy as an excuse to raise taxes so that private corporations fail and then confiscate their assets as they did with several banks, GM and Chrysler. They are printing money at a rate unknown in history and that will wipe out private savings and the old people will not be able to pay their taxes. They are taxing small business out of existence. The interest on the debt will surpass the entire tax revenue base at this rate in only a few years. The money will be worthless due to hyperinflation. Using such a mechanism, the far left can confiscate the wealth of the older white population [the ‘rich’] who cannot pay their taxes and bills and go bankrupt and then begin building their own version of America with minorities in control. All they have left is our wealth and they intend to get as much of it as they can.

Our economy is not doing well and the liberals in Congress like that way and intend to make things much worse. Let us take another look at some numbers.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Apparently, the average citizen is not tuned into the precarious financial situation we face world wide. We all have to understand just what is at stake here and how much of our wealth we can lose to the far left.

In just the US:

[1] National Debt: We have a national debt of $12 trillion dollars soon to balloon to more than $20 trillion due to Obama’s deficit spending of $9 trillion more.  The current deficit of about $2 trillion dollars is more than Bush had in his eight years even though Nancy Pelosi had control over the budget for his last two years. Spend spend spend. The current interest on the debt [2008 number] is a staggering $451 billion. We have to look at the national public debt[8]—not just the external or “foreign” debt. “Public debt is the amount owed by the government to its creditors, whether they are nationals or foreigners. [9]” That amount is now nearly $12 trillion dollars or about $38,834 on average per person out of 309 million total population or for the approximately 60 million persons who actually pay federal taxes a sum of right at $200,000 each. [10]

 [Note that this does not include Social Security which is in a separate account and taxed differently. That is another wreckage of leftist government to be dealt with soon.  SS and Medicare now run about $54 trillion in potential future liability, but that is another story. Note that our net worth is $57 trillion so we are close to being broke now.]

[2] Interest on Debt: The interest on this debt for the year  2008 was $451,154,049,950.63.[11] The debt has increased every year since 1969. The yearly taxpayer’s interest load alone is now $7,519for each of the 60 million workers and earners who actually pay federal taxes. Half the people pay no federal tax to speak of and Social Security and Medicare charges are not included here. FDR put SS off budget about 1933. Congress borrowed the excess taxes for decades and spent it on reelections.

[3] Toxic Assets: Our banks failed and our financial system continues to collapse because of debt resulting from ‘toxic assets.’ After all the blather and foam there is still no clear understanding on how much toxic debt we still  have. The TARP and other funds put money into the banks to prevent them from collapsing. An article by CNBC[12] thinks our Fed put out 7.36 trillion dollars by Nov. 13, 2008 and scattered it around the world. We cannot find out where this money went. $29 billion apparently went to France for unknown reasons.

The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ‘toxic debt’ alone of $3-5 trillion dollars adds another 5 x $16,000 to the taxpayer’s burden since this $16,000 is $1 trillion dollars divided by 60 million taxpayers from above. That is $80,000 more per taxpayer. 

[4] Toxic assets held by banks. We still don’t know how large this might be. Since they dumped the Mark to Market Accounting[13] the banks do not have to declare the very low value of their holdings [if they are] and can, in some instances, maintain their asset levels at the level that mortgages and other loans were originally issued. There is no way to determine what these are worth until banks put them up for auction and we watch the sales price. If they go for 95 cents on the dollar then fine, but what if they auction off at only 5 or 10 cents on the dollars? Down go the banks again as they are insolvent. The number of bank failures is rising rapidly. Some think 1000 more banks will fail in the next two years.[14]

[5] Excess manufacturing capacity. Here, we shift not to debt but to underutilized assets and how they are being handled by various governments.  We know all to well that auto plants have idle capacity and our government has decided to pay back the loyal unions at GM and Chrysler for their fine contributions to politicians, to nationalize some plants and use taxpayer monies, in the form of deficit spending, to prop them up. 

All the heavy stuff moves by ship and rail on the planet so if we look at just shipping so we can look at comments form an international expert [Ambrose Evans-Pritchard [15]] for  views on this on this:

 “1) Japanese …showed that exports fell yet again in July. They are down 39.5pc to the US, and 26.5pc to China…2) The Baltic Dry Index measuring freight rates for bulk goods and commodities has been falling almost continuously for eleven weeks, dropping from 4,290 to 2,778 [ down %35 e.d.] on Thursday.”[16]-- Can the soufflé really rise again? By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard Economics Last updated: August 26th, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Their exports are down because we [US, Eurozone, India, etc] are not buying much  and our exports are down because we are not selling as much.

“There is something wrong with the entire recovery tale, which ignores the fact that excess plant is still at the highest level since the Great Depression (capacity use is 70pc in Europe, 68pc in the US, 65pc in Japan, and as low as 50pc in some countries, according to the World Bank’s Justin Lin). Companies will have to cut jobs and investment.”-- Ambrose Evans-Pritchard August 26th, 2009

Our current mess was driven by credit and debt and now we go into debt to maintain useless capacity? Pay for no work? Yes, that is what we are doing at great peril.

[6] Deflation versus Inflation. We are still deflating.[17] Wealth is lost from falling real estate prices and that truncates credit and shrinks the money supply.  Prices fall. Most of the world has a fractional reserve banking system where added money tends to be multiplied by the reciprocal of the reserve ration, which is %10 in the US. An added dollar becomes 10 dollars in 18 months if it traverses the banks. The reverse happens as well. Removing money from the system contracts the money supply thus a lost dollar causes the supply to shrink by 10 dollars. Our current money supply M2 is $8.3 trillion and with the spending it might soar to $10-15 trillion in a few years. That is massive inflation.

[6] Taxation and Excessive Taxation. Where do we begin? Shall we look at taxes on sugar or excess incomes or carbon or salaries or many others? T he current US tax revenues are down about 18% and our government seems to want to tax everything. The taxes will NOT, however, be used to reduce the debt. The deficit spending this year will be about $2 trillion dollars [$32,000 more national debt for each federal taxpayer on average.] It is a hallowed [but phony] tenet that tax cuts cannot help growth and that tax hikes can avoid things like our current problem.   Paul Krugman[18] will not believe that tax cuts spur economic growth. There are long-winded macroeconomic dissertations that take into account maximum tax rates on the ‘rich’ that indicate that taxation does correlate with growth positive or negative.[19] These studies are interesting only in an academic or political sense. But growth, per se, comes from adding jobs by other than the government jobs. We are losing jobs at 500,000 per month. Only the government is adding jobs.

The past: Tax cut advocates point to the Reagan Era tax cuts:

[a] Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue.

[b] As a percentage of the gross domestic product (GDP), federal revenues declined only slightly from 18.9 percent in 1980 to 18 percent in 1990.

[c] Revenues from individual income taxes climbed from just over $244 billion in 1980 to nearly $467 billion in 1990.5 In inflation-adjusted dollars, this amounts to a 25 percent increase.[20]

Note that in [b] this ‘decline’ is only in the fraction of GDP that the government took in when revenues actually doubles. One must be careful not to let tax mongers tell us those federal revenues ‘declined’ under Reagan. That is a lie. So, they are going to raise taxes no matter what.

The effect of high taxes on small business:

On a small business scale, let us inspect a theoretical business and look at the effects of increased taxes, which are business costs. A hypothetical business makes widgets for $100 each and here is the unit cost breakdown and profits:

In the initial small  business climate and tax structure, the widget manufacture makes a 7% profit and pays a total of federal, state, city and county taxes of $28 and this includes the owner’s salary and taxed dividends and capital gains if any. If taxes from any and all sources such as fees and government regulations, etc., simply increase to $33, then profits fall to $2. What happens now? Does the business decide to continue to operate? Maybe yes or maybe no. The business could try to raise prices of the widget to $105 to make up for the taxes, but other widget manufactures might not raise their prices and sales would drop. The company could reduce its labor force cost from 25 to 20 and improve efficiency and that might work. But, now jobs are lost. The current stock market ‘recovery’ seems to be based on not sales increases but on cost cutting[21] and that means employees. Contemporary businesses who report earnings increase appear to have done so not by increasing revenues but by cutting costs. Note that this is not sustainable.

Case 3 shows what happens with a major tax hike to $38 and now the business loses $3 on each widget.  If many companies do this then more employees get laid off and who is going to buy the widgets? Taxation drives businesses to cut costs and employees and drop out of business. Excessive taxation forces businesses to close.

For the actual business Capterra we get this response from a cofounder:

“Every dollar we [Capterra ed.] have paid in corporate income taxes has been a dollar we haven’t been able to use to grow our business – whether through new hires or additional investments. Retained earnings are the reward for a company well run. These earnings represent capital for future growth and corporate income taxes quite simply decrease (steal?) these funds that could otherwise be used to benefit the business.”[22]--Corporate Taxes, and Their Real Impact On Small Business By Michael Ortner April 24, 2009.

In the widget case, and in all other business cases, growth and expansion can only come from new investment capital from outside or from profits [retained earnings] from inside. The net effect of the tax increase was for what purpose? To increase jobs? If so, tax increases do exactly the opposite. Not only do they force job cuts but prevent new jobs from forming. High taxation only favors bigger government and their only revenue source is taxes.

The left are out of line here and lying to us if they think that tax hikes can create new jobs. The tax process that they tout only transfers wealth to others and prevents profits and new job formation so the purpose of this is not job creation—it is a payoff for political interests. In California[23] the new jobs were supposed to come from the green areas:

“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was all smiles in 2006 when he signed into law the toughest anti-global-warming regulations of any state. Mr. Schwarzenegger and his green supporters [read EcoNazis ed [24][25][26]] boasted that the regulations would steer California into a prosperous era of green jobs, renewable energy, and technological leadership. Instead, since 2007 -- in anticipation of the new mandates -- California has led the nation in job losses.”[27]--California's 'Green Jobs' Experiment Isn't Going Well By Stephen Moore Los Angeles JANUARY 31, 2009

“The regulations created a cap-and-trade system, similar to proposed federal global-warming measures, by limiting the CO2 that utilities, trucking companies and other businesses can emit, and imposed steep new taxes on companies that exceed the caps. Since energy is an input in everything that's produced, this will raise the cost of production inside California's borders.”-- California's 'Green Jobs' Experiment Isn't Going Well

The UK has also attempted to revitalize their economy with EcoNazism.[28]

[7] Unemployment.  Here are the data:

The unemployment rate seems to trend up in spite of the phony stimulus spending that only benefits government. We need to notice that with about 500,000 jobs lost each month that we needed about 150,000 new jobs to maintain a 2-3% growth rate in this country. So, the monthly job loss is more like 650,000.

Conclusion: With massive spending and higher taxation the economy will collapse. There is no way business can survive in this arena. I don’t believe that the liberals in Congress actually believe in the hokum and fluff that are put out like so much hog swill to the voters about ‘recovery.’ They are vicious and liars, but they are not fools. They intend to grow government by printing money[29] and inflation[30] is the only outcome of such a foolish venture. I don’t think that bothers them. The prize for them might be the confiscation of private property of their choice if the banks go down  and when honest citizens cannot pay their exorbitant taxes. The forced inclusion of health care into the massive government maw that consumes trillions of dollars in wasteful spending and the same government that cannot seem to run a successful business or program will only bloat the federal government and minimize the private sector. Expect to see more bailouts as the government steps in, squashes the bond holders and puts stooges into top positions in seized corporations. That is government takeover of private business and is know in the history books as Fascism. [31] That is where I think we are heading. [32] They know their phony ‘ejukashon’ has failed to equip their allies with sufficient cognitive skills to compete with the current upper ore even middle classes in this society. Because of cognitive[33] and cultural reasons, they are mired in the low class forever under capitalism.[34] They have done their best to dumb-down education in California and Washington, DC and have succeeded but they cannot get enough of their victims into private jobs so they have to conquer parts of the economy like healthcare where they will stuff their voters and provide them with cushy jobs. We cannot allow this to happen.

And on it goes. We have to stop this madness.

rycK [a 5^th generation Californian in exile]

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Apollo Alliance, Marxism and Another Chance to Challenge Capitalism Explained.

Abstract: Yet another challenge to capitalism has hatched and once again those who cannot cope with this natural social phenomenon will again fail. This is the usual expectation when basic elements of human society are foolishly challenged since Nature has a way to disposing of her losers. Even the history of capitalism has been corrupted and the usual private business practices that parallel modern capitalism in ancient Rome and Egypt are ignored. This hasty truncation of history provides the anti-capitalists with a more facile task for refutation and obfuscation of the obvious benefits of capitalism. The new Apollo Alliance objective this round is to shift the power away from traditional capitalists to government types who will employ state capitalism [the “technical definition of "fascism.””[1]] to work their system. The Alliance[2] purports to change our economic basis away from oil and private control of energy and technology and strive for a cleaner environment.  For this they want to, to be blunt, control energy type and distribution and redefine transportation methods. This is a radical shift in our current infrastructure and is dangerous. At this juncture the Alliance is run by former radicals and activists from Marxist and other persuasions. Convicted criminals are among their ranks at top levels. The salient question for our current economic stance becomes defined by the query about how we can pay for this. Only more taxation, more spending and major changes in law and subsequent coercion have to follow this trend in concert. We are currently being crushed by debt and this Alliance effort seems to require an expenditure amounting to a sum exceeding our current assets and will require more debt. The analysis seems to suggest that we are in a new age of Fascism where the state will now be run by former Marxists and socialists who need to make state business succeed.  Inexpensive sources of energy and efficient business models will now be replaced by expensive energies government controls and that adds costs to every service and commodity in our economy.  Apparently, we can tax and spend our way to a new society. The Apollo Alliance is run by leftist losers of the very ordinary sort. They will fail as usual and we will have to repeal their programs as Obama is running out of political capital and time. We live in interesting times.

History of Capitalism:

Since ancient times capitalism has been the major driver for economic and social advances in most societies. It is only when such a natural process is rejected that societies and cultures regress to poverty, barbarism and disintegrate.  The many attempts to truncate the beginning of the history of capitalism argue that capitalism as we know it started around the 17^th century with the Netherlands.[3] Some admit it was in the Middle Ages. The definition of capitalism[4] requires that means of production [capital] be in private hands and be invested in the form of a risk and that labor and industrial inputs be defined by market forces and these limitations ignore the salient fact that the Romans perfected this system or something very similar to this before 500 B.C.E. Since they copied what they liked as in arches, food, war at sea, Greek literature, poetry, philosophy, mythology and statuary, it is probable that their adaptation and improvements of capitalism were a modified version of what Egypt, Greece or other places [like the aftermath of whatever the Sumerians used] left behind as these earlier societies may have shaped the significant founding branches of capitalism.  I agree with Mike Anderson on this fundamental point that the Romans were practicing capitalism in ancient times.[5] I think that capitalism is a natural human collective force and seems to work well in most places for most people until it becomes excessive. The far left believes that capitalism is evil and anti-human. History vindicates my position and not theirs. Capitalism is not faultless but socialism is worse and communism is unacceptable. Fascism is a middle case in many respects but the left is apparently willing to embrace at least parts of this system in the near future with their Apollo Alliance. The outcome may be influenced by a lack of militarism unless it sparks a civil war. Fascism was apparently born from the threat of Bolshevism[6]; the Apollo Alliance may be born from the threat of capitalism.

The Romans had mortgages [a borrowed concept from the Greeks from about 500 B.C.E.], business loans, and executive interest and principal adjustments from time to time to fix some imbalances in the wealth distribution for their citizens. Let us recall that the Romans provided the corn dole and baths and other amenities for the plebeians from their wealth and demanded little form them. Few societies have attained the power to continuously and sufficiently feed their citizens as yet. The power of created wealth eventually pushed out the Roman aristocrats who could not compete with others on a cognitive basis from the Senate and replaced them with those descendents of ex-slaves or others who had the power of business acumen. In like fashion the Industrial Revolution replaced the power of royalty in Europe with those who were more creative and intelligent and hard working.

The principal reason for the truncation of the capitalist histories, in my view, is mostly political. By starting off lessons with such failures as the “…tulip mania of 1636-1637, and according to Murray Sayle, the world's first bear raider – Isaac le Maire, who forced prices down by dumping stock and then buying it back at a discount…” they can cast dispersions on this natural human endeavor.[7] Nothing else has been more successful. More comprehensive is the history of money and investment provided to us in the book The Ascent of Money by Niall Ferguson.[8] The Roman government had no credit system, dealt in cash and disposable assets and used narrowly-defined contracts paid in cash with the particulars enforced by the army to build roads, buy grain and perform the usual government functions. That was capitalism.

The Roman Senate restricted members to those who had 10 years of solid military experience, were originally of aristocratic stock and prohibited any participation in commerce by any member. Thus the formal elected government had little or no direct involvement in business, but the slaves and freedmen of the Senate members and other aristocracy did and thus defined the business aspects of Rome. Commerce was private and so was the funding. Much of the commerce outside Rome was left in the hands of governors of the several provinces appointed in one year terms.  Other government functions were left in the hands of the Publicans and these people collected taxes, “…serviced the Roman military, collected port duties, and oversaw public building projects.”[9] These people were paid contractors[10]; this was capitalism. Capitalism is a natural human course of action when barter and sharing must be superseded. Capitalism can offer the very pinnacle of modern society to the few who can appreciate it. Socialism and Fascism and Communism can manage some mediocre version of capitalism for the rest of society.

Any mishandling of capitalism encourages a reflexive crusade to find an alternative:

“Several major challenges to capitalism appeared in the early part of the twentieth century. The Russian revolution in 1917 established the first communist state in the world; a decade later, the Great Depression triggered increasing criticism of the existing capitalist system. One response to this crisis was a turn to fascism, an ideology which advocated state-influenced capitalism; another response was rejection of capitalism altogether in favor of communist or socialist ideologies.”[11]—Wikipedia History of Capitalism

Our socio-economic system is clearly ordered as a pyramidal organization with those few percent of the local citizens who possess the necessary cognitive skills perched at the top organizing the economies and governments of the world. Leftist governments frequently begin at the bottom of the pyramid or work their way up spontaneously from the rubble of the disintegration of such governments and they can only then seize control of the apex with the remaining assets, but only to eventually ruin the previous effective economic structure and cause their substitute anti-capitalist pyramid to collapse in depression, war or famine. [12] Examples: USSR, PRC, Cuba, North Korea and dozens of places in Africa.

How do you start at the top of the Pyramid?

The first hurdle in working your way up into capitalist stratosphere is to ignore the petty leftist sophistries of ‘equality’ and egalitarianism. The radical left insist on equality even though it doesn’t exist.  For a sophomoric example, David Brooks of the New York Times has urged a celebrated and new pathway to success by ignoring IQ scores and concentrating on hard work. He parrots the standard egalitarian argument that equality must be attained at any cost and this is going to be successful using contemporary paralogisms. Brooks cites Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart as an example of an ‘ordinary guy’ who would have not been anything special although he seems to have had an IQ of 165. [13] This is nonsense but a very serious social building block for the left. There is no reason that candidate brain surgeons cannot be selected by lot from the cheap seats at Philly games during time of high heat.

We can review the poor outcome of the Great Society that seemed to show that those with lesser cognitive skills could not compete well with their intellectual superiors. This caused frenzy as now there was a cognitive ceiling that many could not breach and this effect was confounded by analyzing standardized test scores and sorting the results according to race. The Bell Curve debunks this phony theory with numerous—nay millions—of examples.[14] President Obama is against standardized testing for the most part. Standardized testing proves the point that the phony liberal concept of equality is so much buncombe thus it cannot be allowed.

We all know that affirmative action is a tacit admission of the failure of ‘education’ to equip each or our citizens with an equivalent set of mental and entrepreneurial skills and opportunities so they can compete. Cognitive equality is an oxymoron. There is no way you can give standardized tests and ensure that everybody gets the average test grade with nobody getting a higher or a lower test result. The much maligned Bell Curve[15], sometimes accused of actually causing the ‘problem’ of cognitive distribution in the US, actually states the blunt facts about our societies and the distribution of mental skills. This salient fact that half the people who take the standardized test will score below the median is the rallying point for ‘change’ in ‘education.’[16] That is not fair. Society must be equalized.[17] Thus propaganda must replace education. The Bell Curve correctly predicts who will pass high school, college and who will excel in the work place—and who will not—on a group basis. This fact commits millions to menial jobs but is casus belli for the political left.[18] Politically, then, about half the populations are candidates for political exploitation based only on their intrinsic skills. This works well politically. That is 50% of the vote.

For a brief look at what the left offers in terms of business, education, crime and community we have only to look at the top 10 cities in the US and inspect the crime statistics.[19] There is no question that liberals [and all are black left-liberals with the exception of NYC] are fully in charge in these places. They control the ‘education’ and politics of these cities. A review of those who takes drugs is also instructive. [20] Clearly, crime and drug ingestion are not exactly proper attributes for success in the halls of capitalism. But, now, to be contrary, California wants to legalize pot. It is interesting to compare California and Washington DC to see who has the poorest educational system in the US. The same people who want to transform our society to be more egalitarian are the same people who have created the 10 worse cities in the US [9 counting Washington D. C.] in terms of failure, drug addiction, murder and taxes. We should trust these people? Look at California and tell us what they have achieved to date with a free reign on spending and taxation of things other than property.[21] They are heading for default. [22]

California has imported poverty, drugs and disease and used these leftist political assets to swamp the ballot boxes so they could decriminalize sloth, sodomy and drug addiction. They have raised political correctness to a level not envisioned by the Nazis[23] or even the Moscow Show Trials.[24] The new and novel idea for some more tax revenue is to legalize and highly tax marijuana.[25] They have what appears to be a fully degenerative society as lofty tax rates purify their state by driving out the capitalists and other non believers in their psychotic brand of governance. They are moral lepers. “[26]

“We contend that for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.“[27]—Winston Churchill

They believe that EcoNazism[28] will rescue their economy.[29] They will pull hard on the bucket handle. They are True Believers.

Throwing in some capitalism, the nostrum that California can apply a 30% tax on an illegal substance is probably the most exciting example of their willful and disparaging misunderstanding of capitalism. By staying illegal, the dope dealers can now make another 30% in profits!

To participate in capitalism avoid the left

We may summarize at this point and note that when capitalism is allowed then the capitalists will prosper and those around can benefit from a ‘trickle down’ sharing of wealth.  This imbalance and lack of ‘equality’ is based on cost and business notions and has nothing against the ‘poor.’ This point is hotly contested by the left although every time they get involved, the citizens are forced to deal with mediocrity, oppression and whatever the radical left chooses to inflict on their victims as we saw in Russia in 1918, Cambodia during the Pol Pot era, the French Revolution, The Cuban Revolutions and other examples. In all these cases the top few percent of ruling capitalists or royals were always replaced by a few percent of ruing Marxists or primitive liberals who squandered the wealth they confiscated with the promise that they would ‘spread it around.’

The effect of leftist Government: Unintelligent Design

One of the main follies in the human process is that workable ideas and social systems cannot work effectively for everybody so the necessity to redesign or improve the existing system draws power and strength from the dissatisfied.  When given a chance to vote, the lower classes always strive to vote money for themselves.[30]This process proceeds even though the disgruntled may become worse off from the effects of the new design. The solution thus, monotonously, becomes an urgent need for more government.  When we hear that we must ‘do something for the people,’ the people, whoever they are, eventually absorb the full brunt of the failure from this ‘something’ and suffer from starvation, government, poverty or disease. Part of this frantic quest for alternatives to proven viable economic and social systems has produced disasters like the French Revolution^[31], the Russian Revolution, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution^[32]  and many others. Many of the citizens of these movements fell under programs like The Reign of Terror^[33], Dekulakization^[34], The Russian Purges,^[35] the famine in the Ukraine known as Holodomor (Ukrainian: ????????? translation: death by starvation)^[36] and events such as in the sadistic genocide of innocents by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge political party in Cambodia[37], There are too many examples of this madness to even list by title. So, the quest for power and wealth by political operatives goes on under new names, the current one being ‘economic stimulus’ or, in my wording, unintelligent design and now the Apollo Alliance.[38]

Apollo Alliance is just another boiled pot of fish

There is noting new inherent in the propositions and promises of the ‘leaders’ of the Apollo Alliance. The board members[39] include Van Jones whose CV has been sanitized by Source Watch and also Wikipedia to exclude his criminality and radicalism and Marxism. [40][41] What they fail to publish is that:  “Jones, formerly a self-described "rowdy black nationalist," boasted in a 2005 interview that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class "justice."[42]

“.. in jail, he said, "I met all these young radical people of color - I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.'" Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. "I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary." In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."[43]

Van, to be fair, apparently has cast off this mantle and is now just some activist.[44] We shall see. Van joins the Clintons, Pelosi and Obama as some variation of ‘reformed’ Marxists or radicals or some approximation therein.

But, what is new? A New Leftist program designed to grab wealth and solve a lot of imaginary problems is populated with radicals and extremists? The test of this, which may be expensive, will be if they can make solar cells and windmills and such functional and at a cost that does not push inflation to the roof. They cannot do this as their promises are based on technologies that either doesn’t exist or are not efficient.

The economy is sinking, inflation is lurking and the debt is rising faster than the unemployment rates so they don’t have much time left to test out their unworkable theories.  The citizens are restless and don’t like this healthcare scam that is lied about and about to be crammed down our gullets. Van Jones and his counterparts are just puff puppets with little kazoos to honk in the grand parade of leftist adventurism. They pursue unworkable dreams and merely whoop and hop as they proffer their imbecilities to a suspicious electorate. The Apollo Alliance is based in San Francisco [get the monkey off my back!] thus we can easily predict how this group’s programs will turn out. Paraphrasing H. L. Mencken’s view of Hitler these guys are just jackasses with new green brooms.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

The UK’s PM Brown Bows to Islamo-Fascism like Obama. Disgrace Mixed and Served with Dishonour.

The moral and economic threads of what used to be a proud nation started to corrode and decompose shortly after they showed the world that they could pen up and starve whites in concentration camps in the two Boer Wars. Apparently, they successfully anticipated that the notion: “The death and suffering of the civilians, according to many scholars, is what broke the guerrillas' will.” [1] Lacking little but the tattered and redacted remains of their strange history, the English and their lackeys plodded onward in two world wars acting the part of the beggar and worse and managed to bring their citizenry to the brink of starvation from submarine warfare blockades no less than twice. Although the recipients of gifts, favorable violations of neutrality treaties and the lend-lease of ships and such from the distracted Americans they seem to remain a bit churlish when it  comes to the Yanks.  More than 516,000 American lives were lost in military actions mostly at the feverish and frantic behest of the Brits on several fronts although the numbers vary from source to source.[2] This time, events focus on the home front as they now prepare to surrender to the Islamo-Fascists.

These wars were fought, we must presume—at least from the British point of view—for reasons of justice and liberty and all that. Mighty enemies on the continent had to be dispatched and the notion that we must save the world from Fascists or militarists was paramount. It seems they ignored the threats to destroy the British society from Russian Communists and their Bolsheviks for many decades after 1917.  Did they miss the message? It is always interesting to reflect upon the outcome of the two big wars and wonder what they were thinking as the Soviets gained ground and power in each episode and we brushed off the paperhanger only at the exorbitant price of a several decades of very expensive cold war maneuvers with nuclear threats that outdistanced even the tortured imagination of Goebbels.  What was supposed to happen? Were the Russians to simply retreat and forget their blood oaths to crush capitalism? According to Wilson, the US got into that scrape because of German submarine warfare. That partial truth[3], however, was actually based on the German retaliation for the British blockade of Germany and other entente allies against international neutrality treaties.[4] The blockade was extended into 1919 after cessation of hostilities to force the Germans to sign the Treaty of Versailles. All jolly good sport. About 750,000 civilians died in Europe because of starvation caused by this blockade during the First War.[5] This was all very noble in the words of Woodrow Wilson of April 1917.[6] There is a marvelous account of this mess given in the 1957 book  War and Aftermath 1914-1929  by Pierre Renouvin.[7]

Okay, so some hypocrisy, blunders and false guesses and treachery happened in a place or two and we all finally came to appreciate ‘peace’ and to erect in Wilson’s words “…to vindicate the principles of peace and justice in the life of the world as against selfish and autocratic power.” It is interesting that we cannot reach that same conclusion about Islamo-Fascism. Hitler’s powers were puny compared to petrodollar-rich authoritarian states like Iran and Iraq threatening to destroy whole countries and ‘wipe them off the map’ with nuclear weapons. They [US and Israel] are the Great Satan it seems. [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

So, after decades of groveling before the Labour unions and wining only the last few battles in several wars our British friends now face political and financial oblivion as shoveled up from their elected Labour Party man Gordon Brown.

“Gordon Brown faced fresh questions tonight after it emerged that he discussed with Colonel Gaddafi detailed conditions for the Lockerbie bomber's return nearly six weeks ago,..”-- Gordon Brown in new storm over freed Lockerbie bomber • Talks with Gaddafi six weeks ago • US campaign for Scottish boycott By Gaby Hinsliff, political editor The Observer, Sunday 23 August 2009

P.M. Brown has been the subject of several probing questions by the Telegraph who question why Scotland and not London are to be blamed for this mess.[8] The case spins on the fact that one convicted terrorist and noted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi  got a hero’s welcome in Tripoli.  We read in the Telegraph that “Jack Straw, the justice secretary, was forced to issue a statement conceding that any decision on the Lockerbie bomber’s future was indeed a matter for Scottish ministers.” Brown happens to be a Scot so the association was noted. Apparently, Parliament is rendered neutered and helpless in the face of a band of Scots again.[9] Many think that the Labour Part leader and PM Gordon Brown are sinking the UK in the financial latrines as is most of the Eurozone.[10][11] Some, like Janet Daley wonder if he is sane.[12] Brown is apparently sinking the UK indebt. He has allies like the Princeling of Wails who preaches the urgency of high carbon caps and associated taxes to save the planet.[13] Can any of this be related to a selfish and autocratic power element in England?

“The danger is that he [Brown] will be trapped by his own rhetoric and be forced to embrace a form of state capitalism (which is the technical definition of "fascism"). Those who worry about the loss of our traditional rights and freedoms might want to give that prospect a thought.”[14]-- Janet Daley Telegraph London

Gordon Brown now appears to look like the cretin in the movie 300 and plays well the key part of Greek traitor Ephialtes.[15] We can only wonder whose side Brown is on. We can wonder if he is luring the Islamo-Fascists into his party while they preach hatred in the streets and in full view of the fact that they planted a few bombs in July 2005. It seems that ”… 40% of Muslims live in London, where they make up 8.5% of the population.” [16] That is more than 3% of the vote and thus constitutes a splinter group and in close races becomes a ‘king maker.’[17] That means the Muslims might wield mighty powers in Jolly Old England.

Would Brown sell out his fellows and throw in with Islamo-Fascism given their solidarity at the polls and the petrodollars that finance their madrasses? Would Obama sell out his fellows and throw in with illegal aliens given their solidarity at the polls and the underground tax-free dollars that they get after stealing social security numbers thus evading taxes?

We know that the American liberals, Brits, Swedes and others were more than satisfied to aid the Viet Cong in the 60s and 70s and to spit occasionally on servicemen to ameliorate their drug-induced displeasure and now favor the Islamo-Fascists in the Middle East for political reasons by making Guantanamo a political trick pony.

Would either Brown or Obama spend their countries into oblivion and thus create a Fascist form of state capitalism? Is that one path to power?

Much of this may be happening now. The Brits may again experience a devastating loss at a battle similar to the Battle of Stirling Bridge, although much of their Sterling has already gone astray. They may become beggars again as should we if Obama is too successful in wrecking our economy. Are these two ‘leaders’ in any way related to the notion of a selfish and autocratic power system? They seem to share the same level of respect for what others might view as the enemy and are also vying with each other for the title of biggest spender in the world. Perhaps the prize goes to the country that goes broke first. In any event the Islamo-Fascists seem to be winning this one and the wealth of the capitalist world is plummeting perhaps by design. If world war III is being fought in the banks, the tax structure and credit markets then we are losing and Third World is winning. The Fascists had two jolly good runs at it and now maybe we are in for a third try with some new players.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

The Kennedy Marxian Contagion May Continue in the After Life. Can He Vote from the Grave?

Introducing the notion of parasitic politicians, we now must discuss Teddy Kennedy, our new whiskey-soaked[1] mariachi [o escorpión] who sings songs and invites Latinos to vote illegally and participate in a new affirmative action program. He is planning something new for all of us.

We all know, from public sources that Ted Kennedy is a liar, pervert, murderer, flunky, cheat and a booze hound who gets his courage from a brown bottle. That goes forth into the ether sans any factual counter comments. We all know that there are followers like Patrick Kennedy[2][3]who would repeat these themes and remain magical and above the law like Teddy.[4] Given the Kennedy Klan’s quest for sex in any form from anybody and any old time, we might even quibble about any formal genetic relationship between Ted and Patrick Kennedy.[5][6] But, that is for another blog.

 In terms of what is new and intended for us, we suspect that Teddy is currently behind a not-so-secret plant to grab the wealth of old folks, mostly white, using first a 100% inheritance tax [“The estate tax is the most progressive of all federal taxes.[7]—T.K.”]  and then utilize  ‘managed’ health care run by the government where they can withhold care [e.g., Death Panels[8]] from the wealthy oldies, let them croak and then seize their assets.[9] They can grab at about 30 billion dollars if this becomes law. This notion and theory comes directly from the Communist Manifesto: 3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.[10] Offering evidence that the Kennedy Klan inhabitants, if not directly related to each other,  must have had the same narrow political training,[11] we can then offer, as proof of this theory, the strange case of Caroline Kennedy. She is one of the few sober [and as yet unindicted] and ostensibly drug-free members of this inbred tribe of social barbarians from High-Anus and wanted the gift of a senate seat from the half-wit governor of New York, but refused to disclose some items about her personal life and finances unless and until she gets the gratuitous job for nothing.[12] What a sweetheart. We must all marvel at how this failed. New Yorkers accepted an Arky carpet bagger.

We understand fully that Ted deals in sleaze and character assignation and is now sick and about to go on to bigger and better things:

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police  could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, school children could not be taught about evolution, writers and

artists could be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens of whom the judiciary is — and is often the only — protector of the individual rights that are at the heart of our democracy."[13]—Ted Kennedy.

That was particularly nasty.

The power basis of the Party of Democrats is overt racism [or reversed racism to mask overt racism to be more accurate]. I use the term cryptomisoxeny[14] to describe the disease that dictates Ted Kennedy’s political position here. His ailment runs rampant like a plague in his camp. He has used overt racism at every possible political opportunity, as is the customary practice in leftist circles, to protest and denounce others who use overt racism or are accused of that crime. This is a serious mental affliction that infects almost everybody in the world where people use hypocrisy, bigotry and racism to ferret out the hypocrites, bigots and racists with the grand feeling that they are absent these negative attributes and are performing tasks related to justice or other delusions.  It is good to root out and display the racists and the reward is wild applause, contentment and a feeling of well being. Cryptomisoxeny propels tribalism and amplifies religious bigotry to higher and higher levels—even more so with modern communication methods--and ensures that these sick mental social dynamics will persist to infinity.

Now we know all this and so does everybody else except some media types who are so steeped in leftist politics that they probably believe their own lies.  But, we need to be ‘progressive’ and train our thoughts to the future where we might witness a new supernatural turn in politics: voting from the grave! No, I don’t mean the ACORN dim-wits or Daley-Era stooges copying off names from tombstones--I mean actually voting from the grave.

This idea of Ted voting from the grave [or even beyond] begins with a typical example of leftist hypocrisy where Ted Kennedy got the Massachusetts state law changed to add 145 days to the election of a new senator occurring from a vacancy. This was to keep a Republican from nominating a Senator should John Kerry[15] win the Oval Office.

The Kennedy Plea:

“"I therefore am writing to urge you to work together to amend the law through the normal legislative process to provide for a temporary gubernatorial appointment until the special election occurs," writes the Senator.”[16]-- What Ted Kennedy Wants. He's trying to change election rules—again. Wall Street Journal, August 21, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Propaganda of Spreading Mistrust in Obama by Propaganda Experts at the New York Times

Abstract: Krugman peruses the current support for certain elements in the proffered socialized medicine scam and identifies some unseemly conduct on the part of his master Obama. He dares to state that the President has ‘undermined’ confidence on the part of progressives over the options of a public option with nonprofit co-ops reveals his hatred for the private sector. This angry screed is aimed directly at Obama and is intended to force him to stop mumbling and get back to the single-payer system that will ruin our country. The details of costs and eligibilities and taxes are omitted for clarity as is Krugman’s convention. The change to grab 18% of the GDP fades like a wilting daisy.

The New York Times, aka the Walter Duranty Papers^[1][2] is a sophisticated propaganda machine , sophisticated in the limited sense that their core craft is disinformation, which they peddle excellently,  and has a single focus: to form public opinion to support any far left-liberal legislation or policies that may arise from time to time.   Ancillary, but essential for providing background and references for their political screeds, is the necessity to redact and reconstruct history to show that such programs in the past have been successful and beneficial to our citizens. An injection of racism always seems to help.

Part of their authorized existence as lackeys is to view any criticism directed toward their masters or their political or economic themes as an act of cosmic heresy and to refute this problem with ‘the facts’ so far as they can massage them to fit the current problem.  In today’s propaganda piece, their Chief Chum Chucker Paul Krugman wanders about in his little room filled with stacks of soiled clichés and randomly assembles them into a fitting NYT opinion piece. But, enigmatically he offers criticism of Obama!? This is just an exercise as David Brooks [3][4]is off today.

The ‘public option’ and folly:

“According to news reports, the Obama administration — which seemed, over the weekend, to be backing away from the “public option” for health insurance — is shocked and surprised at the furious reaction from progressives.”[5]-- Obama’s Trust Problem By Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published: August 20, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Since labels are applied in order to split away groups for isolation, domination and abuse and perhaps reeducation, if warranted, so we must look at his collective and derogatory term: “progressives.”

[1] This is Stalin’s big word.[6] Krugman correctly signals “all progressive mankind” and demands their attention with this opening.

[2] The murder and the gulags are always ‘excused’ by progressives for the sake of “good intentions” according to a former insider David Horowitz.[7]

[3] The word ‘progressive’ is a collective term that includes a host of anti-capitalist and anti white terms.[8] It is a synonym for a bevy of stooges.

So, the good Dr. Paul Krugman[9][10] [or Mr. Nobel Laureatte] dootifully[11] follows his narrow training and  waxes politically correct in the first phase of this screed. Great start.

“One purpose of the public option is to save money. Experience with Medicare suggests that a government-run plan would have lower costs than private insurers; in addition, it would introduce more competition and keep premiums down.” -- Obama’s Trust Problem By Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

A frequently axed question: What government program can you [directed at Krugman] site that has ‘saved us money’ or produced ‘lower costs’ in your research? Can we wonder about the efficacy of: The Great Society, HUD, War on Poverty, Social Security, Medicare, WW1, WW2, federal welfare and Amtrak to suggest a few? This must be set in the future past perfect subjunctive tense to make any sense here. This is massive government boondoggle and our government is preoccupied with taxes and failure and not ‘saving money.’ Saving money means fewer jobs for the mentally disnimble and horse-stall muckers and is antithetical to the goals of the progressives.

Let us also be clear here: There are no details of how this plan works no hint of any way to pay for it and according to the CBO[12] it will NOT save money. It is fitting and proper to lie by omission here in order to sell this trash to the simple and then set up the taxes and rules later. That is how Stalin worked. That is how Obama wants to work too.

“The CBO report "strips away the political posturing and gets down to the basic fact that it will require alternatives that are generally unacceptable to the people who have been putting forward health-care plans."[13]-- Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) quoted in Obama's Health Plan Needs Spending Controls, CBO Says By By Lori Montgomery, Shailagh Murray and Ceci Connolly [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

This is just a cheap grab at our tax base by people like Stalin and his lackeys.

“And let’s be clear: the supposed alternative, nonprofit co-ops, is a sham. That’s not just my opinion; it’s what the market says: stocks of health insurance companies soared on news that the Gang of Six senators trying to negotiate a bipartisan approach to health reform were dropping the public plan. Clearly, investors believe that co-ops would offer little real competition to private insurers.” -- Obama’s Trust Problem By Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

The feces now fly. We might inquire if Social Security or Medicare fits into any ‘market.’ Here is the Demonization and Hitlerization of opponents that we hear about so often in editorials from this ragzine. But, where is the racism? That is omitted in this piece? We shall see. Let’s do some progressive hating and attack those who would reject the splendor of socialism! Get ‘em.

An option for a public option!

“That said, it’s possible to have universal coverage without a public option — several European nations do it — and some who want a public option might be willing to forgo it if they had confidence in the overall health care strategy. Unfortunately, the president’s behavior in office has undermined that confidence.” -- Obama’s Trust Problem By Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Yes!! Socialized medicine where the government controls all HC costs! Yes. Like Cuba![14] This is a serious case like the Trotsky Problem where some person questions the Fürher.  I suppose, from this reading, that Obama’s approval rating is plummeting among the ‘progressives’ as well as normal human beings. Krugman dares to do this? The problems must be more severe than we thought.

Groping for a concurring opinion:

“So there’s a growing sense among progressives that they have, as my colleague Frank Rich [e.g., Frank the Crank Rich [15] ed] suggests, been punked. And that’s why the mixed signals on the public option created such an uproar.” -- Obama’s Trust Problem By Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Frank has never been depunked.

“Indeed, no sooner were there reports that the administration might accept co-ops as an alternative to the public option than G.O.P. leaders announced that co-ops, too, were unacceptable.

So progressives are now in revolt. Mr. Obama took their trust for granted, and in the process lost it. And now he needs to win it back.” -- Obama’s Trust Problem By Paul Krugman

The Dems ‘won’ so  get on with it! Listen to Nancy Pelosi! Take the Nuclear Option and cram this crap down the taxpayer’s throats [or other convenient orifice] and bring us the splendor of socialism!

So much prattle about ‘trust’ leads me to distrust any trusty comment here by our krugmaniacal leader. This all staged propaganda. He supplies no useful information on costs or structure or eligibility or anything else but just wants the damn thing punched through the scabs.

Vote them out!

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Gangrening the Greenback as Explained by Warren Buffett. Liberalism Has New Excuses for Spending and Printing Money.

Abstract: Warren Buffet writes what appears, a least in the preamble, to be a silly fluff piece. The article wanders about with an inclusive analysis of debt, deflation, inflation and spending but is rather blunt about impending inflation. This theme is out of line with Krugman’s assessment of inflation that routinely bores us in the NYT. Apparently out of place in this ragzine, there are some hints proffered by Buffett for incumbent leftist politicians as to their survival when inflation does break forth and sink the economy. There appear to be defense instructions hidden in the fluff and pedantry of this piece replete with justifications and handy excuses to push off the wrath of the voters into other avenues and allow reelection of loyal leftist in hard times. This disguised political survivor piece is similar to the counsel offered in  The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli.[1]

The quest for the wealth of capitalists is an ongoing crusade in leftist circles and is boldly aided and abetted by the New York Times [aka the Walter Duranty Papers[2]]. Speaking bluntly, a form of expression that can only break through the neuronal scabs and psychological bastions of the average leftist persona, we can safely state that the only thing they can have on this planet is what they can steal from capitalists, the ignoranti or other worthy and successful people. The NYT is thus their Medusa who manifold snakes guide the followers through the sticky labyrinth of political influence and inculcate them with the proper use of propaganda. This rusty crank is tautologically turned daily. Today we read something new and, as a bonus,  it is refreshingly free of reverse racism and Nazi scare tactics for a change.

We must habitually trundle through everyday examples of tautological fluff and assorted ancillary hokum in pieces by the Times where the very few principles of the left are touted in nearly every paragraph. Today, however, we are treated to a novel and unbelievable treatise on butterfly effects from Warren E. Buffett that skirts around the usual leftist pulp disguised as economics and finance that we read from Paul Krugman[3] and this welcome variation in style and fact presents us with a rather stark but focused view of what is really happening in our economy. There is no apparent reason for this article to be even mentioned in the NYT given its disparity from the rote krugmaniacal rut that locks the Times into stale Keynesian economic revisionism, unless we probe deeper into the article. Here we seem to find a loophole for liberal legislators to jump through to escape the several approaching economic disasters that debt had granted us such as: high unemployment, spending deficits, inflation and debt. Let us comb through this piece and attempt to ascertain why this was published in this setting and what kind of signal it sends to the rabid left.

Buffet begins badly:

“In nature, every action has consequences, a phenomenon called the butterfly effect. These consequences, moreover, are not necessarily proportional. For example, doubling the carbon dioxide we belch into the atmosphere may far more than double the subsequent problems for society. Realizing this, the world properly worries about greenhouse emissions.

The butterfly effect reaches into the financial world as well. Here, the United States is spewing a potentially damaging substance into our economy — greenback emissions.”[4]--The Greenback Effect By Warren E. Buffett Op-Ed Contributor Published: August 18, 2009  [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

What an analogy! Many actions have no consequences. This paragraph was seemingly written by a butterfly as it flitters from one point to another with cavalier cerebral abandon. The shifting of the sands, probably on the order of a trillion gazillion events or more per grain with respect to other local grains, on the North beach in Samoa from 654B.C.E. to 974 AD has no effect on either Rome or Carthage for example. The phrase for this nonsense is known as the fallacy: post hoc ergo propter hoc[5] and means that some apparent “correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other.” Buffet has no notions whether butterflies, carbon dioxide or sun spots might cause future greenhouse effects and has even less of an idea whether the effect is arithmetic, geometric or some other mathematical nonlinearity.  But, the use of this mélange of unrelated nostrums that are glued together in this introduction to inflation theory in such a place as the New York Times is vague and unusual thus giving us the false notion that Buffet must be profound since we cannot grasp what he is talking about. He is not profound. He mumbles, but he mumbles for some reason. This foreplay may be a sop to the editors of the Times as their attention span is short and narrow in scope or he may have something important to say about elections. I think he has a message for the liberals in office.

False status and fears:

“The United States economy is now out of the emergency room and appears to be on a slow path to recovery. But enormous dosages of monetary medicine continue to be administered and, before long, we will need to deal with their side effects. For now, most of those effects are invisible and could indeed remain latent for a long time. Still, their threat may be as ominous as that posed by the financial crisis itself.”-- Greenback Effect By Warren E. Buffett

A circular essay. There is no reason to suspect that we are free from the grip of a downward debt-driven deflationary spiral[6] at this time. Most of Europe is deflating and the deflationary aspects of our financial system are currently masked by the wild printing of money, sluggish money velocity[7] of lending at banks and posting trillions of dollars to tier 1 capital accounts of zombie banks[8] that are stone, cold dead. This fresh unanchored money offers the illusion that some of our banks are in point of fact solvent. Now, the bogeyman lurks in the dark swamps out of sight of normal mortals and may soon rise and search for food. This monster is inflation and her daughter is hyperinflation. This was obvious decades ago, but Buffy appears to be the Sage as he presents us with ‘new’ information and wise counsel.

Shifting to things that he can find in history books and after little paring of the fluff we get:

“… If we leave aside the war-impacted years of 1942 to 1946, the largest annual deficit the United States has incurred since 1920 was 6 percent of gross domestic product. This fiscal year.… deficit will rise to about 13 percent of G.D.P., more than twice the non-wartime record. In dollars, that equates to a staggering $1.8 trillion. Fiscally, we are in uncharted territory.” Greenback Effect By Warren E. Buffett

The “we” here has no bearings on any reality landmass as many have been down the Road to Serfdom when money is printed willy-nilly and inflation or hyperinflation roars. That phenomenon has been well studied and Warren is chasing his own butterfly now. 

Finally some solid thinking:

“An increase in federal debt can be financed in three ways: [1] borrowing from foreigners, [2] borrowing from our own citizens or, through a roundabout process, [3] printing money. Let’s look at the prospects for each individually — and in combination.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Comments on [1]

“The current account deficit — dollars that we force-feed to the rest of the world and that must then be invested — will be $400 billion or so this year. Assume, in a relatively benign scenario, that all of this is directed by the recipients — China leads the list — to purchases of United States debt. “--Greenback Effect By Warren E. Buffett

This is the external debt[9]—not the national or “public” debt. “Public debt is the amount owed by the government to its creditors, whether they are nationals or foreigners. [10]” That amount is now nearly 12 trillion dollars or about $38,834.95 on average per person out of 309 million total populations or for the approximately 60 million persons who actually pay federal taxes a sum of right at $200,000 each.

The interest on this debt in 2008 was $451,154,049,950.63.[11] The debt has increased every year since 1969. The yearly taxpayer’s interest load alone is now $7,519.23 for each of the 60 million who actually pay federal taxes. The government is apparently just printing money to pay off this interest as it comes due. Gee, doesn’t that just lead to more debt??

Note that this does not include Social Security which is in a separate account and taxed differently. That is another wreckage of leftist government to be dealt with soon.  

Note that Buffett fails to mention massive debt like the rubble of some 5 trillion dollars in phony mortgage debt that rots in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is what kind of debt? Not on the books yet?? The Fannie Mae ‘toxic debt’ alone adds another 5 x $16,000 to the taxpayer’s burden since this $16,000 is one trillion dollars divided by 60 million from above. That is $80,000 more.  [Gee, this builds up fast!] Notice that Buffett apparently thinks that Fed Balance Sheet transfers are not debt in any way and he is technically correct. This is partially true if that money can be clawed back [read unwound by Tim Geithner[12]] before it enters the fractional reserve banking system and gets into circulation.

An article by CNBC[13] thinks our Fed put out 7.36 trillion dollars around Nov. 13, 2008 and scattered it around the world:

Here are some financial hocus-pocus items featuring some technical language. Some of this money appears to be in terms of guarantees, whatever that means.