Third Party & Independents Archives

David R. Remer wrote: Objection duly noted, and defeated. The bill to block the additional $350 billion allocation failed. As it should have.

Not if all of the bail-out mania results in enough inflation to motivate foreigners to dump and/or spend the $11 Trillion of foreign owned U.S. Dollars, leading to hyperinflation, which will make things much worse by destroying all savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages.

David R. Remer wrote: The credit problem in America has lessened, but remains a hurdle to millions of consumers who would buy retail if credit were available to them.

The trillions already lent/spent have only bought a little time, and have probably made things worse later.

The nation is now simply deeper in debt, the U.S. Dollar is worth less, and the inflation from all of the rampant spending and money-printing will be coming back later to make things much worse.

David R. Remer wrote: The credit problem in America has lessened, but remains a hurdle to millions of consumers who would buy retail if credit were available to them.

More credit?

Not if most Americans are already so deep in debt that they simply can’t borrow anymore.
And with $67 Trillion of nation-wide debt, we’re close to that limit now ($220,000 per person).

$67 Trillion amortized at only 4.0% interest would take 433 years to pay off, even if we had the discipline to pay $233.3 Billion per month ($7.338 Billion per day = $2.68 Trillion per year).
What are the chances of that?
And there’s now no doubt about the strategy the federal government and Federal Reserve are going to attempt, which is more borrowing and creating trillions of dollars out of thin air.
That will cause inflation as sure as the sun rises in the east.
Inflation is already bad, despite the government’s lies about inflation only being 1.07% today.
That lie about inflation (among others with regard to GDP, debt, and unemployment) is revealed by the dollar falling against other major international currencies (which also have inflation of their own too), and the falling GDP since JAN-2007.
And federal debt will most likely default via hyperinflation and a run on the falling U.S. Dollar.

• __ U.S. Dollar vs Swiss Franc (CHF) Exchange Rate __


• 4.9 |———————————————


• 4.6 |o-o—————————————-


• 4.3 |——o————————————-


• 4.0 |———o———————————-


• 3.7 |————o——————————-


• 3.4 |—————o—————————-


• 3.1 |——————o—-o——————-


• 2.8 |———————o—-o—————-


• 1.5 |——————————o————-


• 1.2 |———————————o—-o—o


• 0.9 |————————————o—-o-


• 0.6 |———————————————


• 0.3 |———————————————


• 0.0 |(1968)———-(1988)————(2008) YEAR

• __ U.S. Dollar vs Singapore Dollar (SGD) Exchange Rate __


• 3.7 |———————————————


• 3.4 |o-o—————————————-


• 3.1 |——o————————————-


• 2.8 |———-o—-o—————————


• 1.5 |———————-o—-o—-o——-o


• 1.2 |—————————————o—-


• 0.9 |———————————————


• 0.6 |———————————————


• 0.3 |———————————————


• 0.0 |(1968)———-(1988)————(2008) YEAR

• __ U.S. Dollar vs Japanese Yen (JPY) Exchange Rate __


• 390 |———————————————


• 360 |o-o-o————————————-


• 330 |———-o———————————


• 300 |———————————————


• 270 |————-o——————————


• 240 |—————-o—————————


• 210 |——————-o————————


• 180 |————————o——————-


• 150 |——————————o————-


• 130 |————————————o—o-o


• 100 |(1968)———-(1988)————(2008) YEAR

Perhaps Americans should try to get by with less credit?

Perhaps the government should instead try to cut some of the massive amounts of bloat and waste in the federal government, and shift that spending to develop energy independence for the nation? But I guess that would make too much sense.

Of course, fiscal responsibility now would spell disaster for a nation whose manufacturing base has been deteriorated for decades, whose economy is 70% consumer driven, a Congress that has been sellin’ out Americans for decades, and voters who repeatedly reward Congress for all of it with 85%-to-90% re-election rates.

But worse, there is a strong likelihood that the trillions being tossed haphazardly all about and all of this bail-out mania will create enough inflation to trigger global dumping of $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars.

• __ Foreign Owned U.S. Dollars and U.S. Treasury Securities __


• $12T |———————————————


• $11T |——————————————oo


• $10T |—————————————-o—


• $09T |————————————-o——


• $08T |———————————-o———


• $07T |———————————o———-


• $06T |——————————o————-


• $05T |—————————o—————-


• $04T |———————-o———————


• $03T |——————o————————-


• $02T |———-o———————————


• $01T |o——————————————-


• $00T |(1985)————(1995)————(2005) YEAR

Inflation and devaluation of the U.S. Dollar has already resulted in a sell-off of over $20 Trillion of U.S. assets in the last decade (now foreign owned).
That is, the liquidation has already begun, and the debt may already be untenable?

• ____ Foreign Owned Assets in the U.S. ____


• $24T |———————————————


• $22T |——————————————-o


• $20T |——————————————o-


• $18T |—————————————-o—


• $16T |—————————————o—-


• $14T |————————————-o——


• $12T |————————————o——-


• $10T |———————————o———-


• $08T |——————————o————-


• $06T |————————o——————-


• $04T |————-o——————————


• $02T |o——————————————-


• $00T |(1987)————(1997)————(2007) YEAR

Also, if that $350 Billion of TARP money should not be used to pay peoples’ mortgages.
The government also should not be paying peoples’ mortgages.
Instead, what would help immensely is for the federal government to pass and enforce laws against usury (among other abuses).
There has been rampant greed and usury by the banks this past decade. The banks and their agents and affiliates have also preyed on some minorities, the poor, and the financially ignorant.

The bottom line is that we can borrow and/or create all the new money we want out of thin air, but it will not only fail to solve our economic problems, but will make them worse.
Americans need to start producing more, and consuming and wasting less.
Especially since 80% of all Americans own only 17% of all wealth, and the wealthiest 1% owns 40% of all wealth in the U.S.
The U.S. has become a debt junkie, and more debt, borrowing, and money-printing is like giving more heroin to an addict.

David R. Remer wrote: Therefore, the top priority of the Obama administration and the new Congress is get the economy growing again.

Not with another bubble fueled by more inflation.

Besides, with so much federal debt and nation-wide debt, more inflation and debt may finally burst the debt-bubble.
We may not get another bubble out of this economy, until a lot of debt has somehow been reduced (whether paid down and/or defaulted).

There are lots of abuses Congress put an end to, but won’t because most (if not all) incumbent politicians in Congress ain’t worth the crap they’re made of, and voters choose to repeatedly reward politicains with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, despite voters’ dismal 9%-to-18% approval ratings for Congress.

If the Republicans are opposing the spending based on those reasons, then those reasons have some merit.
However, it is a bit ridiculous and hypocritical that anyone in Congress would now behave fiscally responsible after many years of some of the most irresponsible fiscal policy which has doubled the National Debt in less than a decade.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 15, 2009 11:06 PM

DRR,

Wish in one hand and sh*t in the other and see which hand fills up first…Republicans are going to have to unlearn many of the things they’ve gotten to know and love, before they can get back to being compromising politicians. Dickie, Ronnie and Cheney/Bush have filled them with so much hate, they forget to think.

Thirty years of obstructionism will not go away in one administration. Maybe if just a handful, with the little remaining common sense and a modicum of decency left can swing things more in alignment with what is best for America, for a change???

Posted by: Marysdude at January 16, 2009 04:56 AM

d.a.n said: “The trillions already lent/spent have only bought a little time, and have probably made things worse later. “

Worse than the depression that would have ensued with at least twice as many unemployed as today, d.a.n, were it not for the lending spending to date? Yes, of course there will be a price to be paid for saving the economy from depression. Add that to the debt Bush/Clinton and the previous Congress’ owe the American people for their incredibly bad management of the people’s affairs.

We are at the point where there are no simple or cheap solutions, d.a.n. There are only difficult and expensive, or national failing alternatives. Let’s support the difficult and expensive since it is really the only choice left in the aftermath of Democrats and Republican’s ideological warfare over taxes and spending, laissez faire over regulation and oversight of markets.

d.a.n, America still has a middle and upper middle class very capable of consuming, if only they could be reasonably assured of keeping their jobs. Without that, they aren’t consuming on credit or with cash at the discretionary level which is needed to boost economic activity. Why do you think the federal government is stepping in with economic stimulus? Because the consumer has largely quit stimulating the economy. More than 8 out of 10 Americans capable of working are working. 7 out of 10 Americans are carrying less than $3500 in unsecured debt.

There is still capacity for both consumption and additional personal credit consumption. There just isn’t any confidence in the job markets or in keeping one’s job through 2009 and beyond.

d.a.n said: “Not if most Americans are already so deep in debt that they simply can’t borrow anymore. ”

I think you need to research some hard numbers on personal debt, like average per capita unsecured debt, and number of Americans carrying significantly more debt than the average or their means permit. The simple fact that MOST Americans are not poised for bankruptcy refutes your overgeneralization.

I am sure you will find as I have that those with inordinate personal debt are a concentrated group of Americans, and MOST Americans are NOT so deep in debt that they simply can’t borrow anymore. Most Americans are choosing wisely NOT to borrow anymore UNTIL their confidence in keeping their jobs is vastly improved.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 08:58 AM

Marysdude, current in office Republicans have limited choices. If they think the Democrats are actually going to improve American’s confidence with or without Republicans support in 2 years, they would be well advised to share the credit. If they intend to torpedo Democrats in efforts to restore American’s confidence in the future, they will inevitably become viewed as obstructionists, except in those districts gerrymandered to be overwhelmingly Republican, do or die.

There are still some moderates among Republicans in the Senate to permit Democrats having their way, so long as their way is reasonable and likely to succeed or without alternative, like Susan Collins and Richard Lugar. (This assumes of course that the Blue Dog Democrats don’t align with Republicans, which is still a reasonable assumption for the time being.)

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 09:07 AM

d.a.n, the cpi is down, import prices are down twice as much as export prices which are also down, and producer prices are down, year over year and month to month.

Your concern over inflation is justified, but, only AFTER the economy is averted from the abyss of depression and the economy is growing again. And hyperinflation, from what I am reading, is only possible if import prices surge dramatically in the future along side our own domestic prices, in addition to rapid wage gains, and significantly higher interest rates on national and commercial debt.

There is certain death of our economy through halting all deficit spending and pushing our economy into a protracted depression with the inescapable result of defaulting on our international debts. And then there is recovering the economy through deficit spending and increasing national debt with some risk, but no guarantee of out of control inflation. And the risk of hyperinflation is much smaller still, and dependent upon a host of could go wrongs all going wrong concurrently.

You are right about our having to choose our spending priorities very prudently and cautiously, and that goes for local, state, county, and federal government, for many, many years to come. It is one helluva challenge, so let’s get on with it. Let’s demand that Obama exercise that veto pen against the Congress’ wasteful and inefficient and pork laden spending, and let’s cut back on spending on non-essentials like NASA, foreign elective military engagements, private school subsidies, abstinence only education programs, monuments, and oil industry subsidies to name just a few. And let’s raise taxes on the wealthy who, even after having their taxes raised, will remain wealthy, and boost government revenues to offset some of he necessary deficit spending. And let’s demand that federal dollars spent address a minimum of two national needs across time and get at least double the bang for our tax payer buck.

We can do that. We can make these demands on our representatives. And given the last election, I think most will listen and take notice. They know the American people are watching like never before in decades.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 09:51 AM

d.a.n, what do you think of the idea of the federal government stimulating the economy by legislating a cap of 20% on all credit cards, outlawing higher rates as usury? The trillion or so dollars that would free up for consumption by credit card holders through much lower monthly credit card payments would add significantly to economic stimulation and without tax dollars having to be spent for that portion of stimulus effect. We are after all, talking about a reduction in interest rates from a high of 32% currently. Even a six percent reduction in interest rates would produce 100’s of billions of dollars of new consumption over the next couple years by the millions of Americans with at least one credit card with interest rates above 24%.

Bank of America charges many credit card holders 29 to 32% interest rates, and now they want another 20 billion from tax payers in hand outs. This fleecing of the American public through government connections and influence has GOT TO STOP!

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 10:07 AM

David
Are the majority of Americans now in favor of the bailouts?
Are the majority of Republicans now in favor of the bailouts?
If not, then wouldn’t their objection be representing the people they were elected to represent? And wouldn’t that be sound enough reasoning?

Posted by: kctim at January 16, 2009 10:07 AM

I believe there has been $1-2T doled out thus far in the bailout. As far as I know no sector of the economy has showed improvement. Matter of fact the stock of most major financials has dropped precipitously since receiving their bailout funds. Bank of America has posted a loss for the recent quarter. CITI is restructuring to prevent colaspe. A watchdog submitted something like 52 questions as to where and how the funds were being used. Got answers to 17 questions. Indeed, banks have not loaned, expect to each other in a few cases. They have acted to buy up other banks. Apart from all this, Wells Fargo is buying Wachovia, a good move. Otherwise, with upwards of $2T expended a total of 150 folks with loan problems have received assistance. The Feds put up $300M to supposedly help 400k folks with bad loans. 350 folks applied for help and 150 received some kind of assistance. The program was terminated as being ineffectual. 80% of Dobb’s audience voted to reject the second $350B. Nationwide I think about 62% of the public is against the second $350B TARP.
Somehow, I don’t feel my government really has the interest of the people at heart here. I see us in the middle of a full blown recession supporting some 40M illegal aliens. Just a day or so ago the house passed a bill to make $32B available for childrens healthcare with provisions that the money be used to take care of illegl aliens as well. Wasn’t so long ago that congress accepted another payraise by not voting against the idea. Brings me to postulate another conspiracy theory. Maybe this recession was planned in some fashion to further bring down the middle class worker, getting them ready for globalization.
Not voting for the TARP here. Voting for reform of government. 52 consecutive budget deficits, 52 consecurive years of inflation. CPI up 1170% since the 50’s. No way to run a railroad. I want off and I ain’t waitin til the next stop. I want REFORM.

Otherwise, we have the government/NAU we deserve!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 16, 2009 10:58 AM

Nobody seems to know if any good actually came of the first $350 B. It just helped cover losses. Republicans would have been justified to stick with their free market instincts and oppose it all the way.

I truly believe that this too big to fail mindset we have is a big scam. It’s critical that they do fail and get out of the way and make room for something better.

Posted by: Schwamp at January 16, 2009 12:52 PM

Remer writes; “Even a six percent reduction in interest rates would produce 100’s of billions of dollars of new consumption over the next couple years by the millions of Americans with at least one credit card with interest rates above 24%.”

Having a background in consumer credit I may know something that Remer doesn’t, or conveniently ignores. People paying those high interest rates on their credit cards are doing so because their credit rating is poor and they represent a great risk to the bank of defaulting.

So, force banks to lower interest rates and the most likely response by the banks is to cancel the cards of those they deem too risky. Those billions of dollars Remer imagines being spent by lowering interest rates is merely illusional or magical thinking. Or, is Remer advocating that along with forcing banks to lower interest rates on credit cards the legislation also include a prohibition against canceling those cards? Hmmm, that kind of smells like the failed government mandate of making mortgage loans to those who were unqualified and unable to make the payments.

I have credit cards on which I am paying 4.9% or less on purchases and that’s because I have a very high credit score. Low scorers pay more for credit just as the unhealthy pay more for all types of insurance and the bad drivers pay more for car insurance. Is Remer suggesting that we socialize credit as he favors doing with health insurance?

All Remer’s proposal would do is take the remaining credit available to those with poor credit…away.

I do understand Remer’s reasoning however. Since he advocates more spending by our governments, why would it not be appropriate to find ways to increase personal spending. Both proposals are unreasonable. That responsible American’s have cut back on personal spending indicates they still have a brain. What does that say about government?

Posted by: Jim M at January 16, 2009 02:59 PM

The banks and Wall Street are holding our country hostage and no amount of blackmail money is to much for our politicians.

Yesterday, the market was down because the government didn’t give Bank of America more money. Today, the market is flat because the $20 billion in cash and the $118 billion FICA guarantee wasn’t enough.

It is terrible to have to say this but, the one thing that these power brokers don’t want, the one thing they will do anything to prevent, the one thing that might save us from this crap is a depression.

Posted by: jlw at January 16, 2009 03:37 PM

Nobody bailed out the dinosaurs. They weren’t ready for a comet and they were done. They have been replaced by us. The dinosaurs may not think it was an improvement but by any measure, there is no comparison between a good looking woman and a dinosaur. Big improvement.

Posted by: Schwamp at January 16, 2009 03:49 PM

As U understand it the banks aren’t expected to start making loans to jump start a recovery. They just need to be made solvent. The recovery will come from corporations who start to hire workers. That will give the public confidence and they will start spending.
I agree that no business should become to big to tail. But with the advent of the Regan era when greed became fashionable anti-trust law was gutted and simply not enforced, along with immigration law. When is the last time you read of an anti-trust action against a corp? Now we have these super-mega-conglomerates that control the life of a product from the natural resource to make it to customer sales and support. If an outside product is invented it don’t get no play in the market unless some conglomerate blesses it and takes their cut of the action. Free trade at work.
To big to fail is big stupid and anything over 10% interest is big usury.
Well, big government, bought and paid for by big business, makes the rules. I for one am not sitting out here ‘hoping for change’. I want reform of government. I want the duopoly down and out, soon.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 16, 2009 04:32 PM

David R. Remer wrote:

d.a.n said: “The trillions already lent/spent have only bought a little time, and have probably made things worse later. “

Worse than the depression that would have ensued with at least twice as many unemployed as today, d.a.n, were it not for the lending spending to date?

There will be MORE pain if hyperinflation results from more rampant debt, borrowing, spending, creating money out of thin air.

David R. Remer wrote: Yes, of course there will be a price to be paid for saving the economy from depression.

It hasn’t been saved. Only a little extra time was bought with all of the rampant bail-out mania which was spent very poorly and carelessly, which will make things MUCH worse later for many years to come.

David R. Remer wrote: Add that to the debt Bush/Clinton and the previous Congress’ owe the American people for their incredibly bad management of the people’s affairs.

There is a limit to the level of debt the nation can carry and we are there now.

David R. Remer wrote: We are at the point where there are no simple or cheap solutions, d.a.n.

True. I am well aware of that. I’ve been warning of this for years.

However, I do not think growing the government, debt, and money supply is the solution, and will lead to hyperinflation which will make things worse.

David R. Remer wrote: There are only difficult and expensive, or national failing alternatives.

All the more reason to not make a bad situation worse with hyperinflation.

David R. Remer wrote: Let’s support the difficult and expensive since it is really the only choice left in the aftermath of Democrats and Republican’s ideological warfare over taxes and spending, laissez faire over regulation and oversight of markets.

I won’t support more deficit spending, since I believe the debt is already untenable. However, there’s really nothing I can do to stop it now. I think we need shifts in spending the $2.5 Trillion dollars of federal revenues, instead of increased deficit spending (and the elimination of a number of abuses), because the size of the debt is near (if not already) untenable, and poses a high probability of causing enough inflation to trigger hyperinflation. I do not believe this trickle-down approach, and giving trillions to the banks and Wall Street is working.

The politicians seem determined to try to spend their way to prosperity.
It will fail miserably, and make things MUCH worse.
The politicians will do what they want, regardless of what the voters want who repeatedly reward the politicians for ignoring the voters and allowing the nation’s problems to grow dangerously in number and severity.

David R. Remer wrote: d.a.n, America still has a middle and upper middle class very capable of consuming, if only they could be reasonably assured of keeping their jobs.

The middle income group is shrinking very fast.

David R. Remer wrote: Without that, they aren’t consuming on credit or with cash at the discretionary level which is needed to boost economic activity.

The wealthiest 20% do most of the spendng.

How are you going to make the wealthy spend more?
With negative savings (on average) since year 2005, perhaps Americans should produce and save more, and pay down debt, rather than spending more?

David R. Remer wrote: Why do you think the federal government is stepping in with economic stimulus?

“Why”? Because Congress doesn’t have a clue.

They didn’t even see this economic melt-down coming, despite warnings for many years from David Walker (former U.S. GAO Comptroller) and other economists.
Who in government has been waving the warning flags like David Walker has for years?

David R. Remer wrote: Because the consumer has largely quit stimulating the economy.

That’s because they are already deep in debt, and average savings are still negative.

Most Americans are tapped out.
That’s what happens when banks can create all money they want out of thin air (like playing Monopoly in which one person can print all the money they want).
Before long, everyone else is broke, deep in debt, jobless, and/or homeless, and the bank owns everything.
And even if the banks run into trouble, they are bailed out by the tax payers. cha Ching?
That’s the end result of a dishonest, usurious, inflationary, Ponzi-scheme monetary system.
The debt-bubble will eventually pop.
We don’t have a credit problem.
We have a debt problem.
It’s also a world-wide problem, since most nations adopted fiat money systems about a century ago.

David R. Remer wrote: More than 8 out of 10 Americans capable of working are working.

11.1-to-24.6 Million are unemployed (more than the 12.83 Million unemployed in the Great Depression).

Many are under-employed too.
Jobs are paying less and less than they used to (unless your in Congress, where you can give yourself a raise, as Congress has 10 of the last 12 years).
Congress and their puppeteers have sent most of our manufacturing out of the U.S.
We can’t all wash each others’ laundry (especially in a 70% consumer driven economy).

David R. Remer wrote: 7 out of 10 Americans are carrying less than $3500 in unsecured debt.

I think it is much larger than $3500.

Still, 30% carrying more than $3500 of credit card debt is not trivial.
And credit card debt is only a portion of total debt-per-capita.
People have auto loans, home loans, college loans, etc.
Debt-per-capita today is the highest it has ever been (see more about that and debt-per-capita after World War II below).
And it won’t be long (if it hasn’t already happened) before the $10.7 Trillion debt exceeds GDP ($13.9 Trillion in 2007; probably less in 2008 since GDP started declining in JAN-2007).
If you include the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby boomer bubble approaching, the DEBT-to-GDB is also the highest it has ever been.

Not counting people who carry NO balance, the average credit card balance per household is $9,882.00 (up from $3000 in year 1990).
Credit card debt is adversely affecting the lives of many Americans, giving rise to prolonged financial frustration.
The enormity of the problem can be judged from the results of a recent survey by an agency that reached their figures after questioning as many as 55,000 people online.

About 64% of the cardholders have credit card balances not exceeding $10,000, But over 1 in 10 of those consumers carry quite a significant credit card debt. Nearly 13% were found to have balances over $25,000! Consider the credit card interest rates prevailing these days (0%-to-64%; commonly 10%-to-20%), it would take years for the average consumer to get rid of such debts. Just over 30% of people made regular payments every month, while only 7% refrained from applying for credit cards altogether.

A disturbing fact about credit card use is that a large number of Americans do not view their income as a spending cap, and over 40% of American families spend more than they earn, spending on an average $1.22 for every dollar they earn. This leads to a situation when they have to go for options such as debt consolidation, debt management, debt counseling, etc., for debt relief. Credit card debt consolidation is now an extremely popular method for eliminating multiple debts caused by reckless use of credit cards.

Therefore, Credit Card debt shouldn’t be trivialized.

David R. Remer wrote: There is still capacity for both consumption and additional personal credit consumption. There just isn’t any confidence in the job markets or in keeping one’s job through 2009 and beyond.

See the chart below.

Nation-wide debt as a percentage of GDP has almost quintupled since year 1956. The U.S. is a debt junkie, and the inevitable withdrawl will be very painful.

David R. Remer wrote:

d.a.n said: “Not if most Americans are already so deep in debt that they simply can’t borrow anymore. ”

I think you need to research some hard numbers on personal debt, like average per capita unsecured debt, and number of Americans carrying significantly more debt than the average or their means permit. The simple fact that MOST Americans are not poised for bankruptcy refutes your overgeneralization.

I never asserted that “MOST Americans are poised for bankruptcy”. Even in the Great Depression, MOST Americans didn’t go bankrupt.

David R. Remer wrote: I think you need to research some hard numbers on personal debt, like average per capita unsecured debt, and number of Americans carrying significantly more debt than the average or their means permit.

With a $10.7 Trillion National Debt (that alone is $35,000 per capita)?

With $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching, leaving it pay-as-you-go?
With a $67 Trillion nation-wide debt ($220,000 per capita; Source: mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat.htm)?
With a nation-wide debt that has grown from 100% of GDP (in year 1956) to 483% of GDP (in year 2008).

• ____________ NATION-WIDE DEBT ________________


• $70.0T |——————————————


• $67.5T |—————————————-D (Debt=$67 Trillion)


• $65.0T |—————————————-D


• $62.5T |—————————————-D


• $60.0T |—————————————-D


• $57.5T |—————————————D-


• $55.0T |—————————————D-


• $52.5T |—————————————D-


• $50.0T |—————————————D-


• $47.5T |—————————————D-


• $45.0T |—————————————D-


• $42.5T |—————————————D-


• $40.0T |————————————-D—


• $37.5T |————————————D—-


• $35.0T |———————————-D——


• $32.5T |———————————-D——


• $30.0T |———————————D——-


• $27.5T |——————————-D———


• $25.0T |——————————D———-


• $22.5T |—————————-D————


• $20.0T |—————————D————-


• $17.5T |————————-D—————


• $15.0T |————————D—————-


• $12.5T |———————D——————G (GDP=$13.9T year 2007)


• $10.0T |—————-D—————G
——-

• $07.5T |———-D————G
—————-

• $05.0T |-D——-G
——————————

• $02.5T |-G
—————————————

• $00.0T +(1956)————————- (2008)YEAR

Where current debt (not future debt) is:

• (1) Total Domestic Financial Sector Debt = $15.8 Trillion


• (2) Total Household Debt = $13.88 Trillion


• (3) Total Business Debt = $10.16 Trillion


• (4) Total Other Private Sector Foreign Debt = $1.8 Trillion


• (5) Total Federal Government National Debt = $10.7 Trillion (including $3.0 Trillion foreign-owned U.S. Treasury Securities)


• (6) Total State and Local Government Debt = $2.2 Trillion


• __________________________________________________


• Total = $54 Trillion (that’s 3.91 times the nation’s $13.86 Trillion GDP (i.e. GDP of year 2007)!)


• Including the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 million baby boomer bubble approaching,
  the total is $67 Trillion! ($219,475 per person; that is 4.83 times the $13.86 Trillion GDP (of year 2007)!)

With 80% of Americans own only 17% of all wealth?
With 40% (122 Million) of Americnas who have (on average) ZERO net worth?
With 20% (61 Million) of Americnas who have negative net worth (i.e. debt)?
With 1% of Americans own 40% of all wealth (up by 20% to from 20% to 40% since year 1976; never worse since the Great Depression)?

• 40% of WEALTH OWNED by 1% of U.S. Population:


• 45.0% |—x——————-


• 42.5% |-x-x——————


• 40.0% |xx-x—————xx


• 37.5% |——x—xx——x—


• 35.0% |——x—xx——x—


• 32.5% |——-xx—x—x—-


• 30.0% |——-xx—x—x—-


• 27.5% |—————x-x—-


• 25.0% |—————x-x—-


• 22.5% |—————-x——


• 20.0% |—————-x——


• 00.0% |—————————-YEAR


• ______ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2


• ______ 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0


• ______ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1


• ______ 0 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 0 0

With 11.1 to 24.6 Million unemployed today (Source: www.njfac.org/jobnews.html); a larger total than the 12.83 Million (21.7%) unemployed in the Great Depression)?

• ______________ CIVILIAN UNEMPLOYMENT _________________


• 7.4% |————————————————————————


• 7.3% |————————————————————————
DEC-2008

• 7.2% |———————————————————————-o
7.2% = 11.1 Million

• 7.1% |———————————————————————-o


• 7.0% |———————————————————————o-


• 6.9% |———————————————————————o-


• 6.8% |——————————————————————-o—


• 6.7% |——————————————————————o—-


• 6.6% |——————————————————————o—-


• 6.5% |—————————————————————-o——


• 6.4% |—————————————————————-o——


• 6.3% |—————————————————————o——-


• 6.2% |—————————————————————o——-


• 6.1% |————————————————————-o———


• 6.0% |————————————————————-o———


• 5.9% |————————————————————o———-


• 5.8% |————————————————————o———-


• 5.7% |———————————————————-o————


• 5.6% |———————————————————-o————


• 5.5% |———————————————————o————-


• 5.4% |———————————————————o————-


• 5.3% |——————————————————-o—————


• 5.2% |——————————————————o—————-


• 5.1% |——————————————————o—————-


• 5.0% |—————————————————-o——————


• 4.9% |—————————————————oo——————


• 4.8% |———————————————-ooo———————


• 4.7% |ooooooo——————————oooo————————-


• 4.6% |———-oooooo————-ooooo——————————-


• 4.5% |——————-ooooooooo—————————————


• 4.4% |————————————————————————


• 4.3% |————————————————————————


• 4.2% |————————————————————————


• ____2006——————2007——————2008——————2009

That 11.1 Million is the government’s official number, but it is understated, as are many economic statistics.
The federal government lies like hell about GDP, debt, unemployment, inflation, etc.

With 10,000 foreclosures per day?

• _______________ FORECLOSURES____________________


• 325K |————————————————————————


• 300K |—————————————————————-x—— (10,000 per day AUG-2008)


• 275K |————————————————————-xx-xx—


• 250K |———————————————-x———-xx——-xx


• 225K |———————————————x-xx-xxxx————-


• 200K |———————————————x—-x——————-


• 175K |——————————————xxx————————-


• 150K |————————————xxxx——————————


• 125K |——————-x———-xxx————————————


• 100K |——————x-xxxxxxx—————————————-


• 075K |xxxxxxxxxxxx——————————————————


• 050K |————————————————————————


• ___(2 0 0 5)___(2 0 0 6)_____(2 0 0 7)____(2 0 0 8)___(YEAR)

With negative savings (on average) since year 2005 (percent of disposable income)?

• +3.66% |————————————————————————————


• +3.33% |——————o—————————————————————-


• +3.00% |—————-o-o—o-o——————————————————-


• +2.66% |——o———o-o—o-o——————————————————-


• +2.33% |o-o—o——-o-o-o—-o———o-o-o———-o————————-


• +2.00% |———o-o—o—oo——o-o-o———-o-o—o-o————————


• +1.66% |————-o-o—oo——————————o—o————————


• +1.33% |—————o—-oo———————————-o————————


• +1.00% |———————oo———————————-o————————


• +0.66% |———————oo————————————o———————-


• +0.33% |———————o————————————-o———————-


• +0.00% +————————————————————-o—————————-+


• -0.33% |—————————————————————o—-o-o———-


• -0.66% |—————————————————————o—-o—o———


• -1.00% |—————————————————————-o-o—-o——o-


• -1.33% |—————————————————————-o-o——o-o—-


• -1.66% |——————————————————————o—————-


• -2.00% |————————————————————————————


• -2.33% |(2000)______________________________________(2007)YEAR


• An increase from $40,000 in year 1978 to $43,066 in year 2006 is not great when also considering there are now more workers per household than 30 years ago)

With more inflation after 52 consecutive years of inflation?

• ____INFLATION RATE_____


• 4.00%|———————-


• 3.75%|——————xxx 3.85% average for year 2008)


• 3.50%|——————x—


• 3.25%|————xxx-x—


• 3.00%|————x-xxx—


• 2.75%|——xxx-x———


• 2.50%|——x-xxx———


• 2.25%|—xxx—————


• 2.00%|—x——————


• 1.70%|—x——————


• 1.50%|xxx——————


• 1.25%|———————-


• 1.00%|———————-


• 0.75%|———————-


• 0.50%|———————-


• 0.25%|———————-


• 0.00%|__________________YEAR


• _____ 2_2_2_2_2_2_2


• _____ 0_0_0_0_0_0_0


• _____ 0_0_0_0_0_0_0


• _____ 2_3_4_5_6_7_8

Year _ Inflation Rate
2002 __ 1.59%
2003 __ 2.27%
2004 __ 2.68%
2005 __ 3.39%
2006 __ 3.24%
2007 __ 2.85%
2008 __ 3.85%

Total nation-wide debt increased $4.3 Trillion in 2007, 5.5 times more than GDP increased.
External debt owed to foreign interests increased $2.2 Trillion.
Household, business and financial sector debt increased 7%-to-11% .
Most of the total nation-wide debt was created since year 1990.
So much debt is unsustainable, and that is why we are seeing a massive sell-off of assets to foreign interests (see chart below).
That sell-off could escalate and cause inflation, due to $11 Trillion foreign-owned U.S. dollars, decades of deterioration of the manufacturing base in the U.S, and millions of jobs moving out of the U.S., rising unemployment, 10,000 foreclosures per day, the quintupling of nation-wide debt since 1956, etc.

The debt per capita due to the $10.7 Trillion National Debt is $35,081 (as of DEC-2008).
The debt per capita after World War II was $21,719 per person in year 1945 (in inflation-adjusted 2008 Dollars).
Therefore, the debt-per-capita in the U.S. today is the highest it has ever been (61.9% higher than the debt-per-capita after World War II).
The U.S. is swimming in debt.
We don’t have a credit problem. We have a HUGE debt problem.

David R. Remer wrote: I am sure you will find as I have that those with inordinate personal debt are a concentrated group of Americans, and MOST Americans are NOT so deep in debt that they simply can’t borrow anymore.

Sorry. I disagree, based on the quintupling of the $67 Trillion nation-wide Debt -to- $13 Trillion GDP, the $10.7 Trillion National Debt, massive credit card debt, 10,000 foreclosures per day, average negative savings rates since year 2005, declining median household incomes, and these 18+ deteriorating economic conditions which have never been worse ever and/or since the Great Depression.

David R. Remer wrote: Most Americans are choosing wisely NOT to borrow anymore UNTIL their confidence in keeping their jobs is vastly improved.

They are paying down debt, as they should.

David R. Remer wrote: d.a.n, the cpi is down, import prices are down twice as much as export prices which are also down, and producer prices are down, year over year and month to month.

Year-over-year inflation is up (see inflation chart above and the CPI chart below).

• ______________________ CPI _____________________________
• 230 |————————————————————————-
• 220 |————————————————————————x (average of 215.4 for 2008)
• 210 |———————————————————————-x-
• 200 |——————————————————————-x—-
• 190 |—————————————————————-x——-
• 180 |————————————————————-x———-
• 170 |———————————————————-x————-
• 160 |——————————————————x-:—————
• 150 |————————————————-x——:—————
• 140 |———————————————-x———:—————
• 130 |——————————————-x————:—————
• 120 |—————————————-x—————:—————
• 110 |————————————x——————-:—————
• 100 |———————————x:———————:—————
• 090 |——————————-x-:———————:—————
• 080 |——————————x—:———————:—————
• 070 |—————————x——:———————:—————
• 060 |————————x———:———————:—————
• 050 |——————x—————:———————:—————
• 040 |———-xxx——————-:———————:————-D
• 030 |xxx——————————:———————:————-E
• 020 |———————————-:———————:————-C
• 010 |———————————-:———————:—————
• 000 |———————————-+———————+—————
• ____1——1——1——1——1—1-1——1——1—1-2——2—2
• ____9——9——9——9——9—9-9——9——9—9-0——0—0
• ____6——6——7——7——8—8-8——9——9—9-0——0—0
• ____0——5——0——5——0—3-5——0——5—8-0——5—8

Also, again, the government lies like hell on inflation, GDP, unemployment, and debt statistics. Inflation is worse than what is being reported, which is reveale by the U.S. Dollar falling against other major international currencies (e.g. Swiss Franc, Chinese Yuan, Japanese Yen, etc.), which have inflation of their own too.

David R. Remer wrote: Your concern over inflation is justified, but, only AFTER the economy is averted from the abyss of depression and the economy is growing again.

“Growing”? How about sustainability, instead of boom-to-bust bubble-after-bubble fueled by inflation?

David R. Remer wrote: And hyperinflation, from what I am reading, is only possible if import prices surge dramatically in the future along side our own domestic prices, in addition to rapid wage gains, and significantly higher interest rates on national and commercial debt.

That combination of economic conditions is not required for hyperinflation, nor the cause of hyperinflation.

Hyperinflation can result from an increase in the money supply.
Hpyerinflation can very easily happen if there is a run on the U.S. Dollar, which could happen if $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars are spent/dumped.
A run on the U.S. Dollar can very easily happen with the trillions ($3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion) of dollars being created out of thin air today.
And debauching the U.S. currency is not going to restore confidence in the currency.
The rampant and careless spending and growing the government ever larger is destroying confidence.
Unlike most other nations, the U.S. has to worry about vast amounts of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars (over $11 Trillion).

• __ Foreign Owned U.S. Dollars and U.S. Treasury Securities __


• $12T |———————————————


• $11T |——————————————oo


• $10T |—————————————-o—


• $09T |————————————-o——


• $08T |———————————-o———


• $07T |———————————o———-


• $06T |——————————o————-


• $05T |—————————o—————-


• $04T |———————-o———————


• $03T |——————o————————-


• $02T |———-o———————————


• $01T |o——————————————-


• $00T |(1985)————(1995)————(2005) YEAR

Inflation and devaluation of the U.S. Dollar has already resulted in a liquidation of over $20 Trillion of U.S. assets in the last decade (now foreign owned assets).
That is, the liquidation has already begun, and the total nation-wide U.S. debt may already be untenable?
There is a limit to the level of debt any nation can carry and I think all of the evidence demonstrates that we have reached that limit, and growing the debt any larger will make things MUCH worse.

• ____ Foreign Owned Assets in the U.S. ____


• $24T |———————————————


• $22T |——————————————-o


• $20T |——————————————o-


• $18T |—————————————-o—


• $16T |—————————————o—-


• $14T |————————————-o——


• $12T |————————————o——-


• $10T |———————————o———-


• $08T |——————————o————-


• $06T |————————o——————-


• $04T |————-o——————————


• $02T |o——————————————-


• $00T |(1987)————(1997)————(2007) YEAR

David R. Remer wrote: There is certain death of our economy through halting all deficit spending and pushing our economy into a protracted depression with the inescapable result of defaulting on our international debts.

There is a certain death of any economy that thinks it can spend its way to prosperity, grow nation-wide debt from 100% to 485% of GDP, perpetuate inflation for 52 consecutive years, and sends all of its manufacturing offshore, and has a government that makes unfair trade deals and rewards the wealthy for moving jobs offshore. A 70% consumer driven economy is not sustainable. Too many people in the U.S. try to make money by playing with money, and preying on the poor and ignorant (i.e. rampant usury and fraud as evidenced by the last 3 decades). Deficit spending isn’t a bad idea IF the nation has capacity for more debt. Unfortunately, the U.S. debt bubble is bursting, and more deficit spending will not only accelerate the bursting, but make things much worse later by debauching the currency, and destroying all savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages. Just because the government (which lies about inflation) inflation is low, does not mean trillions of dollars of new money won’t eventually create more inflation. It will, and many other nations have already discovered that economic terror (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation#Examples_of_hyperinflation) when they started creating massive amounts of money from thin air. Inflation is worse than what is being reported. Otherwise, a 1950 U.S. Dollar would be worth more than 10 cents today.

David R. Remer wrote: And then there is recovering the economy through deficit spending and increasing national debt with some risk, but no guarantee of out of control inflation. And the risk of hyperinflation is much smaller still, and dependent upon a host of could go wrongs all going wrong concurrently.

The risk of high inflation and hyperinflation is high. Both more than 50%/50%.

Incessant inflation is a large part of economic instability and boom-to-bust bubble-after-bubble.
Again, deficit spending might make sense in some cases, but not when the current level of debt is already untenable, and resulting in the quintupling of nation-wide debt-to-GDP; the liquidation and selling-off of $20 Trillion of assets in the U.S. to foreign investors; and dozens of deteriorating economic conditions which have never been worse ever, and/or since the Great Depression.

David R. Remer wrote: You are right about our having to choose our spending priorities very prudently and cautiously, and that goes for local, state, county, and federal government, for many, many years to come. It is one helluva challenge, so let’s get on with it.

We don’t need more deficit spending if cuts in all wasteful and unnecessary spending are eliminated.

The federal government could stop deficit spending, and cut all unnecessary and wasteful spending (and there is a LOT of it), shift that spending to create jobs that produce real avings, benefits, and value.
The federal government could also stop a number of abuses (One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm), which have been hammering most Americans for many decades.
The U.S. has a presence in 134 of 192 nations around the world, and that costs a lot. Is all of that necessary?
Congress just gave itself its 10th raise in 12 years.
Illegal immigration costs U.S. tax payers an estimated $70-to-$327 Billion annually in net losses (for votes and profits). Why is that allowed?
Banks are loan-sharking, with ridiculous 35% (or higher) interest rates, and other usurious and predetory lending practices.
Politicians are FOR-SALE, and they’ve sold-out most Americans, but the majority of voters continue to repeatedly reward the same incumbent politicians with 86.9% re-election rates.
There are a lot of things that could be done.
Instead, there is more rampant spending, borrowing, debt, and fiscal irresponsibility.

David R. Remer wrote: Let’s demand that Obama exercise that veto pen against the Congress’ wasteful and inefficient and pork laden spending, and let’s cut back on spending on non-essentials like NASA, foreign elective military engagements, private school subsidies, abstinence only education programs, monuments, and oil industry subsidies to name just a few. And let’s raise taxes on the wealthy who, even after having their taxes raised, will remain wealthy, and boost government revenues to offset some of he necessary deficit spending. And let’s demand that federal dollars spent address a minimum of two national needs across time and get at least double the bang for our tax payer buck.

HMMMmmmmm … I don’t think Obama will veto Congress’ raises (their 10th in 12 years). After all, Obama received a few of those raises while he was in Congress.

I heard today that the Stimulus BILL in Congress had a lot of pork-barrel in it (for the Endowment forthe Arts, etc.).

David R. Remer wrote: We can do that. We can make these demands on our representatives.

Yes, until you are blue in the face, and it won’t make one bit of difference. Congress is FOR-SALE, and the average voter has no voice, because a tiny 0.3% of all 200 million eligible voters make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more.

David R. Remer wrote: And given the last election, I think most will listen and take notice. They know the American people are watching like never before in decades.

I seriously doubt it. There may be a few reforms here and there, but it will most like be severely inadequate.

David R. Remer wrote: d.a.n, what do you think of the idea of the federal government stimulating the economy by legislating a cap of 20% on all credit cards, outlawing higher rates as usury?

I think credit card interest rates should be limited to what most small claims courts limit interest rates: 10% I’ve never paid over 8.5% on any debt in my entire life. But the problem with all of this is (again) inflation. It’s hard to make money on money when inflation is so high (officially 3.85% for year 2008, but most likely at least triple that in reality). Any way, perhaps Americans should try to learn to live with less credit? That’s also one way to reduce usury. Don’t get in debt. What despicable banks are doing today is nothing more than a form of slavery. The level of usury in this nation is disgusting and demonstrates how greedy the banks and credit card companies really are. Also, it is the jacking-up on adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) that is helping to fuel 10,000 foreclosures per day. The banks are so utterly greedy, it resulted in losses due to massive foreclosures. Not only that, they packaged that debt and sold it all over the world, which is outright fraud. And it must be nice to be able to do what the Federal Reserve does; creating new money at a ratio of 9-to-1 of debt-to-reserves, and receiving interest on the money created from thin air loaned to member banks. Cha Ching! And their greed is apparent to, as evidenced by 52 consecutive years of incessant inflation.

David R. Remer wrote: The trillion or so dollars that would free up for consumption by credit card holders through much lower monthly credit card payments would add significantly to economic stimulation and without tax dollars having to be spent for that portion of stimulus effect.

Yes, that is a very good idea. It’s despicable the way the banks prey on the poor and financially ignorant. There are countless instances of people owing tens of thousands on credit card debt that started out only being a few thousand dollars in purchases, due to late payment fees and rates getting jacked up to the maximum (as high as 64%).

David R. Remer wrote: We are after all, talking about a reduction in interest rates from a high of 32% currently. Even a six percent reduction in interest rates would produce 100’s of billions of dollars of new consumption over the next couple years by the millions of Americans with at least one credit card with interest rates above 24%.

Good point. However, I wouldn’t recommend a lot of unnecessary consumption. People need to pay down their debt, since this nation has a debt problem (not a credit problem).

David R. Remer wrote: Bank of America charges many credit card holders 29 to 32% interest rates, and now they want another 20 billion from tax payers in hand outs. This fleecing of the American public through government connections and influence has GOT TO STOP!

Yes. It’s disgusting isn’t it.

Congress is FOR-SALE, and in the pocket of the wealthy banks.
Yet, most voters repeatedly reward Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, despite dismal 9%-to-18% approval ratings for Congress.

Therefore, I hope for better, but realistically doubt many (if any) abuses will be stopped until enough Americans are jobless , homeless , broke and/or hopelessly deep in debt, and hungry.
Already, more people are now unemployed today (11.1 to 24.6 Million; 7.2%) than in the Great Depression (12.83 Million; 21.7%), and those people could care less about percentages.
Perhaps when enough voters are unhappy enough, they will do what most voters did several years into the Great Depression, and vote-out hundreds of incumbent politicians (206 voted-out in year 1933)?

By the way, some economists who predicted this economic crisis are also predicting a run on the U.S. Dollar (i.e. hyperinflation), if the federal government and Federal Reserve try to money-print their way out of this crisis. I agree, because:

• there are over $11 Trillion of foreign owned U.S. Dollars;


• nation-wide debt has fueled a massive $20+ Trillion liquidation of assets in the U.S. that are now foriegn owned; many Americans borrowed against the equity in their homes which are now worth much less than they owe on the loan.


• the deterioration of the manufacturing base in the U.S. and the massive $67 Trillion of nation-wide debt will exacerbate the liquidation of existing assets (i.e. becoming foreign owned); there are more jobs in the government than all manufacturing jobs in the U.S.;


• a number of abuses will continue to hammer most Americans (e.g. regressive taxation; usury; inflation; illegal immigration; dangerous healthcare killing 195,000 per year; 2 wars; a U.S. presence in 132 nations; declining education; massive and growing $10.7 Trillion national debt; the near qunintupling of nation-wide debt from 100% to 483% of GDP; lawlessness, constitutional violations, corruption, government FOR-SALE; and a greedy Congress that just rewarded itself for all of it with their 10th raise in 12 years; etc.), and rewarded the greedy banks with $3.2 to $8.5 Trillion in bail-outs and hand-outs;


• all of the above will result in more unemployment; especially since the wealthy have moved most manufacturing and jobs out of the U.S.

Any way, I’m definitely not in the camp that believes we can borrow, print-money, grow the debt larger, and spend our way to prosperity.

That might have worked in past recession, but not when debt is near (if not already) untenable.
No one has provided any credible evidence that hyperinflation won’t result from the creation of trillions of new dollars of out of thin air.
There is a mountain of evidence and the history of many nations that have already tried to create massive amounts of new money out of thin air, and it didn’t work.
The liqudation of $20 Trillion of assets in the U.S. to foreign interests alone should be convincing enough.
The nation wide debt-to-GDP growing sharply from 100% to 483% of GDP should be convincing enough.
There are many things we can do, but Congress won’t do them.
I think something like a NEW DEAL would help, but not if it includes a lot of deficit spending, instead of shifts in spending and the eliminate of massive waste and bloat.
Besides, with 11.1-to-24.6 Million unemployed, how much money would it take to employ only half of those unemployed?
It would take $266-to-$590 Billion to pay the median income for only half of the 11.1-to-24.6 Million unemployed for ONLY 1 year.
If we don’t get something useful from that spending (like energy independence), then it will be largerly a waste.
I believe rhe government is going to try make the situation MUCH worse by debauching the currency.
The federal government and Federal Reserve and the banks let their greed get out of control, and much of these wealthy people will still be wealthy when the Depression occurs.
They don’t care, because their greed trumps everything, as evidence by the last few decades of rampant greed, usury, fraud, cookin’ the books, and other manifestations of unchecked greed.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 16, 2009 05:08 PM

kctim,

Americans want a growing economy back with job security. Most Americans could not tell you what the CPI did this morning (for Dec., it was negative), or what the unemployment rate is, or why the economy is in a recession. Most Americans DO KNOW the economy is threatening their jobs and savings.

Therefore, though the American people may opine in polls, correctly I might add, that bailouts have not rescued the economy, they also approve of Obama’s intentions to rescue their economy. The bailouts were necessary, and extremely poorly managed. On Dec. 12 or 13, a bill was passed to insure the other half of the bailout money is not wasted or unaccounted for, and applied to purposes designated by the government, (all measures lacking at the hands of Hank Paulson and Congress’ approval of spending the first half of the bailout TARP funds.

If the opinion poll were prefaced with the FACT that if the bailout money had not gone to the financial sector, America would have been thrown into a far deeper recession and vastly greater unemployment, Americans WOULD say the bailout money was necessary.

One has to beware of opinion polls, they measure ignorance of the topic questioned as readily as they measure information about the topic.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 07:27 PM

Roy said: “I believe there has been $1-2T doled out thus far in the bailout. As far as I know no sector of the economy has showed improvement.”

Why guess and hold beliefs based on ignorance, Roy? Why not google the topic and become informed about how much federal dollars have actually left the treasury in the form of greenbacks or foreign borrowing, vs. the amounts legislated as guarantees or insurance which have not left the treasury, vs. the amounts which have gone out to buy collateralized investments or assets, for which the taxpayer will be repaid either in part, in full, or even with gains.

In a recession, no sector IS going to show improvement. In a recession, one measures how close or far from depression one’s efforts have kept one, and whether one’s efforts have prolonged or shortened the life the recession.

This much is factual. The initial TARP allocations prevented combined with FED reserve actions prevented an American economic meltdown.

That alone was worth 6 to 8 trillion dollars in savings and prophylactic action, not to mention the enormous human suffering that would have attended such an economic meltdown.

Then consider that the FED Reserve’s actions in coordinating central banks around the globe averted a global economic meltdown by halting a global run on money market funds, and it is clear that our government’s actions not only averted a deeper recession or depression, but shortened its life considerably.

1.2 trillion spent or allocated to prevent 6 to 8 trillion in losses. I would call that a pretty fair bargain, despite the ineptitude of Congress and the White House in failing to lay down stricter terms for the use of the 350 billion in TARP funds spent. Wouldn’t you?

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 07:39 PM

Schwamp said: “I truly believe that this too big to fail mindset we have is a big scam. It’s critical that they do fail and get out of the way and make room for something better.”

Yes, and many folks believe aliens perform routine anal experiments on us without our knowing while we are asleep.

Calling for economic meltdown and 100’s of millions of American’s suffering those consequences, may appeal to your sensibilities and adherence to Friedman free market principles, but, I somehow expect your satisfaction level in biting off the American nose to spite the American face would not improve your belief system, one iota.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 07:45 PM

If you were determined to be a tax scofflaw do you reckon the IRS would bail you out come hard times? For years Corp’s have sought and found loopholes to circumvent business tax. If the guy on the street tries to dodge taxes he is apt to get nailed. Yet for businesses it seems to be n accepted practice since the government and the public is aware. And as Dan just posted the goveernment lies to us about the GDP, CPI and other measures and the people accept it even as they are aware. Kind of like refusing to enforce immigration law even though we know the laws are on the books, refusing to close the border even though the public is aware congress passed a bill to do just that, or denying the legal existence of the NAU even though people know the truth. Here is an excerpt from the news media relating to tax havens which we all know exist and seem to appreciate as a business tool even though it is illegal, at least for the guy on the street. “WASHINGTON - Eighty-three of the nation’s 100 largest corporations, including Citigroup, Bank of America and News Corp., had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens in 2007, and some of the companies received federal bailout funding, a government watchdog said Friday. Insurance giant American International Group Inc., which has received about $150 billion in bailout money, had 18 subsidiaries. JPMorgan Chase & Co. had 50 units and Wells Fargo & Co. had 18; both financial institutions received government bailout money.

The Government Accountability Office released a report that said Bank of America Inc., Citigroup Inc. and Morgan Stanley all had more than 100 units in countries that maintain low or no taxes. The three financial institutions were included in the $700 billion financial bailout approved by Congress.”
It may come to an end one day. In fact the dime may have been dropped as several Corp’s are moving from Bermuda. I would expect the next loophole is in and ready for play.
Somehow this idea of Corporate Personhood or Corporations being treated as humans just doesn’t ring true. If I got on a plane and tried to take $5001 dollars out of the country I would expect to be hauled off, hauled in, hauled up and hauled out!

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 16, 2009 07:53 PM

Roy said: “Well, big government, bought and paid for by big business, makes the rules.”

CitiGroup can no longer be counted in the “too big to fail” group, and will no longer be making the rules for Congressional politicians. It may be the case that what is happening to CitiGroup (dismantling it and selling off its separate lines of business) is just a down payment on what is coming. If my guess is right, Bank of America will be among the next to come under the thumb of government enforced downsizing, one way or another.

“I for one am not sitting out here ‘hoping for change’. I want reform of government.”

I think government reform is underway, with years more of it coming. Whether it will prove to be effective or not, remains to be seen, but, the relationship between banks and financial institutions and government, is changing from the status quo as we type with much more to come.

Politicians get the government they deserve too, you know, and if you expect voters to respond to adversity differently, you have to at least concede the potential for politicians to as well, especially with a rout of the Republican Party from power as an example of what voters are potentially capable of in the face of a bleak future and desperation over their job security and wages.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 07:54 PM

d.a.n said: “[The economy] hasn’t been saved. Only a little extra time was bought”

Your crystal ball obviously works better than mine. I have never been able to accurately see into the future with mine, which was always on the fritz, even when chance made it appear otherwise.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 16, 2009 07:58 PM

David,
I object! Not as some Republicans who want to spoil President Obama and Congress attempt to get Americas’ Economy restarted, but as an Independent who has yet heard sound plan to stabilize the Market.

Granted, no single Magic Bullet will restore Wall St to 10,000 in a week nor would any amount of Government Spending help offset the lost of revenue by the corporations in 08. In fact, when I first heard of the Republicans objecting to the release of the other $350 Billion of TARP based on their reason I about fell out of my chair.

However, seeing that the Democratic Leaders in Congress has not explained how the other half of TARP will work in harmony with the proposed $800 Billion Economic Stimulus Package to invert the Market. I feel it is my duty to object to the wasteful spending of the American Taxpayers Dollar.

So, why I may agree with you that objecting for the sake of objecting is not the path that I do believe the Loyal Opposition should follow. As the Leaders of the Republican Party works to find their Voice in the 21st Century after being proved that they are wrong about Trickledown Economics, I should warn President Obama Supporters that the same holds true as My Democratic Leaders work to implement their Ideology of a Trickle-Up Economic Theory.

Thus, knowing that there is only pne thing standing in the way of Americas’ Democratic and Republican Elected Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders being able to declare America Energy Independent from Foreign Oil. I do believe My Peers and Their Children would be better served by the Members of Congress if “We the People” could have an Adult Conversation with the Members of Congress not educated in the Benefits of building a Green Civilization.

Or does My Peers care to claim the Ignorance of the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s against Their Children of the 21st Century?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 17, 2009 02:53 AM

I’ll say this about that. Our government, in doing the bidding of big corporations has,
for the last 30 or so years taken this position of globalizing the the economies of the world. They will tell you this was done to bring people out of poverty and make war less likely. What they have shown us is rampant greed and corruption with no planning for the adverse effect of globalizaltioln. Secretly setting up the NAU and expecting to shoe horn the NAU in as the only legal US government at some point downstream. They have diligently worked to break the back of the middle class in getting them ready for globalization. Now they have whizzed away something lik $8T dollars io fight the so-called recession. All the push has been to break the middle class. Nothing about bringing CEO wages and big banks/businesses into line for the globalized economy. So when the enevitable happened, big business had to take a hit from the effect of globalization, the government(Paulson) chose to bail out his wall street buddies. Some $8T has been committed to bailouts. The downturn could have been halted in it’s tracks with the infusion of $2T to buy up degault mortgages. Therefore, I view it as nothing more than a scheme to further make the population ready for globalization while ironically trying to hold the wealthy elites up, to big to fail, etc. Do they expect banks to muddle into globalization without changing their business model? If the population is put on a wage diet do big biz think they can continue to operate as usual? US corp’s have set up to operate in a globalized economy around the world. But here in this country they haven’t given up a dime. Compare the cost of a viagara pill in the US with the EU.
Obama is going to save or create 4M jobs. Sure you can continue to break the back of the middle class by creating infrastructure jobs funded by taxpayer payer dollars. Surely you folks must understand that a country that doesn’t manufacture will have a limited existence. Initially the talk was that the US would become a knowledge based country and cretivity and innovation would be able ro replace manufacturing. Why then would Bill Gates be the biggest advocate for relocating high tech overseas and the biggest advocate and practioner of hiring cheap foreign labor through temporary work visas? In the middle of this so-called recession the border is still open, there are some 40M illegals here while we are enduring 15% unemployment, A bill is sailing through congress now that will provide $32B for childrens healthcare which will include illegal aliens. The call from congress and the new administration if for comprehensive amnesty for illegals. Calif. is $43B in the red, near bankruptcy, 23 percent illiteracy, and yet they will fire 2000 teachers to hood on to their sanctuary laws of paying for the healthcare and education of illegals. And they have the balls to ask the US taxpayer for a bailout.
The thing I want out of this deal is reform of government. A revolution at the ballot box.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 17, 2009 12:39 PM

Henry, trickle up, or trickle down, as an ideology is doomed to fail because applied constantly, it ignores needed adjustments in the opposite direction.

For example, right now, the main reason for job losses is absence of consumer activity. A trickle up approach will help some by giving poorer folks more discretionary cash to spend. But, the consumers are also not spending out of fear and anxiety over losing their jobs. So, there is a very large psychological component to this, that trickle up theory won’t address, in and of itself. And trickle up or trickle down ignore deficits and debt almost entirely as applied by the two parties.

I had to go in debt to invest in my future by going to college. It was worthwhile debt. It got paid off, and my living standard improved substantially thereafter. This is what needs to happen for America, whose future has been ignored so long that it was almost lost completely.

Investments in our schools, education quality, infrastructure maintenance, and moving from fossil fuel energy to other sources, and extending the internet and broadband everywhere, paving the way for most homes and commercial buildings to become largely energy independent self-producers, and dramatically driving down the cost of health care while increasing quality delivery standards are all necessary investments in our future if we are to have one we can afford.

Yes, and I forget to mention establishing a less hostile and more cooperative live and let live approach to international relations is essential as well.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 17, 2009 12:43 PM

Roy, you are wrong on one major point in my opinion. It was not our government that created globalization, it was simply a midwife to a birth that was going to come into this world anyway by way of corporations and their dedication to diversification.

Corporations were able to create international bridges where their governments could not create cooperative relations otherwise. The problem with our government was failing to see the need for better international governmental cooperation in the regulation and oversight of cross and mutli-national corporations.

The day America conceded to allowing international corporate specialization to make America dependent on foreign nations for essential goods and services was the day America took a very wrong turn.

That turn must be undone now, and Obama and many in Congress are now willing to undertake that most painful and costly redo.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 17, 2009 12:51 PM

David R. Remer wrote: Your crystal ball obviously works better than mine. I have never been able to accurately see into the future with mine, which was always on the fritz, even when chance made it appear otherwise.

A person does need a crystal ball or need to be clairvoyant to:

• see this economic mess approaching, caused by decades of numerous abuses, fiscal and moral bankruptcy, and other manifestations of unchecked greed.
• see that more rampant borrowing, debt, and money-printing will lead to inflation, which could easily cause a run on the U.S. Dollar, of which over $11 Trillion are foreign owned.
• see from the history of the past 150 years that many nations have already tried to money-print and spend their way to prosperity, and it resulted in hyperinflation. Many nations have already tried it, and it resulted in hyperinflation (i.e. in the last 150 years: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation#Examples_of_hyperinflation):
  • Madagascar 2004 - 2005 (1/5th of starting value),
  • Zimbabwe 2003 - present (6 quadrillionth of the starting value and continuing to fall),
  • Romania 1998 - 2005 (1/50,000th of starting value),
  • Former Soviet Union 1993 – 2002 (1/14th of starting value),
  • Angola 1991 - 1995 (1 Billionth of starting value),
  • Belarus 1994 - 2002 (1/1,000 of starting value),
  • Georgia 1993 - 1994 (1 Millionth of starting value),
  • Ukraine 1993 - 1995 (1/100,000th of starting value),
  • Bosnia-Herzegovina 1992 – 1993 (1/100,000th of starting value),
  • Krajina 1992 - 1993 (1 Millionth of starting value) reincorporated into Croatia in year 1998,
  • Republika Srpska - Bosnia 1992 - 1993 (1 Millionth of starting value),
  • Turkey 1991 - 1999 , double-digit inflation 2005 - 2007(1 Millionth of starting value),
  • Poland 1990 – 1994 (1/10,000th of starting value),
  • Yugoslavia 1989 - 1994 (1/1x10^27 of starting value),
  • Zaire 1989 - 1996 (1/30 Billionths of starting value),
  • Nicaragua 1987 - 1990 (1/5 Billionth of starting value),
  • Mexico 1987 to 1993 (about 1/3 of starting value),
  • Peru 1984 - 1990 (1 Billionth of starting value),
  • Bolivia 1984 - 1986 (1/1,000 of starting value);
  • Israel 1976 – 1986 (1/16th of starting value),
  • Argentina 1975 – 1983 (1/1,000th of starting value),
  • Chile 1971 - 1973 (1/12th of starting value),
  • Brazil 1960 – 1994 (1 trillionth of starting value), Chile 1971 – 1973 (1/3rd of starting value),
  • China 1947 – 1955 (1/10,000th of starting value),
  • Taiwan 1947 - 1949 (1/40,000th of starting value),
  • Greece 1943 – 1953 (1/50 trillionth of starting value),
  • Hungary 1945 – 1946 (100 quintillionth of the starting value),
  • Japan 1934 – 1951 (1/362nd of starting value),
  • Hungary 1922 – 1923 (1/4 of starting value),
  • Austria 1921 – 1923 (about 1/4 of starting value),
  • Free City of Danzig 1922 - 1923 (1/10 Millionth of starting value),
  • Weimar Republic of Germany 1920 – 1923 (1/466 billionth of starting value),
  • U.S.A. (Confederate States of America) 1861 – 1865 (1/90th of starting value, and then, by the end of the Civil War, the Confederate Dollar depreciated to zero).
  • It also happened in the ancient Roman Empire, when the silver and gold coinage of that day was progressively debased with less valuable metals, in order to fund wars, giveaways to the Plebeians, and various other adventures.
  Other nations that tried to borrow and money-print their way to prosperity learned the hard way that it not only failed miserably, but made things much worse, by debauching the currency, which will destroy all savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages. It will turn a bad recession into another Great Depression with double or triple or 4+ digit inflation rates. All debts will default. Money will be worthless. And with that will come high crime rates, and more pain and misery than allowing bad debt to unwind and pushing bad debt back to those that created it via irresponsibility and/or fraud (i.e. greedy banks, corporations, and Wall Street). We shouldn’t be rewarding banks and Wall Street for their massive irresponsibility, greed, and fraud. The FDIC and Federal Government should guarantee depositors money up to the established limits (i.e. $100K to $250K), but we should not be funding the bank owners fat salaries, bonuses, parties, stocks, etc. In fact, bad banks should be nationalized temporarily.
• see that the federal debt-per-capita (per person) today has never been worse. It is 61.9% higher than the last highest federal debt-per-capita after World War II in year 1945. In inflation-adjusted 2008 U.S. Dollars, federal debt-per-capita in 1945 = $21,719 ($3.045 Trillion National Debt in 2008 Dollars; for population = 140 Million in 1945) In inflation-adjusted DEC-2008 U.S. Dollars, federal debt-per-capita = $35,082 (for $10.7 Trillion National Debt; population = 305 Million in 2008; 61.9% higher than after World War II). In inflation-adjusted DEC-2008 U.S. Dollars, and including the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from, federal debt-per-capita = $77,049 (for $23.5 Trillion total federal debt; 3.55 times more than after World War II).
• see that the U.S. Dollar has been falling significantly against most major international currencies for about a decade.
• see that the decline in the U.S. GDP (in inflation-adjusted 2005 and 1950 U.S. Dollars) is the biggest decline since year 1900 (or ever).
• see that $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars could all come rushing back quickly if inflation motivates the dumping and spending of those U.S. Dollars, creating a vicious circle of more spending and more inflation. And since the manufacturing base has been severely deteriorated in the U.S. for decades, we won’t have much to sell, except the assets we already own, such as homes, land, new and used items, etc. That liquidation has already begun, in which foreign-owned assets in the U.S. more than tripled from 6 Trillion to over $20 Trillion in 2007.
• see that the federal government can’t employ the 11.1-to-24.6 Million unemployed today (DEC-2008), which is now more than the total 12.83 Million unemployed in the Great Depression.
• see that $3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion already lent/spent as of DEC-2008 (see list here: www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-113008-fi-pricetag-g,0,5292528.graphic) will lead to more inflation, and the Federal Reserve won’t be able to stop inflation when 90% of all new money is created as debt, 95% of all money in existence in the U.S. is debt, and nation-wide debt-per-capita has never been higher (now $220,000 per person).
• see that the federal federal government is unlikely to cut unnecessary waste and bloat, and will instead grow the federal government beyond the current size of nightmare proportions. Especially when 86.9% of the FOR-SALE Congress was re-elected and just gave themselves another raise (the 10th raise in 12 years);
• see that the current level of federal ($23.5 Trillion) and nation-wide debt ($67 Trillion = $220,000 per person on average) is untenable. Much of that debt will default, as evidenced by 10,000 foreclosures per day.
• see that the federal government is lying about current inflation, GDP, unemployment, and debt. The lack of accurate economic statistics (such as inflation) is dangerous. In inflation-adjusted 2005 or 1950 U.S. Dollars, GDP has been declining since JAN-2007, despite the federal government’s recent announcement that the recession started in DEC-2007. Also, the current decline in GDP is the largest decline since year 1900 (if not ever).
• see that the federal government is unlikely to stop these 10 abuses, which have been hammering most Americans for decades.
• see that those abuses have resulted in these 18+ worst deteriorating economic conditions ever, and/or since the Great Depression.
• see that the federal government, Federal Reserve, and banks are about to turn a bad situation into a worse situation, by more borrowing, the creation of trillions of new dollars out of thin air, which will create enough inflation to trigger a run on the U.S. Dollar, which will destroy all savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages and succeed in making things MUCH worse. The level of debt is untenable and growing it by several trillions WILL create more inflation and more liquidation.
• see that the debt-bubble is near (if not already) untenable, and growing it bigger risks bursting the debt-bubble and a more horrible economic terror: hyperinflation.
• see that the near quintupling of the nation-wide debt (from 100% of GDP in 1956 to 483% of GDP in 2008) is a recipe for economic disaster.
• see that many (if not all) of the following need to start being done now (simultaneously), or we will most likely see another Great Depression caused by inflation, which will trigger hyperinflation:
  • (01) Stop these abuses now.
  • (02) Stop the dishonest, usurious, predatory, lending practices. Stop the Ponzi-scheme and the steep leveraging of debt-to-reserves (i.e. 9-to-1 fractional lending) by the Federal Reserve and the federal government; banks are loan-sharking, with ridiculously high interest rates (commonly up to 10%-to-20% and as high as 64%) and other predetory lending practices. Banks are preying on the young, poor, minorities, and financially naive.
  • (03) Stop growing and eliminate all of the massive bloat and waste in the federal government now. We don’t need all of this bloat: www.akdart.com/gov1.html
  • (04) Stop the war in Iraq;
  • (05) Stop the war in Afghanistan too perhaps? Insist that other nations help or suffer the consequences of refusing to help in Afghanistan. The terrorists are now mostly in northern Pakistan.
  • (06) Stop the U.S. presence in 134 nations around the world. That costs a LOT!. Is all of that necessary? No. Reduce that presence significantly (if not totally), without become excessively protectionist.
  • (07) Stop throwing money, subsidies, tax breaks, and welfare at failing banks, financial corporations, the wealthy, and Wall Street; stop rewarding failure;
  • (08) Stop rampant corruption by increasing and enforcing more transparency and accountability;
  • (09) Stop Constitutional violations; reduce lawlessness; enforce existing laws (e.g. Article V); stop illegal immigration and $70-to-$327 Billion in annual net losses due to illegal immigration;
  • (10) Stop plundering Social Security surpluses; $12.8 Trillion has been borrowed and spent, leaving Social Security pay-as-you-go, with 77 Million baby-boomers approaching;
  • (11) Stop regressive taxation: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm#Taxes
  • (12) Stop killing 195,000 per day due to preventable medical mistakes. Between 1999 and 2004, over 1.5 million people were killed by preventable medical mistakes. That is more than all the American soldiers killed in the American Revolution (4,435), the War of 1812 (2,260), the Indian Wars (1,000), the Mexican War (1,733), the Civil War (462,000), the Spanish American War (385), WWI (53,402), WWII (291,557), Vietnam War (58,209), Korean War (36,574), the Iraq Gulf War (529), and the current Iraq war Mar-2003-present (3,963), combined! Create a non-profit national health insurance system (get rid of the millions of unnecessary middlemen); build non-profit hospitals and clinics.
  • (13) Stop Congress from rewarding itself with a raise almost every year (Congress recently gave itself the 10th raise in 12 years; the raises are actually automitic and a BILL is required to stop the automatic raise; must be nice, eh?). Is that necessary? No. What arrogance! ? ! Especially when U.S. Troops go without armor, adequate medical care, promised benefits, and have to do 2, 3, or 4+ tours in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.
  • (14) Stop pandering politicians who are virtually are FOR-SALE. Allow only equal public financing of elections. Otherwise, politicians will continue to sell-out most Americans.!
  • (15) Stop pork-barrel; pass a ONE-PURPOSE-PER-BILL amendment;
  • (16) Stop career politicians and judges; pass TERM LIMITS for all offices;
  • (17) Stop the unfair incumbent advantages: One-Simple-Idea.com/FAQ.htm#UnfairAdvantages
  • (18) Stop the deterioration of public education; eliminate the over-paid and incompetent adminstrative staff; More education solutions: One-Simple-Idea.com/Education.htm
  • (19) Stop repeatedly rewarding irresponsible, FOR-SALE, incompetent, and/or corrupt incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates. Stop rewarding corruption, or suffer the painful consequences: One-Simple-Idea.com/NeverWorse.htm
  • (20) Create jobs to research, develop, and implement better and renewable energy resources and rebuild and improve the nation’s infrastructure (which will create long-term savings and benefits);
  • More Solutions: One-Simple-Idea.com/Solutions1.htm

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful). Posted by: d.a.n at January 17, 2009 01:04 PM

CORRECTION:

(12) Stop killing 195,000 per day year due to preventable medical mistakes.

David R. Remer wrote: Roy, you are wrong on one major point in my opinion. It was not our government that created globalization, it was simply a midwife to a birth that was going to come into this world anyway by way of corporations and their dedication to diversification.

I think Roy is right.

The government is FOR-SALE to their wealthy puppeteers.
Greed is at the root of all of it.
Transnational corporations go where labor and resources are cheapest, and sometimes working conditions are dismal and/or dangerous.
In China, 16 people die every day in coal mines.
Greed is behind many of these labor abuses.
Government is complicit in a myriad of ways (e.g. legal and illegal immigration, H1B visas, etc.).
And the government also rewards some corporations for moving operations out of the U.S. (with tax breaks and subsidies).

Thus, the government is a co-conspirator.

And voters are complicit too. Perhaps when enough voters are jobless , homeless , broke and/or deep in-debt , unfairly taxed , and hungry enough, the voters may finally stop repeatedly rewarding Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates? If not, then voters really only have themselves to thank for it, since they have the power to change it. Perhaps when voters are feeling sufficient pain and misery, they will do what most unhappy voters did in year 1933 when the voters ousted 206 members of Congress? Sadly, the Great Depression had already been in progress for several years, and it appears voters will wait too long again. After all, it will be 2 years before the next election, and that is probably too late to avoid a lot of pain and misery that is already in the pipeline now, and 86.9% of Congress was re-elected on 7-NOV-2008 and is unlikely to do much better than they have for several decades.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 17, 2009 01:23 PM

“CitiGroup can no longer be counted in the “too big to fail” group, and will no longer be making rules for Congressional politicians.”

CitiGroup is the first bank to take advantage of Fed chairman Bernanke’s good bank, bad bank strategy. This strategy calls for the banks to be split in half. One half, the bad banks, will hold all the toxic debt and be bought by the government, leaving the so called good banks free to do business as usual.

” the relationship between banks and financial institutions and government, is changing from the status quo as we type with much more to come.”

Apparently the politicians, the banks and the financial institutions haven’t gotten this message yet. The banks and financial institutions spent millions in campaign contributions and lobbying efforts in 2008 and are poised to spend even more in 2009.

Some glaring examples, the Obama campaign recieved approx. $450 thousand from them and Obama rushed to Washington to sign a sight unseen, $700 billion pig in a poke bailout bill. Other big recipients were John McCain, Hillary Clinton and those two great financial guru’s of the Senate and House, Chris Dodd and Barney Franks.

Obama says that his inauguration will be a celebration of the American spirit and the banks and financial institutions are doing what they can to make it so.

The banks and financial institutions might be experiencing hard times but, thier executives sure arent. ” The Center for Responsive Government said executives of finance, insurance and real estate companies and their family members gave $7.1 million to Obama’s inaugural committee.”

A majority of voters opted to replace the Republicans with Democrats, why? Because the election process, like so many other things associated with our government, is a Catch 22.

Posted by: jlw at January 17, 2009 03:32 PM

David,
Why I agree with you that Trickle-Up or Trickledown Economics does have pitfalls. However, given the alternative of having an unbridled market I do believe that some sort of order needs to be maintained by My Peers.

For why I can see the day when the Corporations of Man will be able to supply every Consumer on Earth with what they need and desire. Looking at the track record of history I do believe that “We the People” have a long road ahead to insure that happening.

However, in the meantime I do believe that by investing in Education, Green Technology, and History that the Children of My Peers will be better prepared to deal with the Issues of Man that as of today still must go unanswered.

For why Energy Independence, World Hunger, and several other Issues leftover from the 70’s can now be dealt with through Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders. I can only imagine the questions that will be raised by your Children’s Children about Our Ignorance of how a Cilized Green World is suppose to function.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 17, 2009 08:09 PM

David,
Thats a Civilized Green World

Roy Ellis,
Why protocal prevents me from explaining why the Barons of Society have increased their ranks over the last 30 years, I do realize that it seems that the Middle-Class has been left out to dry in the wind.

For stealing from the Poor to provide the Rich with what they need, want, and desire seems to have a long history in Mankind. And why I can assure you that not all Humans believe that is the best form of Government and Society. Upon looking back to the capacity of the Corporations in the 70’s to provide the Goods and Sevices demanded by All of Society and comparing that with todays corporation capacity I do wonder how much more has to be done in order to ensure everybody can get what they want at a reasonable price.

No, the question of globalization is complex. For why a Simple Man may believe that one meal a day and a roof over their family head is more than enough to be considered Rich. Like the Barons and Lords of Yesterday, there exists folks that believe they should be able to gather as much wealth as the Kings and Queens of the World.

However, in the Spirit of Being Human and finding Common Ground I do believe that every Citizen should be taught and given the opportunity to become Economically Viable and Financially Independent regardless of Race. Color, or Creed. And why we know that divides some of Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders I do hope that My Peers Children can show Our Elected Officials and Powers-that-Be of the 21st Century that it is in Their Inherent Best Interest to use Mans’ Power to build a Global Economy where every Citizen is seen as a Human.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 17, 2009 08:36 PM

True Corporate America picked up and moved in unison with the world’s major corporations. I don’t know what kind of subsidies the government provided for relocation. I do know that 30 years ago the government paying for foreign advertisement for US corporations. I do know that tax havens for corporations have been in place in Bermuda for about 30 years. I do know that globalization was effected without any planning, or none that has been made public, for any adverse effects of globalization. I do recall there was some talk of job training for those who lost jobs to globalization but job training went nowhere as they simply realized there was no demand for jobs of any kind and that it was nonsensical to train people having no prospects for employment. I do know that it was Goldman Sac’s who was the banker of choice for setting up relocation deals, that Henry Paulson was a big player in that arena when he worked for Sav’s and that Henry was front and center to make sure Sac’s and his wall street buddies received the bulk of the bailout bucks.
One could say globalization was done on piss poor planning or just no planning. Either way, here we are. China is coming up from $1.50/hr and we are going down from $18/hr. I guess at some point world wages will reach parity and we will live happily everafter. Now, I’ve watch middle class wages fall and you can bet it’s going to be real different on the other side of this recession. But, my doctor bill hasn’t gone down, CEO wages still through the roof, new cars still above $30 grand, etc. Universities are out of site, millions can’t afford health insurance, etc. Chinese goods can only become more expensive from this point.
David, maybe you can enlighten us and give us some advice on what kinds of manufacturing we need to get started and related training we will need to fill the subsequent jobs. Sounds ludicrous to suggest that Obama will redo NAFTA, the WTO, IMF, NAU and a host of other quasi-illegal-government organizations. After all, the entire world body and the US Chamber of Commerce/government has worked to get us this far with globalization. You expect one President, who is clamoring for amnesty, to turn that around?

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 17, 2009 08:49 PM

DR
It seem the Reps just do not get it. I’ll bet the farm that when the BHO stimulus plan is submitted they will try and exempt it from prevailing rate laws(Davis-Bacon) and will probably try and weaken overtime. They will also try and steer projects to Halliburton and the likes.Anything to move more wealth to the rich instead of to the working Americans that support the economy. I must say that unless they change dramatically you have provided the only (IMO) cogent arguement yet for a third party to check the Dems.

DAN
You really should get a grasp of Keynesian economics. Krugman has a handle on it. I say again,in normal economies you are correct although the sky is not quite falling. These are not normal economic times and decisions have to made in terms of reality. The biggest danger is not doing enough to stimulate the economy. One anology is trying to drive a car up an icey hill. If you do not get enough momentum you fail and may wind up worse off. Lack of audacity ,the size and duration of the stimulus plan is a valid criticism. Also some of the spending will do little to stimulate,like the business tax cuts and ,although a campaign promise, the small tax cuts for the middle class. Public investment is the hail Mary pass at this point. Let us pray BHO throws it hard enough.

Posted by: bills at January 17, 2009 09:34 PM

d.a.n, seeing the past is not seeing the future. You made a statement about the future, and then point to the past.

Change is predicated on the future being different from the past. There is no totality of evidence that currently exists to predict that America’s economic future is doomed. We have been in worse economic positions before, and survived them to grow again.

So throw all the past data you want out, it does not determine the future. It only describes the past. One can guess about the future, but, one cannot state what it will be unequivocally. America can survive these crises brought on since 1999. And it remains to be seen if America will take the appropriate steps, which at a minimum are:

1) preventing a depression which could cause our government to default on its debts

2) scaling back spending to the necessities and changing the wasteful legislative process

3) raising government revenues to match government spending

4) and allocating for and providing for future financial needs in real time current budgets and tax revenues

Following these steps do not guarantee economic survival into the future, but, they will certainly increase the chances of survival significantly. And that is the best anyone can do, since the future is not knowable, only guessable.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 17, 2009 10:06 PM

David, you wrote: d.a.n, seeing the past is not seeing the future. You made a statement about the future, and then point to the past.

If that’s the case a lot of general’s are wasting their time studying the civil war, etc. There is little need of history if you can’t use it to project to the future. How does the NASA know where a satellite is going to be tomorrow?
To not speculate or postulate the future would be sinful or grossly ignorant. Government/Chamber of Commerce feels the economy must grow at 4-8% yearly or we will crash. To achieve that rate we must increase business and population to meet the desired numbers. Alas, we now have a hiccup in our future caused by the post war baby boom. Some 70M folks soon leaving the work force. What might we read into that? Get more workers of course! Bypass the immigration system. Open the borders. Create so-called temporary work visas and never ask or check to see if anybody leaves. Every 3 or 4 years when you’ve collected a bunch of them give them amnesty and keep them coming.
From that we can deduce even more of the future. We can deduce that with 70M retiring and 40M illegals entering we still need another 30M which is why the border is still open, laws being ignorned and Obama holding out for another amnesty. We can deduce that there ain’t much We The People going on here. All the shots are being called by business sector. Based on my projections I can see way into the future. I can see my great grandchild as a worker living in a 43 story apartment/business complex where he/she is only allowed to come to ground once every three months. I hope they can keep making their numbers.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 17, 2009 11:53 PM

Roy Ellis,
Actually Roy both David and you are are right about History and the Future.

For why history cannot predict the future, it does certainly leave a lasting impression. So to quote an old saying “those who do not learn from the past will surely be doomed to repeat it.”

Hence, the problem facing the Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders of today. For why we could compare the War of Terror as the same as Americas’ Civil War and come up with one set of ideas to follow. The same can be said about comparing todays civil unrest as that faced by our parents in the Late 60’s and Early 70’s when they found out that Government and Society is limited.

Yet, which one is right? No, having spent the last 25 years speeding to the botom only to find out that on one has all the answers I do believe that the political deliema faced by those who want to rebel against changing the Status Quo in America is how to make it better. For try as hard you might care to tell me any idea that lends itself to worsening the condition of man will find political wings in the 21st Century?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 18, 2009 02:05 AM

Right on Henry! I for one, am tired of following the boom to bust political charts. Surely we could have been smarter than following a depression with another depression. History taught us plenty but ever greedy business folks, AIG’s CEO comes to mind, and a bought and paid for government/NAU is willing to take us over a cliff. I guess we souldn’t worry too much as the government has plans to extricate us from this situation. If they can bailout Goldman Sac’s and keep them afloat to weather the worst of it then foreign funds can be used to buy up a lot of stuff and put us back to work.

Otherwise, we have the government/NAU we deserve!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 18, 2009 12:20 PM

In Remer’s point #3 he defines liberalism as practiced by today’s democrats succinctly.

“3) raising government revenues to match government spending”. I usually have a good laugh when I hear liberals speak of government revenue as though it is somehow earned by labor or capital performance. Government revenue is liberal-speak for taxes in much the same way as “Pro-choice” is used as a misleading euphemism for killing the unborn.

One need not be a seer or prophet to understand where “raising government revenues to match government spending” leads. Liberals talk of balanced budgets and by that they don’t mean lowering spending…but rather, increasing revenue. Let’s take Remer’s advice to the ridiculous extreme and imagine a day when government spending requires 100% of all the revenue produced by revenue producers…namely, you and me. Remer, if he is honest and a reasonable thinker should be able to tell us at what point government spending should stop exceeding revenue. Approximately what percent of GDP should government consume? What percentage would make liberals jump for joy and declare we have finally found the right balance between spending and revenue (taxes)?

In Remer’s point #2 he states; “2) scaling back spending to the necessities and changing the wasteful legislative process

Have we seen any evidence of point #2 in Mr. Obams’s rescue plans or in Mr. Obey’s recently released Democrat plan for the nation’s recovery? Mr. Remer should be able to point to these spending scale-backs if he truly believes this statement.

What liberal democrats deem as “necessities” differs hugely from a conservative view. When all the necessities in Mr. Obama’s and Mr. Obey’s plans are known will we find more than just a little “pork”. I certainly think so.

For liberals, more spending is always the answer to any problem. Has it worked with social security, Medicare, Medicaid, the nation’s schools, the banking fiasco or the nation’s poor?

Please Mr. Remer, provide the evidence for your hideous prescription.

Posted by: Jim M at January 18, 2009 12:58 PM

Roy said: “There is little need of history if you can’t use it to project to the future.”

Project means guess and probability percentage assignment. It is the stuff of bookmakers and Wall Street prognosticators. I never even implied, in fact I even stated, that the past can improve one’s guesses about the future, but, the future is subject to the Heisenberg principle, and the Butterfly Effect, and therefore, cannot be known. Guessed at with something less than 100% probability, yes. Guaranteed to pass? Absolutely NOT! Especially with something as infinitely variable as our economy.

One innovative technical improvement could salvage the global economy, like a cheap, mobile, infinitely renewable, non-polluting energy source. One natural disaster that wipes out 1/2 of humanity such as an influenza strain, could provide a path to future economic growth for the rest of this century and well into through the next. The correlation between the possible and probable can NEVER be 1.0 consistently. Therefore, the future cannot be knowable. Guessable, yes. Project with odds of probability, yes. Knowable? No!

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 18, 2009 02:44 PM

Jim M, wow, what a gift for the obvious your comment exemplifies to recognize that raising government revenues usually means raising taxes. How impressive! DuH!

Jim M said: “Have we seen any evidence of point #2 in Mr. Obams’s rescue plans or in Mr. Obey’s recently released Democrat plan for the nation’s recovery? Mr. Remer should be able to point to these spending scale-backs if he truly believes this statement.”

Here is an analogy you should be able to grasp. Person B slams into Person A’s parked car, causing so much damage as to make repair costs just slightly less than the cost to replace the vehicle with another of the same kind, and quality. Neither Person B or A have insurance. Person B, the reckless driver is broke, and has nothing to offer Person A for his needed repairs. Person A, has a minimum wage job completely consumed by rent, utilities, and food.

What is Person A to do? There are no other jobs to be had that would pay him better. If he loses his current job, he is out not only his car, but a place to live, and money for food. But, to keep his job, he must have transportation. Person A has NO CHOICE but to borrow the money to repair or replace his car, in order to keep working so that he can aspire to eventually increasing his income and paying off the loan for the car damage.

Person B was the Republican controlled government. Person A is Obama and the Democrats. And the economy is Person A’s car.

You should be able to grasp this reality. But, you may elect to not to as a psychological defense mechanism given your previous defenses of Republican actions and conservative ideology which have wrecked this economy.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 18, 2009 03:00 PM

bills wrote: d.a.n, You really should get a grasp of Keynesian economics.

Why? I don’t agree with all aspects of Keynesian economics.

bills wrote: Krugman has a handle on it.

Krugman did not see the severity of this economic mess coming as some other economists did.

Also, Krugman is now also acknowledging the possibility of hyperinflation, and the likelihood of much of the stimulus being pilfered, wasted, and accompanied by unnecessary pork-barrel.
Many who saw this mess coming are acknowledging the risk of hyperinflation.
Besides, no nation ever borrowed, money-printed, and spent its way to prosperity.
Those that have tried discovered a worse economic terror: hyperinflation
The risk is increased for the U.S., because a deteriorated manufacturing base in the U.S., over $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars that could come rushing back, the tripling of liquidation and sell-off of U.S. assets (from %6 Trillion to $34 Trillion) to foreign interests, 52 consecutive years of incessant inflation, and the dishonest misreporting of inflation, GDP, debt, unemployment, and other economic statistics.

bills wrote: I say again, in normal economies you are correct although the sky is not quite falling.

• Per-capita-debt has never been worse.
• Foreclosures per day have never been worse.
• More people are unemployed today (11.1-to-24.6 Million) than in the Great Depression (12.83 Million).
• Average savings have been negative since year 2005.
• Total federal debt ($10.7 Trillion National Debt + $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security) has never been larger as a percentage of GDP.
• There has never been as large a decline in GDP since JAN-2007 to DEC-2008 since year 1900 (if ever).
• The wealth disparity gap has never been larger since the Great Depression.
• The nation-wide debt-to-GDP ration has never been larger (100% in year 1956 to 483% in year 2008).

But you are right. Things can (and probably will) get MUCH worse.

bills wrote: These are not normal economic times and decisions have to made in terms of reality.

By risking hyperinflation? By growing the debt-bubble larger, which is already near (if not already) untenable? Do you know how many centuries it would take to pay down one-third of the nation-wide debt at only 4.0% interest? Even Keynesian theory and other economists warn of hyperinflation. The current debt problem can not be solved with more debt. The current debt problem today has occurred before in other nations, and the crushing debt lead to hyperinflation to try to avoid defaulting on so much debt. The current debt problem is also understated, as are many economic statistics which the federal government lies about (such as Social Security surpluses, which don’t really exist).

So please, instead of telling people some nebulous rhetoric about grasping Keynesian economics (which parts of the theory are not longer considered acceptable), can you explain why the creation of tens of trillions of dollars of new money out of thin air, and the borrowing of trillions of dollars, and running $1.2+ Trillion federal deficits annually, and doubling or tripling+ the Money Supply will not simply create more inflation and more debt, and trigger a run on the U.S. Dollars (i.e. spending and dumping on exchange markets, and spending of $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars: www.YouTube.com/watch?v=4n3g5lUgkWk&feature=related)?
Especially when the U.S. Dollar has already been falling sharpling for a decade (against major international currencies)?

bills wrote: These are not normal economic times and decisions have to made in terms of reality.

No, but a person doesn’t have to be clairvoyant to see what has already happened to MANY nations due to massive money-printing.

bills wrote: These are not normal economic times and decisions have to made in terms of reality.

Where’s the logic that massive amounts of money-printing, borrowing, and growing the debt-bubble won’t lead to hyperinflation?

I’m not only basing my opinion on history, but simple math.
Creating excessive amounts of new money out of thin air causes inflation, yet many seem to want to ignore that fact.
Also, with so much federal and nation-wide debt (both at the largest amount per-capita ever), it’s going to be hard to stimulate spending when people are so deep in debt (many times deeper than ever in of U.S. history).
Encouraging more espending to sustain a 70% domestic consumer driven economy is not sustainable; especially when it grows the debt ever larger, as evidenced by nation-wide debt which has almost quintupled from 100% of GDP in 1956 to 483% of GDP in 2008!
The U.S. is swimming in debt, and giving more credit to people already on the edge won’t solve the debt problem.

bills wrote: The biggest danger is not doing enough to stimulate the economy.

There are a LOT of things that can be done (see list of abuses above that should be stopped).

But bursting the massive debt-bubble is NOT the solution.
Growing the debt-bubble larger is very risky, if the current debt is already near (if not already) untenable.

bills wrote: One anology is trying to drive a car up an icey hill. If you do not get enough momentum you fail and may wind up worse off.

Bad analogy.

And if you aren’t careful, the car will skid off course and careen over a huge cliff and crash and burn at the bottom of the canyon.
There still haven’t been any convincing arguments here to prove that hyperinflation will not occur from tens of trillions of additional spending, $1.2+ Trillion annual federal deficits, 52 consecutive years of federal deficit spending, $3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion in bail-outs to banks and Wall Street, and a CDS and derivatives bubble (e.g CDSs, SIVs, ABSs, CDOs, subprime CDOs, squared CDOs, CPDOs, SPVs, VIEs, etc.) of over $455 Trillion (source: www.reuters.com/article/rbssFinancialServicesAndRealEstateNews/idUSN1472586720080915).

bills wrote: Lack of audacity, the size and duration of the stimulus plan is a valid criticism. Also some of the spending will do little to stimulate, like the business tax cuts and, although a campaign promise, the small tax cuts for the middle class.

Then why do it?

bills wrote: Public investment is the hail Mary pass at this point.

Only by shifting spending priorities, instead of growing the bloat, waste, and debt larger (already at nightmare levels).

Not by growing the debt-bubble larger, which is already near bursting, which will leading to inflation, and very possibly hyperinflation, which will make things much worse (by destroying all savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages).

bills wrote: Let us pray BHO throws it hard enough.

In my opinion, the worst thing possible is about to happen.

Instead of shifting spending and stopping these abuses now, the massive debt-bubble which is already near (if not already) untenable, is going to be grown larger which will result in inflation which will trigger hyperinflation, which will trigger the spending and dumping of $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars, accelerate the liquidation and sell-off of U.S. assets to foreign interests, and make a bad situation worse by debauching the U.S. currency, which has already been falling sharply (source: One-Simple-Idea.com/USD_Falling.htm) against major international currencies for decades (especially the Chinese Yuan, Japanese Yen, Swiss Franc, etc.).

I hope I’m wrong, but no one here has provided much logic or proof that the risk of hyperinflation does not exist.
Especially with so many trillions of dollars being so carelessly tossed about in this bail-out mania, while we continue to have 10,000 foreclosures per day, massive bankruptcies, rising unemployment, rising year-to-year inflation (2002=1.59%, 2003=2.27%, 2004=2.68%, 2005=3.39%, 2006=3.24%, 2007=2.85%, 2008=3.85%, 2009=??.??), the near quintupling of nation-wide debt since 1956, and the highest per-capita federal and nation-wide debt ever in U.S. history.

Again, there are a LOT of things we can do, but it appears most likely that the rampant spending will be huge and careless, based on what we’ve already seen to date.

Other economists that saw this entire mess coming are warning of hyperinflation, and I agree because the magnitude and style of money-printing and spending (e.g. $3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion; 31%-to-84% of the $10.15 Trillion M3 Money Supply in year 2005), $1.2 Trillion annual deficits, and a $850 Billion stimulus package WILL cause inflation as sure as the sun rises in the east.

David R. Remer wrote: d.a.n, seeing the past is not seeing the future.

True, but as Mark Twain stated:

• “History doesn’t repeat itself - at best it sometimes rhymes” — Mark Twain quotes (American Humorist, Writer and Lecturer. 1835-1910)

Therefore, history can not be totally ignored.

If you touch a hot burner on a stove and burn your hand, that’s the sort of history you do not want to repeat.

David R. Remer wrote: You made a statement about the future, and then point to the past.

Historical precedent is only part of the predictions of the future.

There are other factors of importance, such as simple math.
Drastically increasing the Money Supply causes inflation, as demonstrated by the near 3 dozen nations in the past 150 years (listed above) that already discovered that hyperinflation results from excessive money-printing and spending. Once hyperinflation occurs, it is too late to stop.

The situation today is better than in the Great Depression in a few ways (e.g. Social Securitiy, welfare, Medicare, etc.), but the situation today is much WORSE than the Great Depression in many ways.
The major difference is the debt-per-capita, which has never been worse ever in the history of the United States.

The previous highest debt-per-capita (per person) was after World War II (at $21,719 in 2008 inflation-adjusted U.S. Dollars), and is now 61.9% higher today than in year 1945).
With a $10.7 Trillion National Debt, the debt-per-capita $35,081 ?
With the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching, leaving it pay-as-you-go, the federal debt-per-capita is $77,049 (3.55 times larger)?
With a $67 Trillion nation-wide debt, the debt-per-capita is $220,000 (source: mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat.htm), which has grown from 100% of GDP (in year 1956) to 483% of GDP (in year 2008), which has never been worse, and is many times worse than the debt-per-capita after World War II.
These debt statistics are far too serious to be trivialized as many here are doing.

David R. Remer wrote: You made a statement about the future, and then point to the past.

And you don’t ever use historical precedent to substantiate probable outcomes?

Of course you do all the time, so to now claim historical precedents are inappropriate is a very weak argument.
Especially since dozens of nations over the past 150 years have already discovered what happens when too much money is created out fo thin air.
Besides, historical precedent is only part of the predictions of the future.
Simple math is a major portion of predictions of hyperinflation.
Especially with tens of trillions of dollars (nearly the size of the annual GDP) being tossed about so carelessly, and with such deeply engrained corruption in Congress (86.9^ of which were rewarded with re-election on 7-NOV-2008).

So please, can any one here explain why the creation of tens of trillions of dollars of new money out of thin air, and the borrowing of trillions of dollars, and running $1.2+ Trillion federal deficits annually, and doubling or tripling+ the Money Supply will not simply create more inflation and more debt, and trigger a run on the U.S. Dollars (i.e. spending and dumping on exchange markets, and spending of $11 Trillion of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars)?

Can any one here explain why foreigners holding over $11 Trillion of U.S. Dollars won’t start spending and dumping those U.S. dollars when the value is continuing to fall sharply as they have for over a decade?

If the U.S. didn’t have such a deteriorated manufacturing base, that spending of foreign-owned U.S. Dollars could be spent on exports from the United States.
However, since there are now more jobs in the government in the U.S. than all manufacturing jobs, and the U.S. doesn’t have the manufacturing base we had decades ago, and we don’t produce much that can’t be bought cheaper outside the U.S., the liquidation of assets in the U.S. to foreign interests will continue (rising from $6 Trillion in 1997 to $24 Trillion in 2007).

The U.S. federal government is how the largest employer in the U.S. , and soon scheduled to grow much larger?
How long can that last?
Especially when so much of it is dead weight, bloat, graft, pork-barrel, waste, and the 10th raise (in 12 years) for do-nothing Congress.

And who seriously believes Congress, of which 86.9% were re-elected on 7-NOV-2008 will stop pork-barrel spending, graft, and waste?
In fact, with so many trillions of dollars being tossed about, we may soon see corruption, graft, pork-barrel, and waste on a huge scale never seen before?

Also, with 11.1-to-24.6 Million unemployed (now more unemployed than in the Great Depression), the 2-to-3 Million jobs that the federal government plans to create will still leave 7.1-to-21.6 Million unemployed.
That isn’t likely to improve until a number of abuses are elimianted (e.g. usury; regressive taxation; incessant inflation; illegal immigration; imported cheap labor abuses (e.g. H1B Visas); dangerous healthcare killing 195,000 per year; 2 wars (one unnecessarily and based on false intelligence); a very costly U.S. presence in 132 nations; declining education; massive and growing $10.7 Trillion national debt; plundering of Social Security and $12.8 Trillion already borrowed and spent from it, leaving it pay-as-you-go with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching; the near qunintupling of nation-wide debt from 100% of GDP in 1956 to 483% of GDP in 2008; lawlessness, constitutional violations, corruption, government FOR-SALE; and a greedy Congress that just rewarded itself for all of it with their 10th raise in 12 years; etc.), and rewarded the greedy banks with $3.2 to $8.5 Trillion in bail-outs and hand-outs; etc., etc., etc.).

There’s going to be inflation.
Year-to-year inflation has already been increasing for years.
And ever if we avoid hyperinflation, is growing the debt larger wise?
The larger the debt becomes, the more likely it will lead to hyperinflation by creating the motivation to create excessive amounts of new money to avoid defaulting on existing debt.
There is a limit, and all signs indicate that the debt is near (if not already) untenable.

Until someone can explain otherwise, I do not support growing the debt-bubble larger.
There are MANY things we can and should do, but I do not think growing the debt-bubble larger is one of them, because it will cause more inflation and will most likely trigger hyperinflation, since the U.S. Dollar is the reserve currency and $11 Trillion U.S. Dollars are foreign-owned. That’s the opinion of some economists who saw this entire economic mess approaching, and in my opinion, it makes sense. Unfortunately, the federal government seems determined to reach that level of debt that is untenable (if we haven’t already passed it already).

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 18, 2009 05:11 PM

d.a.n Here, Here!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 18, 2009 07:26 PM

David and Roy,
Why I realize the conventional wisdom of the 20th Century creates a natural divide in Logic and Reason, I do believe that both of you can look at the past and tell me what will not work.

For example;
During the Civil War the South made Picketts Charge in Gettysburg. Now, we can comment on the wisdom of taking your men across open fields or we can look at the Point in Time and see how a different plan may of had a different out come.

So, fast forward to the present and let me ask both of you how changing certain business ideas and concepts will help your Children build a Better World. For surely time has proven that not All Humans believe that they shpould be a Corporation.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 18, 2009 07:34 PM

David
Even if all that is true, it still does not change the fact that the Republican Reps are representing their supporters when objecting to this measure, and not just trying to “rescue their image.”

Its almost like you are saying the voters are too stupid to know whats best for them and the Republican reps are just playing politics by listening to them instead of the Dem majority.

Posted by: kctim at January 19, 2009 09:51 AM

d.a.n, you quoted M. Twain. Heed his words: ““History doesn’t repeat itself - at best it sometimes rhymes” “

Don’t make declarative statements like: “[The economy] hasn’t been saved. Only a little extra time was bought.”

You cannot possibly know that ONLY a little extra time was bought. Many things are afoot and any combination of things could 1) extend the time bought even longer, 2) avert an economic meltdown altogether. The only thing that can be said with certainty is there will be a price to be paid for arriving to these crises in the first place.

Whether that price is demanded as from a loan shark, pay or die, or if it is amortized over a long period with due consideration of our ability to pay thus averting a meltdown via default, cannot be known at this time.

You can speculate that there is no positive economic future for America, but, you have no proof of your speculation. We have carried higher debt to GDP before and survived and grown. Therefore, your past historical data prove nothing in the way of your speculation that we are doomed due to our current NECESSITY to deficit spend to salvage the economy in the short term.

Again, I make the empirically provable statement that your crystal ball doesn’t work any better than mine. There may be a way through our current economic crises without economic collapse. There is as much historical data to support that statement as there is to support the speculation that economic collapse will occur. Both statements are contingent upon what happens between now and then. While we can speculate on the infinite variable combinations that may play out with If statements, because the variable combinations are infinite, declarations of future collapse as a certainty, are empirically illogical.

Best, and most logical, to keep hope alive that we can salvage these crises without collapse, and work to make that hope a reality.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 19, 2009 10:09 AM

Henry, a quick response is to cite the VISION USA page of my 3rd party website. Some are my idea but most are from books such as Joel’s Delusional Democracy. I’m frequently changing things and plan to do a rewrite in the next couple of months. I saw the ship building thing as a way to provide health and safety security for imported goods but with China building seaports in Mexico it might be a hard sell. I like the idea of a strong merchant marine for delivering war materials and to allow for health/safety/security checks enroute.

 Government is returned to the people and democratic principles have been restored. Sovereignty issues have been addressed. Political reform continues.
 This Party is helping to KEEP IT THAT WAY by holding elected and appointed officials accountable.
 Constitutional requirements are being met. Only Congress can declare war. Enforcement of federal law is the law of the land.
 The US Government is withdrawn from supporting Globalization and a North American Union. Government funding and support for corporations to relocate overseas is stopped.
 International trade agreements have been nullified or renegotiated ensuring there is no loss of American sovereignty, trade is fair and balanced, and human and worker rights are protected.
 Government is more open and transparent to the public. Information retrieved through the Freedom of Information Act is made available within two weeks of the request. Unclassified meeting and conference areas of congress are considered public access through the media.
 The Federal Reserve is now a program office within, and subordinate to the Treasury Dept. A 17% flat tax is adopted based on gross income with no taxation below the poverty level. Deduction’s, depreciation’s, and subsidies are abolished. Offshore tax havens are illegal under the law. A usury law is in effect.
 All Agency head positions are filled with senior government staff executives. Assignments to these positions are rotated on a four year basis.
 Trade agreements are ‘treaties’ and must be ratified by congress. Contracts and agreements are no longer made using trade as a foreign policy tool or a form of foreign aid.
 The Federal Trade Commission negotiates all trade agreements with the participation of selected industry leaders, environmentalist, concerned citizens and pertinent Agency heads. US sovereignty law is being strictly enforced. Every trade agreement or contract will so state that US sovereignty law overrides said agreement or contract.
 Strong anti-trust laws are enacted to prevent monopolies and insure competition.
 Election Day is a National Holiday.
 Political parties hold state primaries on the same day.
 Electoral College is modified to produce a one person, one vote effect in the general election.
 Media exposure for political candidates is mandated through Federal law. This law ensures sufficient media exposure for candidates of the five major parties in the run-up to election.
 Government controls are in effect to prevent budget deficits two years in sequence.
 Only federal and state collected monies are permitted in campaign financing.
 Illegal immigration is stopped with the completion of a border fence and adequate border and internal security enforcement. Laws against hiring and harboring illegal aliens are enforced.
 Corporations are no longer treated under the law as having human rights.
 Law is enacted to prevent the use of Eminent Domain for economic development or increasing tax revenue.
 The Dept. of Energy is reorganized to support a large scientific staff in the quest for alternative sources of energy. This new office will leverage the knowledge and technology of U.S. government agencies, universities, leading scientists and corporations. This program will use U.S manufactured materials and labor. Government will establish a minimum labor rate based on the cost of living for one individual supporting a four member family household.
 Our manufacturing base is restored, ensuring our ability to manufacture war materials for our defense.
 A Federal Government sponsored program to build a modern merchant marine shipping fleet has been approved. Research and design is being carried out for the production of lightweight vessels powered by non-fossil fuel systems. This program will use U.S manufactured materials and labor. Government will establish a minimum labor rate based on the cost of living for one individual supporting a four member family household.
 The Federal Government, in cooperation with State Government, is planning for infrastructure upgrade in all major U.S. cities. This program will use U.S manufactured materials and labor. Government will establish a minimum labor rate based on the cost of living for one individual supporting a four member family household.
 College student positions are increased by 10% across all technical, medical, and scientific fields of study. A corresponding 10% reduction in foreign student positions is effected.
 A pro-longed effort to elevate all public high schools curricula to that of college preparatory is in effect.
 Voting rights are restored to those who have completed incarceration.
 A nation wide training program for semi-skilled and skilled labor is in effect to provide reduced or free training/certification directed at specific fields of employment. The government will facilitate the attendance of low risk inmates and they will be awarded reduced incarceration time on completion of such training. Government and civic organizations are carrying out a nation wide job placement program.
 Work continues to place a permanent manned presence on the moon.
 Work continues on a manned Mars’s expedition.
 Restoration of the Social Security program has been implemented.
 Health care programs are undergoing a six-month evaluation and will be placed on a national referendum.
 Corporate and farming subsidies are terminated.
 Government and citizen groups negotiate with pharmaceuticals on the cost of prescription drugs. Citizens and government entities can purchase prescription drugs from reliable overseas markets.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 19, 2009 11:40 AM

David R. Remer: d.a.n, you quoted M. Twain. Heed his words: “History doesn’t repeat itself - at best it sometimes rhymes.”

“Rhymes” means it is similar.

“Rhymes” means history doesn’t always repeat in exactly the same way, but is similar.
However, the fact is, history does repeat itself closely enough to make history important.
There’s also another famous quote:

• “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” — George Santayana

Besides, dozens of nations have already learned over the past 150 years what happens due to excessive creation of new money out of thin air.
Doubling, tripling, quadrupling, or N-tupling the money-supply WILL create inflation.

David R. Remer: Don’t make declarative statements like: “[The economy] hasn’t been saved. Only a little extra time was bought.”

OK. I should add “most likely”.

I thought it was understood that we are all speaking in terms of probabilities, since no one can know the future absolutely.
After all, we could be hit by a 15-mile-wide asteroid, or fried by a gamma-ray from a super-nova, or some other natural catastrophe, and none of this will matter much.

Any way, I believe if the money-supply is doubled or tripled, there is a 51% (or higher) chance that it will lead to enough inflation to motivate foreigners holding $11 Trillion in U.S. Dollars to start spending and dumping those dollars, which will result in hyperinflation, which will make everything worse by destroying savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages.

I haven’t seen any convincing evidence to disprove that theory.
In fact, there are many economists that acknowledge the dangers of hyperinflation.
And if most of that money is created as debt, as it is today at a ratio of 9-to-1, such that 95% of the U.S. money in existence in the U.S. exists as debt, then the debt-bubble will simply grow bigger.
And since we don’t have the manufacturing base we used to have decades ago, foreigners will be buying mostly assets instead of our exports, which is a liquidation that has already been in progress for a decade, as evidenced by the total foreign-owned assets in the U.S. that have jumped from $6 Trillion in 1997 to $24 Trillion in 2007.

However, above, you wrote (which I responded to) …

David R. Remer wrote: Yes, of course there will be a price to be paid for saving the economy from depression.

That sounds declarative and absolute too. Shouldn’t it be “there will [probably] be a price to be paid” ?

David R. Remer: You cannot possibly know that ONLY a little extra time was bought.

Not absolutely. But probably.

No one can know absolutely that “saving the economy from depression” has actually occurred, but may have only been delayed.
And if hyperinflation results from doubling, tripling, quadrupling, or N-tupling the money supply, it will most likely make things much worse.

David R. Remer: Many things are afoot and any combination of things could 1) extend the time bought even longer, 2) avert an economic meltdown altogether. The only thing that can be said with certainty is there will be a price to be paid for arriving to these crises in the first place.

True. And I think doubling or tripling the money-supply will most likely result in hyperinflation, which will make a bad situation worse.

David R. Remer: Whether that price is demanded as from a loan shark, pay or die, or if it is amortized over a long period with due consideration of our ability to pay thus averting a meltdown via default, cannot be known at this time.

Federal debt is not the only problem.

Total nation-wide debt is worse then ever before, having grown from 100% of GDP in 1956 to 483% of GDP in 2008 (also evidenced by 10,000 foreclosures per day and millions of bankruptcies per year).
And have you amortized $10.7 Trillion (or $23.5 Trillion including $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security (source: www.socialsecurity.org/reformandyou/faqs.html#2)?
Do you know how many centuries it would take to pay down only a third of that debt at only a 4.0% interest rate?
Do you know how many centuries it would take to pay down only a third of the $67 Trillion nation-wide debt at only a 4.0% interest rate?

• One-Simple-Idea.com/NationalDebt_$10.7Trillion.jpg


• One-Simple-Idea.com/23.5Trillion.gif


• One-Simple-Idea.com/67Trillion.gif

David R. Remer: You can speculate that there is no positive economic future for America, but, you have no proof of your speculation.

I was speculating, just as you state declaritively that …

David R. Remer wrote: Yes, of course there will be a price to be paid for saving the economy from depression.

Besides, there is ample evidence to support a prediction of hyperinflation.
These claims that history is irrelavent and nitpicking whether predictions are absolute or based on probabilities appears to be an attempt to obfuscate and distract from the facts supporting the belief that there will most likely be inflation, and if excessive, it could trigger a run on the U.S. Dollar, which has already been falling for many years.
I’ve given many reasons (see list below) why I think the probability is high (51% or higher) that hyperinflation will result.
Why do you think it won’t?

David R. Remer: We have carried higher debt to GDP before and survived and grown.

Not true.

Not per-capita for the National Debt ($21,719 in year 1945 versus $35,081 in year 2008), excluding the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching.
Not per-capita for the total federal debt ($21,719 in year 1945 versus $77,049 in year 2008), including the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security.
Excluding the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, the $10.7 Trillion Nationa-debt is 77% of GDP ($13.86 Trillion in 2007).
Including the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, the total $23.5 Trillion of federal debt is 170% of GDP ($13.86 Trillion in 2007), which is much more than the previous peak of 116% in year 1945 (after World War II).
After World War II, total nation-wide debt (federal and non-federal) was 100% of GDP.
Today, total $67 Trillion nation-wide debt is 483% of GDP (up from 100% in year 1956).
The U.S. is swimming in debt.
The U.S. is a debt junkie, and the fact that it is now showing withdrawl symptoms, and there is comtemplation of creating a lot of money out of thin air, is telling us something.
The U.S. has a debt problem, and growing that debt larger doesn’t make sense, since dozens of other nations have already learned that hard lesson over the past 150 years.

• Total nation-wide debt of has never been larger (among a number of other things), both in size and as a percentage of the $13.86 Trillion GDP:
  • private domestic financial sector debt=$15.8 Trillion;
  
  
  • household debt= $13.88 Trillion;
  
  
  • bus iness debt=$10.16 Trillion;
  
  
  • federal government National Debt = $10.7 Trillion
  
  
  • state and local government debt = $2.2 Trillion;
  
  
  • other private sector foreign debt = $1.8 Trillion;
  
  
  • _______________________________________________________
  
  
  • Total nation-wide debt = $54 Trillion (and that does not even include the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 million baby boomer bubble approaching);
  
  
  • If the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security is included:
  
  
  • Total nation-wide debt = $67 Trillion = $54 Trillion + $12.8 Trillion = 4.83 times the nation’s $13.86 Trillion GDP (year 2007) !
  
  
  • Total federal debt is = $23.5 Trillion = $10.7 Trillion + $12.8 Trillion = 1.70 times the nation’s $13.86 Trillion GDP (year 2007) !

David R. Remer: Therefore, your past historical data prove nothing in the way of your speculation that we are doomed due to our current NECESSITY to deficit spend to salvage the economy in the short term.

Not everyone believes in that “current NECESSITY”

Especially if the debt is near (if not already) untenable.
And now who is speaking in terms of absolutes?
Is deficit spending necessary if it results in hyperinflation, which will most likely make everything much worse by destroying the currency, savings, pensions, entitlements, and wages?
How can you be so certain that doubling, tripling, or N-tupling the money-supply won’t lead to hyperinflation?
We can’t borrow enough planning to be spent, so much of it will have to be created out of thin air.
And if there aren’t cuts in all unnecessary federal spending to create productive jobs, the government will have simply grown larger and more bloated.

We will have to agree to disagree.
You can disagree, but claiming past history is irrelavant to this situation is a very weak argument.
Especially when dozens of nations have already learned (over the past 150 years) the hard way about hyperinflation due to the creation of massive amounts of new money out of thin air.

David R. Remer: Again, I make the empirically provable statement that your crystal ball doesn’t work any better than mine.

• em·pir·i·cal (m-pîr-kl) KEY
• ADJECTIVE:
• Relying on or derived from observation or experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis.
• Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment: empirical laws.
• Guided by practical experience and not theory, especially in medicine.

Empirical?
Empirical implies something known by experience (e.g. history).
You are going to dig yourself into a very deep hole if you continue to insist that history and empirical data are not relevant.
The root causes of wars are often the same.
The root causes of a lot of things are the same.
When the smme root causes exist today as they did in the past, it is very logical and responsible to recognize the probability of a similar (if not identical) outcome.

By the way, I’ve written here for years that an economic crises was approaching, and many here with rose-colored glasses called it “Chicken Little” rhetoric.
Well, they were wrong and I was right.
But it didn’t take a lot of insight or intuition to see the economic mess coming.
The U.S. is being crushed by massive, oppressive debt, and that problem still persists, and it won’t be easy or painless to unwind.
These predictions don’t require clairvoyance.
Just a little history, math, and common sense.

David R. Remer: There may be a way through our current economic crises without economic collapse.

Yes. But not likely with the way they appear to be approaching it with massive spending, borrowing, and creating massive amounts of new money from thin air.

David R. Remer: There is as much historical data to support that statement as there is to support the speculation that economic collapse will occur.

If hyperinflation resutls, there will be an economic collapse.

The odds of hyperinflation will be high if the federal government doubles, triples, quadruples, or N-tuples the money-supply.
If hyperinflation occurs, it will make things much worse.

When associated with depressions, hyperinflation often occurs when there is a large increase in the money supply not supported by gross domestic product (GDP) growth, resulting in an imbalance in the supply and demand for the money. Left unchecked this causes prices to increase, as the currency loses its value.

So, how will we increase GDP?
By printing new money?
By manufacturing and exports?
By asking foreigners holding $11 Trillion in U.S. Dollars to stop buying assets being liquidated in the U.S. (which already jumped from $6 Trillion in 1997 to $24 Trillion in 2007)?
By asking the wealthiest Americans to spend more?

There are a LOT of things we can do, but it is doubtful they will occur.
The elimination of these 10 abuses would help tremendously, but it is doubtful they will be eliminated.
I see Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has already introduced an immigration bill (S. 9) to be used as his vehicle for a sweeping Illegal Alien Amnesty.
The amnesty of 1986 quintupled the problem, and another amnesty will make the problem worse too.
Importing by the millions of the less educated, less skilled, more diseased, and more impoverished can’t help, except for those wanting votes and cheap labor.

David R. Remer: Both statements are contingent upon what happens between now and then.

Of course. But what is the likelihood that a massive debt problem and so many pressing problems will be solved by more debt, borrowing, and money-printing?

David R. Remer: While we can speculate on the infinite variable combinations that may play out with If statements, because the variable combinations are infinite, declarations of future collapse as a certainty, are empirically illogical.

Not true.

It isn’t necessary to consider all variables; only the most important and more limited number of variables.
You also don’t need a crystal ball or need to be clairvoyant to see this economic mess approaching, and the probability of a massive debt-problem getting worse if the debt-bubble is grown larger by the doubling, tripling, quadrupling, or N-tupling the money-supply, which WILL create inflation as sure as the sun rises in the east.

Besides, comtemplating all potential outcomes is the responsile thing to do.
So trying to discourage probable outcomes doesn’t make much sense.
In fact, discouraging probably outcomes is irresponsible.

David R. Remer: Best, and most logical, to keep hope alive that we can salvage these crises without collapse, and work to make that hope a reality.

I have hope, and I will do what I can to make things better.

However, I’m not the type to ever stick my head in the sand, and excessive optimism is as dangerous as excessive pessimism.
A grip on reality is what is needed.
That is what will renew confidence.
When I hear about $1.2+ Trillion federal deficits for many years to come, $3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion bail-outs to banks and Wall Street, continued plundering of Social Security surpluses, $750 Trillion bail-outs, $850 Billion stimulus packages, and little (if any) talk of cutting bloat and waste, that doesn’t create much cause for confidence and optimism.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 01:42 PM

CORRECTION: So trying to discourage probable outcomes [speculation] doesn’t make much sense.
In fact, discouraging probable outcomes [speculation] is irresponsible.
Planning and alternative contingency plans are based on speculation.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 02:23 PM

Roy,
Why I avoid political parties, I do see an opening for a third party if the Republicans cannot or willnot get their act together. And why protocal prevents me from exploiting these weaknesses myself, I do believe that your agenda needs to be expanded to take advantage of Late 20th Century Technology.

For example;
You mention China building seaports in Mexico. And why I do believe that America needs to rebuild a Merchant Fleet and upgrade her seaports. I do believe that our Children would be better off investing in building a “Flying Ship” like the one built by USSR since we could have the advantage of speed and protected inland seaports.

Sorry I cannot remember the name of the plane or give you any details; however, I do know the plane was built in southern USSR at a port that starts with a K. Yet, given the fact that it can travel at 200 mph and the best ship on the sea can travel at 30 knots I do believe that looking into the future the advantages of faster flying ships will out perform any ship built with 2000 plus technology.

So, keep up the good work and your eyes open to the possibiliity that the Republicans like the Whigs will not meet the challenges of tomorrow today. For why America and the World can change, it will take educating the average citizen that Life is not writen in stone and our Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders do not have all the answers.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 19, 2009 03:45 PM

Heny, Going to be hard enuff to find an alterntive fuel for a merchant fleet. Also, inspectors and security folks would need some time to inspect/check hundreds of containers. A slow dirigible type aircraft might not do well in hurricanes and strong storms. You would need manuverability and flexibility to avoid the bad stuff.
Otherwise, you’ve got the idea. Drive a wedge between the public and the Republicans. Try to shoehorn a 3rd party (with a different attitude) in there.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 19, 2009 04:08 PM

I stated that Mr. Remer should be able to point to these spending scale-backs if he truly believes His statement.

Remer replies with; “Here is an analogy you should be able to grasp…and then proceeds to present a hypothetical case involving a bad driver demolishing the car of another driver neither of which have insurance.

What was lacking in Mr. Remer’s third-grade level construct was an answer to my question. I’ll answer it for him…there are no spending cuts which Remer says are the minimal necessary in this quote from his post.

“And it remains to be seen if America will take the appropriate steps, which at a minimum are:

2) scaling back spending to the necessities and changing the wasteful legislative process”

As usual Mr. Remer just spins away and thinks no one will notice his non-answer just as he was so pridefully anxious to explain to me that unearned income is the same as earned income.

Proclaiming to be an investor who did in fact pay his taxes, unlike the possibility that I don’t pay mine, he just didn’t notice the different tax rates for various types of income. One can hope that Mr. Remer uses someone other himself to prepare his tax returns.

Posted by: Jim M at January 19, 2009 05:09 PM

Scenario 1: Deflation: Deflation results from a vicious circle of debt unwinding as foreclosures and bankruptcies, causing business to fail and/or shut-down. This in turn causes rising unemployment, falling living standards, and a long-term decline in economic activity (as occurred in the 1929 Stock Market crash and the depression in the 1930s). The depression lasts 6-to-10 years.

Scenario 2: Hyperinflation: The near (if not already) untenable $23.5 Trillion of total federal debt and the near (if not already) untenable $67 Trillion nation-wide debt creates tremendous pressure to create new money to avoid defaulting on the $430 Billion in annual interest, and continue the deficit spending of the past 52 consecutive years. It creates double-digit inflation for a while. Since $11 Trillion U.S. Dollars are foreign owned, the inflation motivates spending and dumping of U.S. Dollars. However, since the U.S. doesn’t have the manufacturing base it once had decades ago, and since it can’t manufacture products cheaper than those in Asia, foreigners start buying up assets in the U.S. (land, houses, new and used products, etc.). The liquidation has already begun, as evidenced by the foreign owned assets quadrupling from about $6 Trillion in year 1997 to $24 Trillion in year 2007. Hyperinflation is worse in some ways than deflation, because it also debauches the currency, which destroys savings, pensions, government entitlements, and wages. Then a depression follows, which lasts 6-to-10 years.

Scenario 3: Hyperinflation and Deflation: The $455 Trillion Credit Default Swap and derivatives bubble and the massive $67 Trillion nation-wide debt-bubble continues to cause the failure of banks and corporations. The federal government tries to avert these failures by pumping trillions of more dollars of liquidity into the banks, but only for a while and not enough to cause hyperinflation. The net result is a combination of hyperinflation and deflation, and high volatility. The volatility motivites many to get out of the stock markets. A deep recession follows that lasts 8-to-12 years.

Scenario 4: We Muddle Through: The federal government cuts a lot of unnecessary spending and shifts the spending to create 2.5 million jobs to pursue energy independence and infrastructure projects. The total federal debt is grown larger by about 200%. A significant number of abuses are eliminated. However, government spending is always far too slow to have any impact for the 1st year. Therefore, tax cuts are also used to provide stimulus. But many Americans are deep in debt, so increased spending is limited since they are also paying down debt. The nation-wide debt unwinds slowly but surely. After a few years, the benefits of the elimination of several abuses and shifting of federal spending to productive jobs gradually stabilizes the economy with slightly negative growth for 2 years and ZERO growth for 1-to-2 years.

Regardless of which of scenarios 1 through 4 occurs, afterward, the U.S. returns to bad habits, and restarts the inflation-fueled boom-to-bust bubble-after-bubble, and the debt pyramid start growing again.

Scenario 5: We Learn and Do Better: Most (if not all) unnecessary federal bloat and wasteful spending is eliminated, and those money saved from those spending cuts is shifted to spending to create 3.5 million jobs to pursue energy independence, infrastructure projects, and a national non-profit health insurance sysetm. U.S. Troops leave Iraq. The U.S. military presence in 132 nations is greatly reduced (if not eliminated), including Afghanistan. Deficit spending is stopped the 1st year. The Federal Reserve’s fractional banking system is reformed to decrease the debt-to-reserve ratio. Zero inflation/deflation is targeted. After the 2nd year, the federal debt is slowly reduced which also reduces the interest payments. The federal government stops spending Social Security surpluses. Most (if not all) of these abuses are eliminated. However, government spending is always far too slow to have any impact for the 1st year. Therefore, tax cuts are also used to provide stimulus. The tax system is also made fairer and less regressive (if not a flat percentage on all income above the poverty level). Public education is improved. eVerify is required and 12-to-20 illegal aliens are NOT given amnesty. Most self-deport. Unfair trade deals are rescinded. Usury laws prohibit loan sharking. But many Americans are deep in debt, so increased spending is limited since they are also paying down debt. The nation-wide debt unwinds slowly but surely. After a few years, the benefits of the elimination of several abuses and shifting of federal spending to productive jobs gradually stabilizes the economy after 1 year, followed by ZERO growth for 2-to-4 years, and then modest growth for a few years thereafter. The federal debt and nation-wide debt continues to be slowly reduced. Hopefully it never grows back to the previous nightmare proportions ever again. And if Congress fails to do these things, voters hopefully will not reward incumbents in Congress again with 85%-to-90% re-election rates. However, we will most likely revisit these mistakes again someday.

Which scenario above do you think is most probable?

Or do you see a significantly different scenario?

Based on history, the level of deterioration, and the reasons below, I think Scenario 2 above is most likely, but I hope for Scenario 1.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 07:37 PM

REASONS WHY THE RISK of HIGH (double-digit) INFLATION and/or HYPERINFLATION ARE 51% or GREATER:

• [01] NATIONAL DEBT: The $10.7 Trillion National Debt per-capita has never been larger ever, BOTH as a percentage (170%) of GDP and per-capita ($35,081 in year 2008 versus $21,719 in year 1945 in inflation-adjusted 2008 U.S. Dollars)


• [02] TOTAL FEDERAL DEBT is UNTENABLE: The current total federal debt ($23.5 Trillion = $10.7 Trillion National Debt + $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching) is near (if not already) untenable.


• [03] LARGEST TOTAL FEDERAL DEBT EVER: The total current $23.5 Trillion of federal debt and has never been larger ever, BOTH as a percentage (170%) of GDP and per-capita ($77,049 in year 2008 versus $21,719 in year 1945 in inflation-adjusted 2008 U.S. Dollars)


• [04] TOTAL NATION-WIDE DEBT: Total nation-wide debt has never been larger in size, as a percentage of GDP, and per-capita (per person):
  • Private domestic financial sector debt=$15.8 Trillion;
  
  
  • Household debt= $13.88 Trillion;
  
  
  • Business debt=$10.16 Trillion;
  
  
  • Federal government National Debt = $10.7 Trillion
  
  
  • State and local government debt = $2.2 Trillion;
  
  
  • Other private sector foreign debt = $1.8 Trillion;
  
  
  • __________________________________________________________
  
  
  • Total nation-wide debt = $54 Trillion (excludig the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 million baby boomer bubble approaching);
  
  
  • Total nation-wide debt = $67 Trillion (includig the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security);
  
  
  • Total nation-wide debt of $67 Trillion is 4.83 times they GDP of year 2007 ($13.86 Trillion);
  
  
  • Total nation-wide debt is $220,000 per-capita, which has never been larger, and has almost quintupled from 100% of GDP in year 1956 to 483% of GDP in 2008.
  
  
  • Source: MWHodges.home.att.net/debt-summary-table.htm


• [05] UNACCOUNTABILITY of BAIL-OUT MONEY: The Federal Reserve will not disclose a full accounting of $3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion in bail-outs and hand-outs for banks and Wall Street.


• [06] INCESSANT INFLATION: The federal government and Federal Reserve have perpetuated inflation for 52 consecutive years and more inflation will almost certainly continue by doubling, tripling, or N-tupling the money supply by creating massive amounts of money from thin air (since the massive amounts being spent can’t all be borrowed from China, Japan, or other nations).


• [07] FEDERAL RESERVE: The Federal Reserve is a dishonest, usurious, predatory, inflationary Ponzi-scheme, creating new money as debt at a steep leveraging ratio of 9-to-1 (i.e. banks are only required to have 10% in reserves, which obviously isn’t enough to weather a significant economic down-turn).


• [08] INFLATION versus POLITICAL CAUSES: Moderate or double-digit inflation can lead to hyperinflation. Although hyperinflation is caused mainly by excessive deficit spending financed by excessive money-printing by a government, some economists believe that social breakdown leads to hyperinflation (not vice versa), and that hyperinflation’s roots lie in political rather than economic causes. It is probably BOTH. That is not encouraging since 86.9% of Congress was re-elected on 4-NOV-2008.


• [09] ABUSES: These 10 abuses have been (and still are) hammering most Americans for severeal decades (corroborating the theory in [08] above that the root causes of hyperinflation may be political instead of economic?). It appears most likely that a number of these abuses will continue (such as illegal immigration: see [13] below).


• [10] FOREIGN OWNED U.S. Dollars: Over $11 Trillion U.S. Dollars are foreign owned. Inflation could motivate the spending and dumping of those U.S. Dollars (i.e. a run on the U.S. Dollar).


• [11] UNEMPLOYMENT: There are 11.1-to-24.6 Million unemployed (more than the 12.83 Million unemployed in the Great Depression), and growing by over half-a-million per month. The federal government can’t employ all of those people. Then administration plans to create 2-to-3 million jobs, which may still leave 9.1-to-22.6 Million unemployed.


• [12] FEDERAL BLOAT and WASTE:


• [13] ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has already introduced an immigration bill (S. 9) to be used as his vehicle for a sweeping Illegal Alien Amnesty.
  The amnesty of 1986 quintupled the problem, and another amnesty will most likely make the problem worse too (again). Importing by the millions of the less educated, less skilled, more diseased, and more impoverished is not helping the nation (except for those wanting votes and cheap labor). The federal government appears determined to continue to despicably pit Americans and illegal aliens against each other for votes and profits disguised as compassion. Americans will continue to lose an estimated $70-to-$327 Billion per year in net losses due to illegal immigration.


• [14] DECLINING GDP: GDP ($13.86 Trillion in year 2007 in 2007 U.S. Dollars), in inflation-adjusted 2005 and 1950 U.S. Dollars has been falling between year JAN-2007 and JAN-2009, and the decline has never been larger since year 1900 (if ever). During the period there has also been record level deficit spending by the federal government.


• [15] INFLATION: Year-to-year inflation is rising (though it has decreased in the last few months of 2008): 2002=1.59%, 2003=2.27%, 2004=2.68%, 2005=3.39%, 2006=3.24%, 2007=2.85%, 2008=3.85%, 2009=??.?? . There has been positive inflation (sometimes double-digit) for 52 consecutive years, and it appears there will be many more years of inflation.


• [16] MOST MONEY in the U.S. is DEBT: 90%-to-95% of all U.S. money in the U.S. exists as debt, because money is created as debt at a ratio of 9-to-1, requiring banks to only have 10% in reserves. Where will the money come from to merely pay the interest on so much nation-wide debt when that money does not yet exist? Creating new money out of thin air is a sure way to create inflation. If there is too much inflation, it may cause a run on the U.S. Dollar, since $11 Trillion U.S. Dollars are foreign-owned.


• [17] FALLING U.S. DOLLAR: The U.S. Dollar has already been falling significantly for years againast many major international currencies.


• [18] HISTORY OF HYPERINFLATION: Dozens of nations over the past 150 years have already tried to money-print, borrow, and spend their way to prosperity, and it destroyed the currency. Double-digit inflation alone could cause enough fear to trigger a run on the U.S. Dollar. The gargantuan size of the total federal and nation-wide debt (both of which have never been larger per-capita or as a percentage of GDP) could cause enough fear to trigger a run on the U.S. Dollar. Also, with $11 Trillion foreign-owned U.S. Dollars, inflation is more dangerous.


• [19] MOST AMERICANS TAPPED-OUT: Most Americans are tapped-out and in-debt. That’s a death nail for an economy that is 70% consumer driven. Money is created as debt (at a 9-to-1 ratio of debt-to-reserves) and 90%-to-95% of all U.S. Dollars in the U.S. exist as debt. How can the money-supply increase if most people can borrow any more? Recognizing that dilema, the federal government and Federal Reserve are now making plans to create and/or borrow money and give it away. However, that will most likely create more inflation (which has been positive for 52 consecutive years), which will devalue all money that already exists, wages, pensions, savings, and entitlements. Who does inflation really help most? Inflation has been used for decades to slowly but surely extract wealth from the middle-class and funnel it to the banks. And even if times are tough, the federal government and the Federal Reserve will bail-out the banks and Wall Street.


• [20] WEALTH DISPARITY: The wealth disparity gap in the U.S. has been growing larger since year 1976, and have never been larger since they Great Depression. The wealthiest 1% owns 40% of all wealth. 80% of all Americans own only 17% of all wealth in the U.S. 20% of Americans have negative net worth (i.e. debt). 40% of Americans (on average) have ZERO net worth.


• [21] LIQUIDATION is ALREADY in PROGRESS: Foreign owned assets in the U.S. has quadrupled from about $6 Trillion in year 1997 to $24 Trillion in year 2007. Why? Because Americans are selling off assets to pay their debts.


• [22] 70% CONSUMER-DRIVEN ECONOMY: A 70% consumer-driven economy is not sustainable. Politicians constantly speak of growth instead of sustainability. However, most Americans are going backwards. Real median household incomes have been falling for decades (especially when including regressive taxation, $70-to-$327 Billion per year in net losses due to illegal immigration, more workers per household, more national debt, and a more bloated and wasteful government of nightmare proportions;


• [23] REGRESSIVE TAXATION: Warren Buffet, the 2nd wealthiest person in the U.S., pays a lower percentage of income to federal taxes (e.g. 17.7% on $46 Million in year 2006), than his secretary (who paid 30% in federal taxes on an income of $60K) and many Americans. Warren Buffet told Tom Brokaw on “NBC Nightly News” that the U.S. tax structure is unfair. Warren Buffet performed an informal poll in his office, where the average tax rate was 32.9%, compared to his 17.7% percent, citing that as evidence that “the tax system has tilted toward the rich in the last 10 years”.


• [24] CREDIT DEFAULT SWAP BUBBLE: $455+ Trillion Credit Default Swap bubble and derivatives bubble (e.g CDSs, SIVs, ABSs, CDOs, subprime CDOs, squared CDOs, CPDOs, SPVs, VIEs, etc.) of over $455 Trillion (source: www.reuters.com/article/rbssFinancialServicesAndRealEstateNews/idUSN1472586720080915 );


• [25] 11.1-to-24.6 Million Unemployed (DEC-2008): There are more unemployed today than the 12.83 Million unemployed in the Great Depression. While the percentage is 7.2% today (versus 21.7% in 1934), the 11.1-to-24.6 Million unemployed probably couldn’t care less what the percentage is. At any rate, so many unemployed equates to less tax revenues, more welfare and unemployment expenses, decreased consumerism, more foreclosures, and more people without health insurance.


• [26] TRADE IMBALANCES: Massive imports (versus exports) has created a steady flow of wealth out of the U.S., and millions of jobs have left the country. The federal government even gives tax breaks and subsidies to some corporations who move jobs out of the U.S. Unfair trade deals have created numerous abuses. Since Congress is FOR-SALE, it is unlikely this pattern will end any time soon. Greed and profits drive corporations to move operations out of the U.S. and when wages in those foreign nations rise too high, the corporations go somewhere else, ensuring a source of cheap labor should they return later. Also, since environmental and labor laws are weaker and/or non-existent in many nations, corporations can commit abuses, pollute, and avoid costs and laws prohibiting such abuses. It’s a race to the bottom. While it may be difficult to stop all of these manifestations of unchecked greed, the federal government should not be rewarding corporations for such abuses. But then, Congress also shouldn’t be rewarding itself for it either with 10 raises in 12 years. Since Congress is FOR-SALE, and voters repeatedly reward incumbent politicians in Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, it is very unlikely Congress will stop this or an number of abuses.


• [27] GOVERNMENT BLOAT and WASTE: There are more jobs in government than in all manufacturing.


• [28] MORE of the STATUS QUO: 86.9% of Congress was rewarded with re-election on 4-NOV-2008. And Congress just gave itself its 0th raise in 12 years. It is very unlikely Congress has turned over a new leaf?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 07:45 PM

CORRECTION:

[01] NATIONAL DEBT: The $10.7 Trillion National Debt per-capita has never been larger BOTH as a percentage (170%) of GDP ($35,081 in year 2008 versus $21,719 in year 1945 in inflation-adjusted 2008 U.S. Dollars)

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 08:26 PM

Roy,
Why I cannot and will not say that. I do believe that if the Republicans do not embrace the idea of making every American Economically Viable and Financially Independent in the 21st Century than the Children of the 21st Century do hold the Guaranteed Civil and Constitutional Rights to seek a political voice that will move forward their agenda.

As far as creating the energy to power a flying ship, I suppose that will have to be one of those things that Government and the Institututes of Society will have to work on over the next 40 years.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 19, 2009 08:26 PM

Roy, Those are some good ideas. Especially the following:

• Constitutional requirements are being met. Only Congress can declare war.


• International trade agreements have been nullified or renegotiated ensuring there is no loss of American sovereignty, trade is fair and balanced, and human and worker rights are protected.


• Government is more open and transparent to the public.


• The Federal Reserve is now a program office within, and subordinate to the Treasury Dept.


• A 17% flat tax is adopted based on gross income with no taxation below the poverty level. Deduction’s, depreciation’s, and subsidies are abolished. Offshore tax havens are illegal under the law.


• A usury law is in effect.


• Election Day is a National Holiday. {more early voting too}


• Electoral College is modified to produce a one person, one vote effect in the general election. {Right. The electoral college should not trump the popular vote.}


• Illegal immigration is stopped with the completion of a border fence and adequate border and internal security enforcement. Laws against hiring and harboring illegal aliens are enforced.


• Law is enacted to prevent the use of Eminent Domain for economic development or increasing tax revenue.


• Work continues to place a permanent manned presence on the moon. {I think NASA’s focus should be shifted to develop ways to stop asteriods and comets from colliding with Earth. It’s not a matter of IF, but a matter of WHEN that will occur again.}


• Corporate and farming subsidies are terminated.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 09:31 PM

CORRECTION to comment #273868: Based on history, the level of deterioration, and the reasons below, I think Scenario 2 above is most likely, but I hope for Scenario 1 [Scenario 5].

Posted by: d.a.n at January 19, 2009 11:52 PM

d.a.n said: “[01] NATIONAL DEBT: The $10.7 Trillion National Debt per-capita has never been larger ever, BOTH as a percentage (170%) of GDP and per-capita ($35,081 in year 2008 versus $21,719 in year 1945 in inflation-adjusted 2008 U.S. Dollars)”

WRONG! You are not comparing apples to apples with your data, d.a.n.
Here are some OMB figures of public debt as % of GDP:

1946 109.0% (highest)
1950 94.1%

Assuming 13.5 Trillion as the GDP for 2008, you can divide the debt of 10.7 by the GDP of 13.5 and the percentage is 79%.

My statement that, as a percentage of GDP our current debt is lower than in history, is correct as I have just demonstrated. And I was being conservative on the GDP amount using a figure slightly less than was estimated for 2007 (to allow for the economic downturn from Oct. 2007 through the end of the fiscal year 2008.) If the GDP number was actually slightly higher, the percentage would be lower for 2008.

Now, there is every indication that in 2010 we will set a new record for public debt as a percentage of GDP. Which is precisely why Obama insists that we invest nationally in innovative technologies which America can export and use domestically to lower the cost of living going forward and arrest inflation, and by lowering the cost of living the federal government can raise taxes to halt deficit spending and eventually, hopefully, begin to pay down the record setting debt.

That is in essence how America grew its way out of the post WWII debt as a percentage of GDP, through economic growth and increasing part of was exports. America can lead the world in energy, health, and food innovations which lower the cost of production and which can be exported to a world in growing need of such innovations.

Going forward, America has one advantage it didn’t have in the 1940’s and 1950’s. And that is a vast growing middle class across the planet. If America can provide that foreign middle class with the innovations they demand to lower their cost of living, America can grow its economy and therefore its revenues and beat back the national debt that we are now creating. It is a plan.

No one knows at this point whether it will work or not. But, many will lay odds one way or another as we move forward in time. I am cautiously hopeful it will work, and it is clear that we are going to move in that direction barring lockstep obstruction by Republicans and both Dem. and Rep. special interest groups and lobbyists. Obama and the Congress CLEARLY must initiate political reforms as part and parcel of the making this plan successful.

That may be the tougher row to hoe. Maybe not. Who in Congress wants to be labeled the cause of the collapse of our economy?

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 20, 2009 10:37 AM

Jim M said: “What was lacking in Mr. Remer’s third-grade level construct was an answer to my question.”

No, what is lacking, apparently, in your comment here is comprehension of that 3rd grade analogy. The answer to your question was in that analogy. Ehh!@ Thank you for playing, but, no cigar this time.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 20, 2009 10:41 AM

Dan, I choose scenario #4. The klepto-Plutocracy will continue with a policy of getting us ready for globalization. The way I see it is we have to reach wage parity with the developing world in order to have a self sustaining manufacturing base. Also, I believe the k-p realizes the fiat ponzi money system was nearing it’s useful life and by winding the economy and wages back to something comparable to that of the developing world they can keep the train on the track. If we start to see some type of protectionist policies put on the table I would have a different opinion.

you didn’t mention assigning staffer’s as Agency heads. I like that idea as a means to stop/slow the revolving door process. Also, would serve to keep the “most informed, most intelligent, most likely to succeed, most influential, and most wealthy’ business folks on the side lines or in a non-policy making status. Now, I like that.

A 3rd party with a different political attitude would focus their politicians on such an agenda and bring real reform to government pretty toute suite. For example: as long as the wealthy are subject to a regressive tax structure we will never see a flat tax. It would take an Article V amendment or a 3rd party with a different political attitude to pull that off. Article V, while useful, is a single dimensional tool. VOID would work for some things but has no focus on specific issues. The better way, IMHO, is to focus politicians on a specific agenda through a 3rd party with citizens’ oversight for elected and appointed officials. That would get er dun!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 20, 2009 10:51 AM

David R. Remer wrote:

• d.a.n said: “[01] NATIONAL DEBT: The $10.7 Trillion National Debt per-capita has never been larger ever, BOTH as a percentage (170%) of GDP and per-capita ($35,081 in year 2008 versus $21,719 in year 1945 in inflation-adjusted 2008 U.S. Dollars)”

WRONG! You are not comparing apples to apples with your data, d.a.n. Here are some OMB figures of public debt as % of GDP: 1946 109.0% (highest) 1950 94.1% Assuming 13.5 Trillion as the GDP for 2008, you can divide the debt of 10.7 by the GDP of 13.5 and the percentage is 79%.

That was a cut-and-paste error, and I made a CORRECTION above to that effect in Comment # 273876).

Yes, the ratio of $10.7 Trillion National Debt to $13.86 Trillion GDP in 2007 = 77% .
The ratio of Debt-to-GDP in year 1945 was 116%.
However, in year 1945 (after World War II; the highest Debt-to-GDP ratio up to that time) a $12.8 Trillion had not been borrowed and spent from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby boomer bubble approaching.
Including that $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, the total federal debt-to-GDP ratio = ($10.7T + $12.8T) / $13.86T = 170% which is higher than the 116% in year 1945.

David R. Remer wrote: My statement that, as a percentage of GDP our current debt is lower than in history, is correct as I have just demonstrated. And I was being conservative on the GDP amount using a figure slightly less than was estimated for 2007 (to allow for the economic downturn from Oct. 2007 through the end of the fiscal year 2008.) If the GDP number was actually slightly higher, the percentage would be lower for 2008.

That is only true if you ignore the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security (and there are NO Social Security surpluses; only I.O.U.s).

Including that $12.8 Trillion, the Debt-to-GDP has never been larger, which is 170% = ($10.7T National Debt + $12.8T S.S. debt) / $13.86T GDP

Also, excluding the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, the debt-per-capita is MORE today than ever before.
In 1945, the debt-per-capita was $21.719 in inflation adjusted 2008 dollars.
Today, the debt-per-capita on the $10.7 Trillion National Debt = ($10.7T / 305Million) = $35,802 (which has never been large and is 61.5 higher than in year 1945).
Including the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, the debt-per-capita is $77,049 ($23.5T / 305 Million).
Which do you think is more important to individual Americans: Debt-to-GDP or Debt-per-Capita ?
Debt-per-capita (i.e. per person, on average) is much higher today than ever before in U.S. history (regardless of the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security).

Roy Ellis wrote: Dan, I choose scenario #4. The klepto-Plutocracy will continue with a policy of getting us ready for globalization. The way I see it is we have to reach wage parity with the developing world in order to have a self sustaining manufacturing base. Also, I believe the k-p realizes the fiat ponzi money system was nearing it’s useful life and by winding the economy and wages back to something comparable to that of the developing world they can keep the train on the track. If we start to see some type of protectionist policies put on the table I would have a different opinion.

Roy, I hope your right. However, I think growing the massive debt-bubble bigger will be the last straw, which is why I think Scenario # 2 (hyperinflation) is likely.

Roy Ellis wrote: You didn’t mention assigning staffer’s as Agency heads. I like that idea as a means to stop/slow the revolving door process. Also, would serve to keep the “most informed, most intelligent, most likely to succeed, most influential, and most wealthy’ business folks on the side lines or in a non-policy making status. Now, I like that.

Hmmmm … I’m not sure about that. I’ll have to think about it. Regardless, the influence of money needs to be reduced (or eliminated).

Roy Ellis wrote: A 3rd party with a different political attitude would focus their politicians on such an agenda and bring real reform to government pretty toute suite.

If hyperinflation and another Great Depression occurs, it will probably give rise to a 3rd party, and/or a mass ousting of incumbent politicians as occurred in year 1933, when most unhappy voters ousted 206 members of Congress. That’s a piece of inforamation that voters should be aware of. That is probably the only thing that will ever get bought-and-paid for politicians’ attention.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 20, 2009 12:41 PM

CORRECTION: In 1945, the debt-per-capita was $21.719 $21,719 in inflation adjusted 2008 dollars.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 20, 2009 12:43 PM

Remer writes; “The answer to your question was in that analogy. Ehh!@ Thank you for playing, but, no cigar this time.”

Not taking note of, or direction from his apparent hero, now President Obama, who advocates straight talk, Remer continues to evade the question referring back to his silly obfuscation.

One can hope that eventually Remer will have the confidence to honestly admit that there are no meaningful spending cuts in the rescue package being promoted by the Democrats as he called for in an earlier post.

I do understand Remer’s disappointment that congress, apparently following Obama’s wishes, has not seen fit to practice what they have been preaching. Unlike Remer however, I never did believe a word they were saying about reducing government’s wasteful spending addiction.

And, as long as Republican legislators (not conservatives) get some of the lard to bolster their bonafides with some of the greedy folks back home, there will be no objections from them.

We are witness to a gigantic spending party attended by an overwhelming majority of those elected leaders sworn to defend this country from all her enemies, foreign and domestic. Big wasteful spending which will surely cripple, if not destroy our way of life is the work of an enemy of freedom and prosperity.

Posted by: Jim M at January 20, 2009 01:41 PM

Roy,
Why America may have reached wage parity in the Global Market, I do believe that a Political Party could make the case so that the American Consumer, Small Business Owner, and Taxpayer can reap the benefits of a Green Society instead of Labor and Management.

And why it will take better minds than mine to split the difference. I do see it as a way to help Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders assit Americans in maintaining and raising their Lifestyoe while dealing with those nations fighting against us.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 20, 2009 04:42 PM

Henry, as I see it we are far from wage parity but are on a tangent that will get us there soon enough. Bush chose to grab the last big field of undeveloped sweet crude rather than pursue alternative energy. We will have to wait and see what the Obama administration does in that regard. It was the Dem’s who chose to use a food stock for transporation energy. Be assured this 3rd Party with a different political attitude will pursue alternative energy. Recall the following from the VISIONUSA page.

 The Dept. of Energy is reorganized to support a large scientific staff in the quest for alternative sources of energy. This new office will leverage the knowledge and technology of U.S. government agencies, universities, leading scientists and corporations.

The global warming thing is a hard nut to crack. The NASA guy is saying if we don’t act within the next 4 years it will be to late to affect global warming. He is pushing the scientific world to try to reach concensus and quickly. My think right now, based largely on the economy, is to not spend on global warming per se, but put the money into other greens such as alternative energy. I could forsee building new nukes to help in the transition from fossil to renewable and knock them down when we achive a certain level of renewable energy. Natural gas and nukes could solve our immediate energy problems while we go full out to develop alternatives. Plus, for the immediate future you aren’t going to take China and Russia off their fossils program. We need to develop clean energy for the world.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 20, 2009 07:05 PM

Why the Market already offers the American Layman several ways to generate the 400 kWh of Renewable Elecricity to cover Their Fair Share of the National Power Grid. Unless President Obama, Congress, or a Political Party is willing to address Americas’ Transportation System than the idea of making America Energy Independent is limited by Mans’ Weakness to address Grandmas’ Argument that they cannot have cars that fly.

So, why I support Mr. T. Boone Pickens Plan to build electric cars powered by natural gas generators where possible. I do look forward to the day when Man discovers that he can build a Zero Weight 100% Traction Electric Vehilce that will pay him to drive it up and down the road by being powered by Man-made Wind.

And though I have no way of knowing what impact such a vehicle would have on Global Warming. I am seriously wondering if it is commerical entreprising to build CO2 Collectors so I could provide the Bio-Mass Material with the CO2 they need to produce fresh air for buildings.

So, as I told a somebody a while back. If a Political Party or an Individual really wants to do something about Global Warming and Pollution than find a way to make money with it. For why our Children’s Children may be able to make something out of nothing, History will show that Man can build his Society where everything given by Nature is used.

Posted by: Henry Schalatman at January 20, 2009 08:02 PM

Right Henry. There is so much that could be done in pursuing alternative energy. Unfortunately, our government is driven by special interst business leaving innovation and creativity sitting on the shelf. That’s why I call for reform of government to get business out of government. Then We The People would be free to pursue renewable energy through the large umbrella of government. Something like a Manhattan Project if you will. With government in control of research money corporations, universities and the scientist of the world would focus on renewables instead of fossil.
I haven’t heard how much big oil put out for the inauguration but I did hear that the failed Wall Street banks carried the day. Was any bailout money used for that? We can’t know.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 21, 2009 11:51 AM

Roy,
Why I realize the Norm is taught to believe that Government or Societal Institutes are the only enities of man that can solve problems. I also reconize that like good parents it is not until the Learned of Society understands how and why something works that they will allow it on the Market.

Thus, IMO America does not need a Manhattan Project, but Our Democratic and Republican Citizens and Elected Officials need an Education Course in the Benefits of taking the Nation Green. For why the technology exists today to begin the process of lowering Americas’ Carbon Footprint to zero and build Zero Emission Power Plants. Not having been discovered in the Universities, it does take someone like Mr. T. Boone Pickens to spend the money in order to get the idea “Acceptable” by Socity.

Because IMO it is not the Government “We the People” deserve, but limited to the Government My Community Elders and Peers can peacefully pass by the NIMBY’s of our time into Law.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 21, 2009 08:20 PM

I see where you are going Henry. But I suspect T. Boone, the oil patch and similar entities will spend their money relative to their interest. These guys will lobby Congress to force their interest on the market. That’s exactly why we need business out of government or at least out of the drivers seat. Otherwise, what we have is the status quo. You can see it today with the auto industry. Government is beating up on the auto industry to develop alternative energy vehicles but industry wants to make cars they believe they can sell. Likewise, they spent 100 years perfecting the gasoline engine and they don’t want to just walk away from it now they have a functional product. I think our forefather’s would have us work with and trust government as opposed to industry. It’s just that we have to find a way to get business out of government in order to put trust in government. In order for that to happen we have to reform government, as our representatives are incapable of reform, and put accountability into government before people will work with and trust government to represent the people’s interest.

That’s exactly what our 3rd Party with a different political attitude is about.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 21, 2009 09:10 PM

Roy,
Again, why Protocal prevents me from exploiting the Ignorance of My Community Elders and Peers, you will be happy to know that Americas’ Elected Officials are bound by Logic and Reason over business. For if “We the Consumers” (i.e. Democratic and Republican Citizens) decide that they do not and will not spend their money on the products being offered by any business. That business or sector can lobby Congress all they want and still if the Voice of “We the People” remain loud enough no amount of money will let the business have their way.

Thus, IMO a 3rd Political Party could make a difference if they can find a Voice in Labor and Managent that exists in many Small Businesses found throughout the Land. For why Mr. Pickens may be looking at his own interests and profits, can you explain why some Employers and Employees share the same interests and point of view when it comes to their business?

For why the Adults of Society limit Americas’ Democratic and Replublican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders as well as ANY 3rd POLITICAL PARTY to the Debate of Labor and Management. I can assure you that the Government “We the People” deserve can be found in the Bold Vision of the Founding Fathers of America and the Ancient Ones of Songs.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 21, 2009 11:09 PM

Jim M wrote: … there are no meaningful spending cuts in the rescue package …

That’s what worries me.

If the already severely bloated federal government only grows larger and more wasteful, it will offset any truly productive jobs and benefits.
The federal government received $2.5 Trillion in total federal revenues in year 2007, yet it manages to spend hundreds of billions more each year.
And in 2008, the deficit was $1.2 Trillion.
And in 2008, the deficit will be ?????
I’m afraid to guess.

I also fear these 10 abuses will not only continue, but a few will get worse (debt, inflation, illegal immigration, etc.). And in my opinion, the total federal debt and nation-wide debt today is near (if not already untenable), because the $10.7 Trillion National Debt is 61% higher today (per capita) than after World War II (in inflation adjusted 2008 dollars: $21,719 in year 1945 versus $35,081 in year 2008). And the planned solution for this appears to be several more years of $1+ Trillion dollar deficits! We heard promises to go through the budget with a fine-tooth comb to eliminate unnecessary spending, but with 52 consecutive years of deficit spending, and 52 consecutive years of excessive money-printing and inflation, sufficient federal spendng cuts and shifting of federal spending seems unlikely. I’ll believe it when I see it. Especially after Congress just gave itself its 10th raise in 12 years.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 22, 2009 12:10 AM

Folks, spending cuts CANNOT occur in the rescue package. Spending cuts must come in the budgetary appropriations legislation.

Be real folks. If Russian troops knocked on Sarah Palin’s door tomorrow morning, would you really want the U.S. to just invite Putin’s troops on down to the lower 48 because we are committed to cutting spending even in the case of emergencies? This economic crisis IS an emergency.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 22, 2009 11:42 AM

Jim M said: “One can hope that eventually Remer will have the confidence to honestly admit that there are no meaningful spending cuts in the rescue package being promoted by the Democrats as he called for in an earlier post.”

Dead WRONG! again, Jim M. I NEVER called for spending cuts in the rescue package. See my comment above. Thank you for an another opportunity to an easy debate.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 22, 2009 11:46 AM

Remer; Debate has ended as you now apparently agree that there are no spending cuts in the rescue package. See how easy that was.

That only more spending is being proposed in our supposed rescue is obvious. Cutting government wasteful spending is not considered important at this time by the liberal congress (including many Republicans) and PO.

Posted by: Jim M at January 22, 2009 02:18 PM

Just out of curiosity what kind of spending cuts would one expect to see in a stimulus package intended to get the economy out of a mini depression and the unemployed back to work? I thought the stimulus package was intended to stimulate the economy to get it rolling.

Seems to me spending cuts should have been thought of during the 107th and 108th Congress when the economy was in better shape. To bad we were cutting taxes on the wealthy and borrowing for the debacle in Iraq. Seems these fine stewards of the economic ship had their eye on the oil and not on the best interests of the Country.

To cut the budget for government programs during a mini depression, in an emergency bill that is intended to put people back to work, would only exacerbate the problem. What am I missing here?

Posted by: j2t2 at January 22, 2009 10:59 PM

John McCain has now called the republican party
the “party of no”…”the party has got to become
much more than this”. Demint calls himself a
“freedom fighter against socialism”, Richard Shelby is just a plain old grinch, John Cornyn
is an expert at intelli-babble, Most have some
illogical reason why they cannot support a bill
before them, nor do they have an alternative.
Senator Corker while I don’t agree with all of his
concepts at least makes an effort to provide some
substance to the debate. All in all the republicans are going to present a major roadblock
to the progress of this country. If they had their on acceptable solutions, that would be
different, they don’t. At least when Newt Gingrich
was around Washington he had substantive ideas, not all of which I agreed with, but he moved the
agenda forward. The American people will lose patience with these empty suits and the party
will be forced to make a move one way or the other.

Posted by: Bob Henry at January 23, 2009 02:30 AM

j2t2 wrote: Just out of curiosity what kind of spending cuts would one expect to see in a stimulus package intended to get the economy out of a mini depression and the unemployed back to work? I thought the stimulus package was intended to stimulate the economy to get it rolling.

That’s a good question.

Excluding the U.S. Postal Service and U.S. Military, there are 1.8 million civil employees, making the U.S. federal government the nation’s largest employer.

• About 90% of the 1.8 Million federal employees work outsde of Washtington D.C.


• There are about 2.6 million active military, guard, and reserves (1.5 Million are active, non-civilian military personnel organized for combat).


• There is a tremendous amount of unnecessary spending and waste that not only creates no value, but creates a huge drain on the economy.


• The U.S. has a presence in 132 nations. Is that necessary?


• Is all of this necessary?


• Federal government waste investigations and recommendations can be found in hundreds of governmetn reports, such as:

Studies published by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO);

The Congressional Budget Office’s Budget Options book;

Inspector general reports of each agency;

Government Performance and Results Act reports of each agency;

The White House’s Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) program reviews;

The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee’s 2001 Government at the Brink reports;

For those seeking past recommendations that went unheeded, the 1984 Grace Commission report on government waste and the 1993–1995 publications of Vice President Al Gore’s National Performance Review can still be found;

10 Examples of Egregious Federal Waste and Spending:

• (01) The Missing $25 Billion - Buried in the Department of the Treasury’s 2003 Financial Report of the United States Government is a short section titled “Unreconciled Transactions Affecting the Change in Net Position,” which explains that these unreconciled transactions totaled $24.5 billion in 2003. The unreconciled transactions are funds for which auditors cannot account: The government knows that $25 billion was spent by someone, somewhere, on something, but auditors do not know who spent it, where it was spent, or on what it was spent. Blaming these unreconciled transactions on the failure of federal agencies to report their expenditures adequately, the Treasury report concludes that locating the money is “a priority.” The unreconciled $25 billion could have funded the entire Department of Justice for an entire year.


• (02) Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 Million - An audit in 2005 revealed revealed that between 1997 and 2003, the Defense Department purchased and then left unused approximately 270,000 commercial airline tickets at a total cost of $100 million. Even worse, the Pentagon never bothered to get a refund for these fully refundable tickets. The GAO blamed a system that relied on department personnel to notify the travel office when purchased tickets went unused.
  Auditors also found 27,000 transactions between 2001 and 2002 in which the Pentagon paid twice for the same ticket. The department would purchase the ticket directly and then inexplicably reimburse the employee for the cost of the ticket. (In one case, an employee who allegedly made seven false claims for airline tickets professed not to have noticed that $9,700 was deposited into his/her account). These additional transactions cost taxpayers $8 million. This $108 million could have purchased seven Blackhawk helicopters, 17 M1 Abrams tanks, or a large supply of additional body armor for U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.


• (03) Embezzled Funds at the Department of Agriculture - Federal employee credit card programs were designed to save money. Rather than weaving through a lengthy procurement process to acquire basic supplies, federal employees could purchase job-related products with credit cards that would be paid by their agency. What began as a smart way to streamline government has since been corrupted by some federal employees who have abused the public trust. A recent audit revealed that employees of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) diverted millions of dollars to personal purchases through their government-issued credit cards. Sampling 300 employees’ purchases over six months, investigators estimated that 15% abused their government credit cards at a cost of $5.8 million. Taxpayer-funded purchases included Ozzy Osbourne concert tickets, tattoos, lingerie, bartender school tuition, car payments, and cash advances. The USDA has pledged a thorough investigation, but it will have a huge task: 55,000 USDA credit cards are in circulation, including 1,549 that are still held by people who no longer work at the USDA.


• (04) Credit Card Abuse at the Department of Defense - The Defense Department has uncovered its own credit card scandal. Over one recent 18-month period, Air Force and Navy personnel used government-funded credit cards to charge at least $102,400 for admission to entertainment events, $48,250 for gambling, $69,300 for cruises, and $73,950 for exotic dance clubs and prostitutes.


• (05) Medicare Overspending - Medicare wastes more money than any other federal program, yet its strong public support leaves lawmakers hesitant to address program efficiencies, which cost taxpayers and Medicare recipients billions of dollars annually. For example, Medicare pays as much as eight times what other federal agencies pay for the same drugs and medical supplies. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently compared the prices paid by Medicare and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care program for 16 types of medical equipment and supplies, which account for one-quarter of Medicare’s equipment and supplies purchases. The evidence showed that Medicare paid an average of more than double what the VA paid for the same items. The largest difference was for saline solution, with Medicare paying $8.26 per liter compared to the $1.02 paid by the VA. These higher prices not only cost the program more money, but also take more money out of the pockets of Medicare beneficiaries. In 2002, senior citizens’ co-payments accounted for 20% of the $9.4 billion in allowed claims for medical equipment and supplies. Higher prices mean higher co-payments.
  Medicare also overpays for drugs. In 2000, Medicare’s payments for 24 leading drugs were $1.9 billion higher than they would have been under the prices paid by the VA or other federal agencies. Although Medicare is supposed to pay wholesale prices for drugs, it relies on drug manufacturers to define the prices, and manufacturers have strong incentives to inflate their prices.
  Nor are inflated prices for drugs and supplies the most expensive examples of Medicare’s inefficiencies. Basic payment errors—the results of deliberate fraud and administrative errors—cost $12.3 billion annually. As much as $7 billion owed to the program has gone uncollected or has been written off. Finally, while Medicare contracts claims processing and administration to several private companies, 19 cases of contractor fraud have been settled in recent years, with a maximum settlement of $76 million.
  Putting it all together, Medicare reform could save taxpayers and program beneficiaries $20 billion to $30 billion annually without reducing benefits. That would be enough to fund a $3,000 refundable health care tax credit for nearly 10 million uninsured low-income households.


• (06) Funding Fictitious Colleges and Students - In 2002, the Department of Education received an application to certify the student loan participation of the Y’Hica Institute in London, England. After approving the certification, the department received and approved student loan applications from three Y’Hica students and disbursed $55,000.
  The Education Department administrators over-looked one problem: Neither the Y’Hica Institute nor the three students who received the $55,000 existed. The fictitious college and students were created (on paper) by congressional investigators to test the Department of Education’s verification procedures. All of the documents were faked, right down to naming one of the fictional loan student applicants “Susan M. Collins,” after the Senator requesting the investigation.
  Such carelessness helps to explain why federal student loan programs routinely receive poor management reviews from government auditors. At last count, $21.8 billion worth of student loans are in default, and too many cases of fraud are left undetected. Tracking students across federal programs, verifying loan application data with IRS income data, and implementing controls to prevent the disbursement of loans to fraudulent applicants could save taxpayers billions of dollars.


• (07) Manipulating Data to Encourage Spending - The Army Corps of Engineers spends $5 billion annually constructing dams and other water projects. Yet, in a massive conflict of interest, it is also charged with evaluating the science and economics of each proposed water project. The Corps’ “strategic vision” calls on managers to increase their budgets as rapidly as possible, which requires approving as many proposed projects as possible. Consequently, the Corps has repeatedly been accused of deliberately manipulating its economic studies to justify unworthy projects.
  Investigations by the GAO, The Washington Post, and several private organizations have found that Corps studies routinely contain dozens of basic arithmetic errors, computer errors, and ridiculous economic assumptions that artificially inflate the benefits of water projects by as much as 300%. In one case, a study’s authors inflated a project’s benefits by using a 2.5% interest rate that dated back to 1954. In many cases in which the Corps calculated that a project would be a net benefit, arithmetic corrections revealed that the costs would be many times greater than the benefits. By that point, of course, the unnecessary and wasteful project is often underway and cannot be stopped.
  These errors appear to reflect more deception than sloppiness. A Washington Post investigation uncovered managers ordering analysts to “get creative,” to “look for ways to get to yes as fast as possible,” and “not to take no for an answer.” After a public outcry, in 2002, the Corps suspended work on 150 projects to review the economics used to justify them. However, given the combination of Congress’s thirst for pork-barrel projects and the Corps’ built-in incentives to approve projects that will increase its budget, real reforms seem unlikely.


• (08) State Abuse of Medicaid Funding Formulas - Significant waste, fraud, and abuse pervade Medicaid, which provides health services to 44 million low-income Americans. While states run their own Medicaid programs, the federal government reimburses an average of 57% of each state’s costs.
  This system gives states an incentive to over-report their Medicaid expenditures in order to receive larger federal reimbursements. Not surprisingly, the GAO has identified state schemes that shift money between state accounts to create an illusion of higher Medicaid expenditures. Similarly, some states have spent their federal Medicaid dollars on non-Medicaid purposes. Tight state budgets like those experienced by most states today have increased the pressure to use such deceptive tactics.
  The GAO and the HHS Inspector General have also uncovered some states’ practice of recovering improper payments, retaining the funds, and then spending them on unrelated programs—a practice that costs the federal government well over $2 billion per year. Congress could enact legislation to prohibit these actions more effectively.
  Minor reforms enacted by HHS in 2001 and 2002 are expected to save Medicaid $70 billion over the next decade. A small sample of financing schemes uncovered in a few states suggests that, if Congress acts, even larger savings are available.


• (09) Earned Income Tax Credit Overpayments - The earned income tax credit (EITC) provides $31 billion in refundable tax credits to 19 million low-income families. The IRS estimates that $8.5 billion to $9.9 billion of this amount—nearly one-third—is wasted in overpayments.
  The complexity of the EITC law leads to many of these mistakes. Calculating the credits is more complex than calculating regular income taxes. While the credit amount depends on the number of children in a household, the tax code does not clearly define how a child qualifies for the credit. In addition, fraud and underreporting of income are common, and the IRS lacks the resources to verify the qualifications of all EITC claimants. Efforts are being made to address this problem, but Congress can do more by requiring better verification of incomes and by clearly defining the standards by which a child qualifies for the EITC.


• (10) Redundancy Piled upon Redundancy - The federal government’s layering of new programs on top of old ones inherently creates duplication. Having several agencies perform similar duties is wasteful and confuses program beneficiaries who must navigate each program’s distinct rules and requirements.
  Some overlap is inevitable because some agencies are defined by whom they serve (e.g., veterans, Native Americans, urbanites, and rural families), while others are defined by what they provide (e.g., housing, education, health care, and economic development). When these agencies’ constituencies overlap, each relevant agency will often have its own program. With 342 separate economic development programs, the federal government needs to make consolidation a priority.
  Consolidating duplicative programs will save a lot of money and also improve government services. In addition to those programs that should be eliminated completely, Congress should consolidate the following sets of programs:
  • 342 federal economic development programs;
  
  
  • (10.01) 130 federal programs serving the disabled;
  
  
  • (10.02) 130 federal programs serving at-risk youth;
  
  
  • (10.03) 90 federal early-childhood development programs;
  
  
  • (10.04) 75 federal programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities;
  
  
  • (10.05) 72 federal programs dedicated to assuring safe water;
  
  
  • (10.06) 50 federal homeless assistance programs;
  
  
  • (10.07) 45 federal agencies conducting federal criminal investigations;
  
  
  • (10.08) 40 separate federal employment and training pro­grams;
  
  
  • (10.09) 28 federal rural development programs;
  
  
  • (10.10) 27 federal teen pregnancy programs;
  
  
  • (10.11) 26 federal small, extraneous K–12 school grant pro­grams;
  
  
  • (10.12) 23 federal agencies providing aid to the former Soviet republics;
  
  
  • (10.13) 19 federal programs fighting substance abuse;
  
  
  • (10.14) 17 federal rural water and waste-water programs in eight agencies;
  
  
  • (10.15) 17 federal trade agencies monitoring 400 interna­tional trade agreements;
  
  
  • (10.16) 12 federal food safety agencies;
  
  
  • (10.17) 11 federal principal statistics agencies; and
  
  
  • (10.18) 4 overlapping federal land management agencies.

Some waste is probably unavoidable, but the list above is egregious waste, and it is only the tiny tip of a gargantuan iceberg.

Other Sources of Waste Investigations and Reports:

• Citizens of Government Waste (CAGW.ORG);


• Congress just gave itself its 10th raise in 12 years. Cha-Ching! Maybe that is their reward to themselves for managing to dupe enough voters into rewarding Congress with a 86.9% re-election rate on 4-NOV-2008?:
  • 1998: $136,673 per annum; $151,813 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders;
  
  
  • 2000: $141,300 per annum; $156,900 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $181,400 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2002: $150,000 per annum; $161,200 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $186,300 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2003: $154,700 per annum; $166,700 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $192,600 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2004: $158,100 per annum; $175,700 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $203,000 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2005: $162,100 per annum; $180,100 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $208,100 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2006: $165,200 per annum; $183,500 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $212,100 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2007: $168,000 per annum; $186,600 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $215,700 per annum for Speaker;
  
  
  • 2009: $174,000 per annum; $190,700 per annum for Majority/Minority Leaders; $220,400 per annum for Speaker;


• The missing $2.3 Trillion dollars: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV301PZ-LhE


• More …

And then there are these 10 abuses which have been hammering most Americans for several decades, and the elimination of these abuses would do wonders for helping to energize the economy.

j2t2 wrote: Seems to me spending cuts should have been thought of during the 107th and 108th Congress when the economy was in better shape. Too bad we were cutting taxes on the wealthy and borrowing for the debacle in Iraq. Seems these fine stewards of the economic ship had their eye on the oil and not on the best interests of the Country.

Anytime is a good time to cut waste.

j2t2 wrote: To cut the budget for government programs during a mini depression, in an emergency bill that is intended to put people back to work, would only exacerbate the problem. What am I missing here?

The federal government received $2.5 Trillion in federal tax revenues in year 2007, and was probably less in year 2008.

In year 2008, the federal goverment exceeded that $2.5 Trillion by at least another $1.2 Trillion (spending over $3.4 Trillion).

Stimulus spending alone won’t be enough.
In fact, growing the already-severely bloated and wasteful federal government beyond the current nightmare proportions is a recipe for disaster, when the $10.7 Trillion National Debt is already near (if not already) untenable. That $10.7 Trillion National Debt does not even include the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching.
The massive waste and numerous abuses must be reduced and/or eliminated simultaneously.
The savings from reduced waste and fraud should be shifted to producing jobs that create real value, to increase the nation’s energy independence and energy efficiency; create less pollution; improve education to improve our global competitiveness; repair the most important parts of the nation’s infrastructure, etc.
For example, simplifying the tax-code would save Americans billions per year in wasted time, record keeping, etc.
There are a LOT of things that can be done.
A lot of promises have been made to correct a lot of the nation’s problems, growing dangerously in number and severity.
Focus on the most important issues is paramount, or another Great Depression is not far-fetched.
Several well-known economists (this week) have expressed a likelihood that the economic factors are truly dismal and another Great Depression is possible.
You really don’t need a crystal ball or need to be clairvoyant to recognize the real possiblity.
However, many things need to happen soon and simultaneously.
The failure to (a) stop numerous abuses, and (b) avoid growing the near (if not already) untenable debt and inflation larger, risks an economic terror worse than a recession: hyperinflation
Dozens of nations have already discovered what happens when the money-supply is doubled, tripled, or N-tupled.
Value and wealth can not be created by money-printing.
We can’t borrow, money-print, and spend our way to prosperity.
The plans to spend Trillions more dollars, when we are already running Trillion+ dollar deficits, without much (if any) discussion to cut unnecessary spending and end numerous abuses, and growing the already-severely-bloated and wasteful federal government larger, will most likely fail.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 11:51 AM

j2t2 writes; “To cut the budget for government programs during a mini depression, in an emergency bill that is intended to put people back to work, would only exacerbate the problem. What am I missing here?”

Many thanks to d.a.n. for his detailed and welcome answer to j2t2’s question.

One of the very best proposals for helping America recover was that put forward by my representative from East Texas, Louie Gohmert.

Louie proposed an income and payroll tax holiday for all employed workers for two or three months which many believe would actually stimulate the economy immediately.

The proposal will never see the light of day in congress as the liberals dare not allow working American’s to discover, in real time, just how much government sucks from each pay period. Giving working American’s their total wage for two months will open millions of eyes and once opened, the political class with all its mirrors and smoke will be hard pressed to explain why they need more money for anything.

Give working American’s a chance to discover what it’s like to have possession of all their wages to spend as they see fit, rather than government forcibly taking a substantial amount to spend as they see fit and that genie will be almost impossible to put back into the bottle.

New age politicians greatest fear is an informed public. We have become so conditioned to thinking of our wages as what we take home that many do not reflect on the amount taken by various government’s. We all know folks who brag about getting a tax refund as though it is “found” money and free. Just imagine how these same folks would feel if suddenly their payroll checks were increased by 30% or more. And then, just imagine the angst among these same folks when, once again, government began taking its pound of flesh away again.

There would be a tax revolt of gigantic proportions in the land from which liberals would hardly recover. Sanity could return as working Americans understood that government isn’t free…but extremely costly and wasteful.

Posted by: Jim M at January 23, 2009 01:10 PM

Good information Dan. More reason to promote a new 3rd party with a different political attitude. This government cannot, will not indulge in major reform. It’s simply impossible. A third party with a different political attitude is the vehicle to reform government and keep it that way.
I see where Microsoft made $4B this last quarter and is laying off 5k workers. Do we know if that includes workers on H1B temp visas? When asked by reports Microsoft offered a “no comment”. Is he still hiring H1B workers? 90% of the programmers working at Microsoft are paid below standard US wages.
I see where Watson, Hunter, Poe and Jones want an investigation into Mexico’s meddling in Border Patrol issues. This will be a good scrap between the legal government and the not so legal NAU.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 23, 2009 01:32 PM

d.a.n.,

I tried to relate your last entry to a stimulus package, but with all those government workers that would end up on unemployment compensation, it would not relate…sorry.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 23, 2009 01:34 PM

Marysdude wrote: d.a.n., I tried to relate your last entry to a stimulus package, but with all those government workers that would end up on unemployment compensation, it would not relate…sorry.

So we should continue to employee federal employees in jobs that are not only adding no net benefit, but are creating a drain and burden on society?

Just think how many people could move on to something else besides auditing millions of complex tax returns?
That is, if we had a simple, deductionless, single federal flat 17% income tax on ALL forms of personal income above the poverty level, with no tax-loop-holes, it would save billions per year in time-savings, reduced accounting and record keeping, and reduced legal expenses. For example.
It would probably produce more revenue too since it would remove the regressive nature of the current tax system.
That would give most Americans a tax break, and since Warrent Buffet paid 17.7% on $46 Million in year 2006 (mostly due to a maximum of 15% tax on capital gains), the wealthy would only see a tax increase of a few percent at most. However, still, everyone would be paying the same flat 17.0%.
Stopping these 10 major abuses as soon as possible would have immediate and far-reaching benefits.

Marysdude, Besides, most federal employees could continue to work for the federal government, if they don’t mind doing a different job that actually produces something of value.
There is a LOT the federal government does that simply doesn’t need to be done, and there is a LOT the federal government does that can be done MUCH more efficiently.
The resistance to cutting waste and dead-weight, merely to keep people employed at jobs that are a net-loss instead of a net-gain seems pretty dumb.

Every cent possible of tax revenue needs to be spent as wisely as possible.
Every cent possible of waste needs to be shifted to other things that create net benefits instead of net losses.
If some dead weight loses a job, well that’s just too bad.
We can longer afford so much bloat, waste, and graft.
We can’t all work for the government, which has already growng far beyond nightmare proportions.

To continue to pay tens of thousands of federal employees to do jobs that are unnecessary, instead of shifting that spending to focus on the nation’s most important needs is probably why the massive spending and multi-trillion dollar deficits will fail. There are hundreds of billions of dollars being wasted annually; not only on federal employee jobs, but spending on unnecessary things such as this (below). Look at what incumbent politicians in CONGRESS do daily as our troops risk life and limb, go without armor, inadequate medical care, promised benefits, and have to do 2, 3, 4+ tours in Iraq and/or Afghanistan:

• Congress give itself its 10th raise in the 12 years between 1997 to 2009.


• Vote for $107,000 to study the sex life of the Japanese quail instead of Vote for body armor for troops without body armor


• Vote for $1.2 million to study the breeding habits of the woodchuck instead of vote for more funding for disabled veterans


• Vote for $150,000 to study the Hatfield-McCoy feud instead of vote for more armor for Humvees and military vehicles


• Vote for $84,000 to find out why people fall in love instead of vote to secure the nation’s near wide-open borders


• Vote for $1 million to study why people don’t ride bikes to work instead of vote to fix the levees in New Orleans


• Vote for $19 million to examine gas emissions from cow flatulence instead of shore up the plundered Social Security and Medicare systems


• Vote for $144,000 to see if pigeons follow human economic laws instead of vote for funding for flu vaccines


• Vote for funds to study the cause of rudeness on tennis courts and examine smiling patterns in bowling alleys instead of improve public education


• Vote for $219,000 to teach college students how to watch television instead of vote to use that money for scholarships


• Vote for $2 million to construct an ancient Hawaiian canoe instead of secure the nation’s coastal ports


• Vote for $20 million for a demonstration project to build wooden bridges instead of repair our crumbling infrastructure (bridges, roads, railways, tunnels, etc.)


• Vote for $160,000 to study if you can hex an opponent by drawing an X on his chest instead of reduce election/voting fraud


• Vote for $800,000 for a restroom on Mt. McKinley instead of vote for better medical care for injured soldiers and veterans


• Vote for $100,000 to study how to avoid falling spacecraft instead of vote for funding better defense systems


• Vote for $16,000 to study the operation of the komungo, a Korean stringed instrument instead of vote for funding to fight diabetes, aids, and other diseases


• Vote for $1 million to preserve a sewer in Trenton, NJ, as a historic monument instead of improve existing water treatment and sewer systems


• Vote for $6,000 for a document on Worcestershire sauce instead of vote for better intelligence that would prevent us from going to war for the wrong reasons


• Vote for $10,000 to study the effect of naval communications on a bull’s potency instead of vote for communications and aerial surveillance of our borders and coastlines


• Vote for $100,000 to research soybean-based ink instead of vote for funding to increase produce production


• Vote for $1 million for a Seafood Consumer Center instead of vote for reform for our ridiculous tax system


• $75,000 for Onondaga County for the Greater Syracuse Sports Hall of Fame;


• $250,000 added by the House for the North Creek Ski Bowl in the district of House appropriator John Sweeney (R-N.Y.);


• $250,000 added by the Senate for the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum in Nashville, Tenn. to support community programs;


• $775,000 for the Biltmore Hotel in the district of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.);


• $300,000 for Baltimore for the relocation of the Center Garage;


• $150,000 added in conference for the Coca-Cola Space Science Center in Columbus, Ga.;


• Vote for $1 million for a Seafood Consumer Center instead of vote for reform for our ridiculous tax system ?


• $100,000 for the Tiger Woods Foundation;


• $75,000 for Onondaga County for the Greater Syracuse Sports Hall of Fame;


• $250,000 added by the House for the North Creek Ski Bowl in the district of House appropriator John Sweeney (R-N.Y.);


• $250,000 added by the Senate for the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum in Nashville, Tenn. to support community programs;


• $775,000 for the Biltmore Hotel in the district of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.);


• $300,000 for Baltimore for the relocation of the Center Garage;


• $150,000 added in conference for the Coca-Cola Space Science Center in Columbus, Ga.;


• $100,000 for the Tiger Woods Foundation;


• And the one that best epitomizes the misplaced priorities of government: $57,000 spent by the Executive Branch for gold-embossed playing cards on Air Force Two.


• And all of that above is just the tip of the iceberg. Imagine this going on while many U.S. troops can not get adequate medical care and promised benefits. It’s a disgrace!
  
• Congress despicably pits American citizens and illegal aliens against each other, refuses to enforce the laws, and refuses to address illegal immigration. Homeland Security is a joke when ports and borders are wide-open.


• $2.3 Trillion missing (yes, that’s Trillion with a “T”), and no one in Congress seems to care (January, 2006).


• CAGW.ORG (thousands of examples of waste, graft, and corporate welfare) …


• More problems ignored, growing in number and severity …

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 03:00 PM

marysdude writes; “I tried to relate your last entry to a stimulus package, but with all those government workers that would end up on unemployment compensation, it would not relate…sorry.”

PO’s current proposal calls for 3 to 4 million new jobs of which he designates 20% for government. That’s 600,000 to 800,000 new government employees.

I recall a few blogs ago that Mr. Remer objected to my assertion that these jobs would never be eliminated. He responded that they would when the financial crisis was over.

Now comes marysdude to add strength to my point. He would not cut the current number of government employees to save the economy…much less cut any future government jobs to be created if PO has his way.

d.a.n. wrote; “The resistance to cutting waste and dead-weight, merely to keep people employed at jobs that are a net-loss instead of a net-gain seems pretty dumb.”

Dumb and purely political in my opinion…thanks d.a.n.

Posted by: Jim M at January 23, 2009 03:43 PM

Jim M & d.a.n.,

You can argue against any kind of stimulus package, if you must. You may have several good points in your favor. But the way I understand it you are mostly for including policy issues within the stimulus package. Even I can see this approach is invalid. Stimulus, by its very nature, is a shot of adrenalin…hard to be a shot of anything if you tie it down to conservative policy issues.

Can either of you imagine how long it would take Congress to agree on a package that rested on the many points d.a.n. has mentioned? We’ll have long since turned into a third world nation, before the first item is agreed to.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 23, 2009 04:52 PM

d.a.n thanks for the response and the 10 examples of Federal waste and other info on the issue. I would agree that these kind of issues need to be dealt with, but in an emergency stimulus package? We will be here for years trying to solve those issues if the past is any indication.

“Anytime is a good time to cut waste.”
Yes it is. But some times are better than others wouldn’t you think. To try to include some of the items from your list into this package would serve to complicate the process. The right time IMHO was back when things were going strong.By not doing so then it has made the situation harder to deal with IMHO. I’m not a fan of piling on debt nor borrowing and spending but then I’m also not a fan of a full blown depression either.

“Stimulus spending alone won’t be enough.”

It probably won’t but the other part of the stimulus package are the proposed tax cuts. Would you expect our representatives to do nothing at this point or wait until they can deal with the waste you speak of? I realize that with the globalization of economics the past 3 decades things that worked before may not work now but to wait until the wastes you refer to are included in this bill may mean a long wait.

Posted by: j2t2 at January 23, 2009 04:55 PM

marysdude argues; “But the way I understand it you are mostly for including policy issues within the stimulus package. Even I can see this approach is invalid.”

Oh really marysdude. I have lost count of the number of war funding bills that were larded up with pork. Please don’t insult the intelligence of the readers on this blog by claiming wasteful spending reductions can’t be part of a stimulus bill when pork is nearly always part of any spending done by congress.

The words “stimulus” and “spending” are identical for congressional purposes. Trying to spin them as something different is silly.

Spending our way out of this crisis is just as crazy as the idea that we could tax our way out of the energy crunch a few months ago.

No one knows if this huge spending spree will help our economy in the long run and the haste upon which it is being put together simply means that it will be flawed. Does anyone imagine that a bill of this size and magnitude will be read and understood by the members voting on it? Hell no, they will rely upon the direction of the leaders in congress and PO and fall in step to keep campaign coffers filled with money from the fruitcake loudmouthed libs back home.

Posted by: Jim M at January 23, 2009 06:31 PM

marysdude wrote: Jim M & d.a.n., You can argue against any kind of stimulus package, if you must. You may have several good points in your favor. But the way I understand it you are mostly for including policy issues within the stimulus package. Even I can see this approach is invalid. Stimulus, by its very nature, is a shot of adrenalin…hard to be a shot of anything if you tie it down to conservative policy issues.

marysdude, I never asserted that stimulus and cost-cutting should be in the same BILL.

In fact, I recommend against that.
However, we should be pursuing BOTH simultaneously.
BILLs should be in the works now to find ways to eliminate all major unnecessary spending, waste, and bloat (and there’s a LOT of it).
Also, spending more responsibly is not necessarily a “conservative policy issue”.
It’s just common sense.
With so much debt, it is unlikely we can afford to continue to support such massive bloat and debt, and also double, triple, or N-tuple the money supply by more borrowing, debt, and rampant money-printing.

marysdude wrote: Can either of you imagine how long it would take Congress to agree on a package that rested on the many points d.a.n. has mentioned? We’ll have long since turned into a third world nation, before the first item is agreed to.

What’s that mean?

Ignore the waste listed above?
Just give up?
That fact is, if massive spending is not done more responsibly (followed by cuts in unnecessary spending too), it probably ain’t gonna matter much.
If the debt is near (if not already) untenable, a spending-only approach will be the tiny push needed to send the economy over the edge.
Regardless of what some people think, there is a limit to debt, money-printing, and waste.
If we exceed that limit (and we may have already) and there will be painful consequences, and many of those painful consequences are already appearing now.
The debt-per-capita today for the $10.7 Trillion National Debt has never been higher (61.9% higher than the previous record-high in 1945; $21,719 per-capita in 1945 in 2008 dollars versus $35,081 per-capita in year 2008).
The $67 Trillion Nation-wide debt today has ever been worse and has grown from 100% of GDP in year 1956 to 483% of GDP in 2008.
That much debt (never more debt) is probably untenable.
So, how is more debt going to become more tenable?

j2t2 wrote: d.a.n thanks for the response and the 10 examples of Federal waste and other info on the issue. I would agree that these kind of issues need to be dealt with, but in an emergency stimulus package?

I agree. Mixing a multitude of issues (spending and cuts) in one BILL is a bad practice, and I’m a big supporter of One-Purpose-Per-BILL (to discourage pork-barrel).

j2t2 wrote: We will be here for years trying to solve those issues if the past is any indication.

Yes. I agree.

I never meant spending cuts should be combined with a stimulus spending BILL.
Yes, spending cuts will be very contentious too, and perhaps impossible, given the pork-happy Congress that has been deficit spending for 52 consecutive years.

I support a stimulus spending for creating productive jobs, benefits, savings, and efficiency. However, I believe it should ultimately be financed by savings from cuts of a LOT of waste and bloat.
That will create confidence that is missing today, because some polls show that most Americans are not in favor of Trillion+ deficits and Trillion+ stimulus packages.

j2t2 wrote:

d.a.n wrote: “Anytime is a good time to cut waste.”

Yes it is. But some times are better than others wouldn’t you think.

Yes. But going throught the federal budget “with a fine tooth comb” (as Obama, McCain, and others promised) should start soon (if not now in a separate BILL), and it should cut as much unnecessary spending as possible, and free up money to fund more productive activities. If the government simply continues to grow ever larger, all benefits of the stimulus spending will be offset or overcome by more wasteful, unnecessary, and unproductive spending.

j2t2 wrote: To try to include some of the items from your list into this package would serve to complicate the process.

Yes. I agree. Budget cuts need to be in separate BILLs.

j2t2 wrote: The right time IMHO was back when things were going strong. By not doing so then it has made the situation harder to deal with IMHO.

Me too. However, we have had 52 consecutive years of deficit spending. Congress has no fiscal discipline.

j2t2 wrote: I’m not a fan of piling on debt nor borrowing and spending but then I’m also not a fan of a full blown depression either.

Well, unless wasteful spending is shifted to productive spending, and the debt and government simply grow larger, another Great Depression is almost certain to occur.

j2t2 wrote:

d.a.n wrote: “Stimulus spending alone won’t be enough.”

It probably won’t but the other part of the stimulus package are the proposed tax cuts.

Hopefully, the tax cuts will make the tax system more fair (i.e. less regressive).

However, if it is merely a one-time tax-credit (e.g. $1000), and the regressive tax curve is not corrected, then we will still have a regressive, unfair tax system: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm#Taxes

Also, stopping these 10 major abuses would have huge benefits and boost confidence tremendously.
After all, a small part of this economic melt-down is due to a loss of confidence (a loss of confidence which is well justified).

j2t2 wrote: Would you expect our representatives to do nothing at this point or wait until they can deal with the waste you speak of?

Actually, I expect some in Congress to be studying the complete federal budget, and working simultaneously on other (separate) BILLs for spending cuts. But knowing Congress, that makes too much sense and a a bit too much to ask of do-nothing Congress.

j2t2 wrote: I realize that with the globalization of economics the past 3 decades things that worked before may not work now but to wait until the wastes you refer to are included in this bill may mean a long wait.

I never meant that wastes should be done only, nor first.

I recommend that many things be done simultaneously (in separate BILLs and steps).
What we need is for Congress and the administration to thread a tiny needle with a fat thread, and they need to do it soon.
The do-nothing Congress needs to learn how to dribble and chew gum at the same time.
I’m not sure that will happen witt this Congress, since 86.9% of all incumbents were re-elected on 7-NOV-2008, and most incumbents in Congress have been there for over a decade.
Unfortunately, Congress mostly only knows how to spend, spend, spend (and not responsibly).
Also, with so much money on the table, more corruption, greed, and lack-of-oversight is probable.
If the debt is already untenable, how can it be grown any larger?
The fact is, no one in the federal government seems to know if the total debt is already untenable. That’s not a good sign.
If we keep growing the debt and government larger, these 18+ deteriorating economic conditions, which have never been worse ever, and/or since the Great Depression, could easily result in another Great Depression.
And another Great Depression may already be unavoidable.
I think I see a way out of this, but it appears doubtful that the federal government will have the discipline to spend wisely and cut the waste and bloat.

Jim M wrote: BO’s current proposal calls for 3 to 4 million new jobs of which he designates 20% for government. That’s 600,000 to 800,000 new government employees.

Merely growing the government larger may be the last straw. Spending cuts are as important as stimulus, if the debt is near (if not already) untenable.

I think the debt has most likely already been untenable for over a year, and the cause of so many deteriorating economic conditions (worse then ever before, and/or since the Great Depression).

Roy wrote: Good information Dan. More reason to promote a new 3rd party with a different political attitude.

Thanks Roy. Don’t worry, a new 3rd party, and/or a mass-ousting of incumbents in Congress is almost a certainty.

Roy wrote: This government cannot, will not indulge in major reform. It’s simply impossible.

Roy, I fear you are correct. I don’t think (most likely) this Congress has the discipline to do what is required (i.e. the Congress that just gave itself its 10th raise in 12 years). This Congress (which is 86.9% of the previous Congress and 80% of the Congress before it, … , and 55% of the Congress from decades ago) is too greedy and arrogant, and there is little doubt in my mind that they will prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt with more corruption, pork-barrel, waste, and growing government to nightmare hellish proportions.

Roy wrote: I see where Microsoft made $4B this last quarter and is laying off 5k workers.

And that was after Bill Gates lobbied Congress to raise the H-1B Visa limits.

Roy wrote: Do we know if that includes workers on H1B temp visas? When asked by reports Microsoft offered a “no comment”. Is he still hiring H1B workers? 90% of the programmers working at Microsoft are paid below standard US wages.

Roy, You’re right.

I saw that in the News too.
When asked about whether they were laying off H-1B contractors too, Microsoft said “no comment”.
I’ll bet you $100 bucks that Microsoft is laying off U.S. Citizens and keeping H-1B Visa contractors.
How greedy is that?
It’s disgusting.
It’s disgusting how the federal government repeatedly raises the H-1B Visa limits when 11.1-to-24.6 Million Americans are unemployed.
It’s disgusting how the federal government despicably pits American citizens and illegal aliens agianst each other for votes and profits (disguised as compassion).
Some of the richest people in the world aren’t satisfied with their billions.

• www.programmersguild.org/docs/bill_gates_lies_about_h1b_wages.html (Bill Gates lies about wages for H-1B workers)


• www.youtube.com/programmersguild (fake job ads asking for the moon are used to justify avoiding hiring American citizens)


• www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx—jNQYNgA (law firms teach corporations how to avoid hiring qualified American citizens)


• archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/31/92649.shtml (wage stagnation + cheap labor = BIG profits)

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 06:55 PM

You know something is dreadfully wrong when the people have become so dependent on a government that is not only broke, but so deep in debt that the debt is probably untenable, and that government has plans to create Trillions of dollars of new money from thin air.

• ,-(1) Corruption, oppression, totalitarianism, pain and misery,
• | (2) courage, Responsibility, rebellion,
• | (3) liberty, growth, abundance,
• | (4) selfishness, complacency, fiscal irresponsibility,
• | (5) apathy, dependency, fiscal & moral bankruptcy,
• ` - - return to step (1)

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 06:59 PM

Dan, you really are an important player in advocating for better government. Few of us can remember one pork item or can do no more than cite one or two pieces of long detailed story. You make it so evident that out government has experienced systemic corruption and dysfunction for decades. Laws, programs, projects, commissions, etc. once started are never ended. I’m confident if you search for it you will find where subsidies being mailed to families for products that haven’t been grown in the US for a hundred years. The Rural Electrification Association (REA) is ongoing, etc. Not to infer that once the check cutting starts it’s on autopilot. Nope, the legislator’s know where the beans go. Everything’s cool so long as nobody makes any waves. Status quo you know.
We are simply being governed by a system that has taken a couple of hundred years to morf into a klepto-plutocracy, evermore driven by the influence of money. Gasoline is a good analogy. Long as it’s plentiful and cheap nobody cares about alternative energy. Same with government, long as folks have a job, a pig in every poke, then government can do as it pleases and nobody gets too upset.
I’d so like to see a 3rd party made up of centrist populist of the ilk of Andrew Jackson take up the revolution and carry out a real reform of government. I rant a lot about the lack of accountability in government as being a major problem. Greater yet is that there is too much democracy. Democracy is a straight shot to the majority being ruled by a minority. We need to restore the Republic to the extent possible.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 23, 2009 09:18 PM

Roy, Thanks. We’ve reached a few. Every step begins with the first step.

A 3rd party has a very good chance of coming about if the status quo persists, because voters will most likely be at their wits end.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 10:13 PM

CORRECTION: Every step journey begins with the first step.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 10:15 PM

d.a.n. and Roy,
To give you an idea of the battle ahead look at America during the Mid-1800’s when Slavery was the overbearing issue. For why I realize that Americas’ Democratic and Republican Elected Officials are trying hard to bring the two sides together. At times I wonder what “Huge Human Event” will show My Peers that the Children of the 21st Century are not into the game of Economic Slavery.

Yes, I do believe that if the Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders fail to help President Obama keep his promise of making America Energy Independent in the next two years that a group of Citizens from all walks of life can create a viable 3rd Political Party that can stand up as the Loyal Opposion.

However, until than I do believe that the Independents of America would better serve the Nation by confronting both the Extreme Left and Right on how far they want to take the Argument of Stupidity held by the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s on such issues as the Economic Stimulus Package.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 24, 2009 01:18 AM

“Well, unless wasteful spending is shifted to productive spending, and the debt and government simply grow larger, another Great Depression is almost certain to occur.”

d.a.n with Corporate America pulling jobs out of the Country and/or bringing in foreign labor what exactly is productive spending anymore? It seems the top 1% of the wealthy are not consuming enough to keep the economy going. With the wage deterioration of the past 30 years the middle class can’t keep up with the glut of products ready to be consumed.
Maybe we need to rethink our entire game plan here. Cutting the wasteful spending is more a longer term issue than the stimulus money entering the economy. Debt will continue to increase for some time if the stimulus package passes, we continue to stay in Afghanistan and Iraq and we continue with our current budget deficit. Whether government will grow larger, unless you mean deeper in debt, in terms of a significantly bigger payroll doesn’t seem likely IMHO.

Based on the great depression we cannot count on the wealthy or corporate America to help in any way. If infrastructure spending isn’t the answer and tax cuts of $1k to people in debt will probably work about as well as the last stimulus package which didn’t seem to help at all.

I guess my point is there is no easy choices or sure things that will work soon. According to some the “recession” will resolve itself by 2010 why do anything until 2011 if there is still a problem?

BTW d.a.n in comment 274161 you have duplicated your efforts on the following items
1. Biltmore
2. Baltimore
3.Coca-Cola
4.Tiger Woods
5. Seafood Consumer
Not that I read every word but…

Posted by: j2t2 at January 24, 2009 01:35 AM

j2t2,
Why I ealize that the Extreme Left and Right seem to want to resist change I do believe once they are educated on the benefits of building a Green Civilized World that both will have to be kept from trying to out do the other. Sort of like Mr. Pickens and others saying that the economic stimulus package is a good start and me saying no it is not.

Hopefully, Americas’ Democratic and Republican Parents will get the message from Their Children or do “We the People” needed to wait another 40 years to become Enrtgy Independent.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at January 24, 2009 03:40 AM

>marysdude, I never asserted that stimulus and cost-cutting should be in the same BILL.
Posted by: d.a.n at January 23, 2009 06:55 PM

d.a.n.,

If Obama has not even submitted his first budget, and we will work from the Cheney/Bush budget until it runs out…do you think he can do all you want with Executive Orders and Signing Papers? Apparently you want everything taken care of at once, but, if you were president how would you go about that? If he sends his stimulus package to Congress on the same day he sends proposed policy changes, how much work will get done on the stimulus right away? You leave me scratching my head.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 24, 2009 05:28 AM

j2t2 writes; “Whether government will grow larger, unless you mean deeper in debt, in terms of a significantly bigger payroll doesn’t seem likely IMHO.”

If the stimulus package PO (President Obama) is suggesting is passed, asking for 20% of the 3 or 4 million created jobs to be in government, that’s 600,000 to 800,000 more folks sucking at the government teat. That is quite an increase in government payroll. Does anyone know what these additional 100’s of thousands of folks will be doing to earn their bread?

Posted by: Jim M at January 24, 2009 12:06 PM

Henry Schlatman wrote: However, until than I do believe that the Independents of America would better serve the Nation by confronting both the Extreme Left and Right on how far they want to take the Argument of Stupidity …

As a centrist, I agree. That’s good advice.

j2t2 wrote: d.a.n with Corporate America pulling jobs out of the Country and/or bringing in foreign labor what exactly is productive spending anymore?

It is spending that produces real value, savings, efficiency, and benefits (e.g. energy independence, reduced bureaucracy, important infrastructure, manufacturing that leads to exports and reduces imports, etc.).

It is things that produce net benefits instead of net losses.
Much of what the severely bloated federal government is doing is a net loss (i.e. waste).
Those net losses need to be converted to net gains.
We can’t afford to have people doing jobs in the federal government that are a net loss to society.
There has been far too much of that for many decades.
There are more jobs in government than all manufacturing jobs in the U.S.
The federal government is the largest employer in the U.S.
There are numerous examples of waste and bloat:

• One obvious example is a military presence in 132 foreign nations, which can be and should be significantly reduced.


• Another example is the billions wasted annually on a severely complex and regressive tax system.


• Another example is the estimated $70-to-327 Billion of annual net losses due to illegal immigration, which does not even include the untold cost of crime and job millions of displacemed jobs. Divide those net losses by the number of states (i.e. 50 states). Yet, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and many in Congress are despicably trying to undermine 3Verify (to confirm citizenship or legal employment status) which is 99.6% accurate, and Harry Reid has introduced BILL S.9 to help pass another shamnesty like the one in 1986 (which more than quadrupled the problem). Also, there are rumors of spending to secure ports, but what about the borders and prosecuting greedy illegal employers of illegal aliens? It appears that Congress is going to continue to despicably pit Americans and illegal aliens against each other for votes and profits.


• Another example is hundreds of billions of dollars pork-barrel, corporate welfare, and subsidies for the weatlhy.


• Another example is these farm subsidies.
  I know some people who are quite well off, own thousands of acres of land, and receive hundreds of thousands (or more) in subsidies per year.
  Many are huge corporate owned farms receiving millions annually.
  
  • Consider these top 10 subsidy programs for one state (e.g. Texas) 1995-2006:
  
  
  • Rank ____ Subsidy ___________ Recipients _____ Total
  
  
  • 01 __ Cotton Subsidies _______ 96,628 ______ $6,126,931,257
  
  
  • 02 __ Disaster Payments _____ 144,923 ______ $2,410,774,724
  
  
  • 03 __ Conservation Reserve ___ 37,769 ______ $1,759,118,624
  
  
  • 04 __ Rice Subsidies __________ 5,619 ______ $1,325,261,031
  
  
  • 05 __ Wheat Subsidies _______ 95,337 ______ $1,291,098,137
  
  
  • 06 __ Corn Subsidies _________ 59,302 ______ $1,213,424,428
  
  
  • 07 __ Peanut Subsidies _______ 11,680 ______ $491,103,948
  
  
  • 08 __ Livestock Subsidies _____ 84,430 ______ $456,298,603
  
  
  • 09 __ Dairy Program Subsidies ___ 2,586 ______ $92,836,865
  
  
  • 10 __ Env. Quality Incentive ___ 12,036 ______ $80,298,602

Above in Comment # 274138 (www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/006384.html#274138), there were 10+ examples of massive waste and fraud.
Also, we should not be giving tax-breaks and subsidies to corporations, such as oil companies, and corporations that send jobs off shore.

Those above are only a very few examples.
Thousands of examples of waste can be found at CAGW.ORG’s databases.
There are hundred$ of Billion$ of U.S. Dollar$ being wasted annually that need to be converted to produce net benefits instead of net losses.

j2t2 wrote: It seems the top 1% of the wealthy are not consuming enough to keep the economy going. With the wage deterioration of the past 30 years the middle class can’t keep up with the glut of products ready to be consumed.

The economy is 70% consumer driven, and the wealthiest 20% do most of the spending (typically; before year 2008).

However, a 70% consumer driven economy is not sustainable, and we can’t force the wealthy to spend more.
Also, buidling and consuming junk is not the solution.
Producing real value is part of the solution, and the requires many things, including the elimination of many abuses.
One abuse is a regressive and unfair tax system.
The wealthy should pay an equal percentage of total federal taxes, which they are not: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm#Taxes
The deterioration of the middle-to-low income groups is not merely due to lack of consumption.
It is also due to the perpetuation of numerous abuses: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm

• (01) Lawlessness (constitutional violations, existing laws being ignored, etc.)


• (02) Wars (7 wars in the last 90 years; some unnecessary wars)


• (03) Plutocracy / Kleptocracy (99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent by a mere 0.3% who make 83% of all federal campaign donations)


• (04) Illegal Immigration and Unfair Trade Practices; $70-to-$327 Billion in annual net losses;


• (05) Election Problems; an estimated 3% of votes are by illegal aliens;


• (06) Debt ($67 Trillion of nation-wide debt); $10.7 Trillion National Debt; debt has never been worse per-capita;


• (07) Inflation / Usury / the Monetary-System is a Pyramid-Scheme; seen the falling U.S. Dollar lately? One-Simple-Idea.com/USD_Falling.htm )


• (08) Regressive and Unfair Taxation: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm#Taxes


• (09) Insufficient / Inadequate Education; many American are unaware of the level of corruption, waste, fiscal and moral bankruptcy;


• (10) HealthCare or DangerousCare? 195,000 people killed annually by avoidable medical mistakes and adverse drug reactions;

j2t2 wrote: Maybe we need to rethink our entire game plan here. Cutting the wasteful spending is more a longer term issue than the stimulus money entering the economy.

We don’t have time to put off analysis of waste in the budget.

The Congress and Executive Branch must do many things simultaneously.
The situation is that serious.
It is encouraging to see that Obama seems to understand that.
Lately, Obama seems to be discovering that things are much worse than he previously thought.
Of course, he’s been campaigning for the last two years, instead of studying economic statistics and conditions.
One doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist or clairvoytant to see that things are serious:

• The $10.7 Trillion National Debt per-capita has never been worse (which doesn’t even include the $12.8 Trillion borrowed from Social Security).


• The current National Debt-per-capita is 61.9% higher than the previous highest federal debt-per-capita after World War II in year 1945, which was $3.045 Trillion in 2008 Dollars.


• The $67 Trillion nation-wide debt has never been worse (up from 100% of GDP in 1956 to 483% of GDP in year 2008).


• Average personal savings rates are negative (since year 2005), and have never been worse since the Great Depression.


• Total personal household debt nation-wide ($13.88 Trillion) has never been larger, both in size and as a percentage (over 100%) of the $13.86 Trillion GDP.


• Real median household incomes have fallen since year 1999, and have actually never been lower since year 1978 when also including the fact that (a) there are now more workers per household; (b) we have more regressive taxation (voters should ask to see the tax curve on gross income; before a myriad of tax loop holes are applied); (c) and the 40-hour work week is disappearing; (d) urban sprawl and high fuel costs are hammering the middle-income and lower-income levels;


• The current number of unemployed (11.1-to-24.6 Million as of DEC-2008) has never been worse since the Great Depression (12.83 Million). Unemployment increased by over half a million in DEC-2008. Rising unemployment is causing a rise in the already record-level foreclosures and bankruptcies.


• Illegal immigration has never been worse and more costly, costing American citizens an estimated $70 Billion to $338 Billion annually in net losses. The problem has quadrupled since the amnesty of year 1986. Hundreds of overrun hospitals have closed (60-to-84 in California alone), California is now laying off 20,000 teachers in the public school system. 29% of all people incarcerated in Federal prisons are illegal aliens. The politicians (despicably) capitalize on it in 3 ways: (a) by pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for profits and to depress wages (Wage_Stagnation + Cheap_Labor = Big_Profits); (b) by dividing the voters (capitalizing on Americans misplaced compassion for illegal aliens more than their fellow Americans); (c) and by pandering for votes;


• The wealth disparity gap has never been larger since the Great Depression. The gap started growing larger, and has not stopped growing larger since year 1976.


• Taxation has been regressive since year 2000 (or before). We have never had so many different kinds of taxes; many of which are regressive sales taxes. The current tax code is ridiculously complex (by design) with a myriad of tax loop-holes that mostly benefit the wealthy.


• Home equities have never been lower (below 50%) since year 1945.


• Home ownership has fallen since year 2006 for low-income and middle-income groups. A study shows that only 59.6% of working class families owned their homes in 2003, lower than the 62.5% in year 1978. That is, home ownership is rising among the wealthy, while falling for most Americans that are losing wealth, losing equity, losing income, and losing their homes at record levels. Currently, home ownership is in a record plunge, and the 4th quarter of 2007 had the biggest one-year drop (1.1%) since tracking began in year 1965.


• Foreclosures have never been higher (10,000 per day);


• Energy vulnerability: high oil and energy prices, which have recently never been higher (both in nominal price and adjusted for inflation; worse than the spike in year 1981). Despite some recent reduction in oils and fuel prices, the U.S. is still dangerously dependent on foreign oil.


• Federal government bloat has never been worse, and continues to grow to nightmare proportions. There are now more jobs in government than all manufacturing nation-wide.


• Global competition has never been stronger. Trade deficits have never been larger. Jobs are leaving the nation in droves; a trend that started in the early 1970s, and also helps to explain why real median household incomes have actually been falling since year 1978.


• Medicare has hundreds of billions of unfunded liabilities per year, which are being funded by more borrowing and debt. It is not sustainable; especially with the approaching 77 million baby-boomer bubble. In year 2007, Medicare (16%) and Medicaid (7%) combined were 23% of the $2.7 Trillion federal budget.


• Inflation was higher in the mid-to-late 1970s and early 1980s, but we have had positive inflation since year 1956. 3% to 5% inflation doesn’t sound bad, but when it is every year, it becomes exponential (i.e. 3% this year is really more than 3% of last year, which is more than 3% the year before, etc., etc., etc.). Thus, a 1950 U.S. Dollar is now worth less than 10 cents. As of 16-JUL-2008, consumer prices have rose at a rate that has never been faster in the last 26 years. In addition, inflation has been understated for several years, due to questionable modifications to the inflation calculations in year 1983 and year 1998. Inflation has been rising year-to-year (2002=1.59%, 2003=2.27%, 2004=2.68%, 2005=3.39%, 2006=3.24%, 2007=2.85%, 2008=3.85%, 2009=??.??).


• The total $10.7 Trillion National Debt and the $67 Trillion nation-wide debt may be near (if not already) untenable. A massive $455 Trillion derivative bubble could burst. The economy is structurally unbalanced and most consumers are on the edge (i.e. tapped-out and deep in debt).

The BIG question now is what to do about the above, most of which have never been worse, and/or since the Great Depression.

Much needs to be prioritized.
Several things need to happen simultaneously (or nearly simultaneously).
Spending alone won’t work, because the existing bloat and waste will drag-down and dilute (if not destroy) attempts to make things more efficient, beneficial, and useful.
There will be a lot of resistance by many people in the federal government who won’t like their dead-weight, do-nothing jobs being cut.
There are a number of wealthy who will not like a reduction (or elimination) of the abuses that have been making them wealthy for decades.
Congress is FOR-SALE and addicted to borrowing, graft, money-printing, and spending.
That will be hard to change (if at all possible).

j2t2 wrote: Debt will continue to increase for some time if the stimulus package passes, we continue to stay in Afghanistan and Iraq and we continue with our current budget deficit.

And we have a military presence in 132 other foreign nations. Can we afford that? There was a $1.2 Trillion deficit for 2008, and that did not even include the $3.2-to-$8.5 Trillion created out of thin air by the federal reserve to prop up bad banks: www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-113008-fi-pricetag-g,0,5292528.graphic

j2t2 wrote: Whether government will grow larger, unless you mean deeper in debt, in terms of a significantly bigger payroll doesn’t seem likely IMHO.

Based on numerous sources, estimates show the number of people employed by the federal government is expected to grow larger:

• www.govcentral.com/benefits/articles/2047-the-9-fastest-growing-govt-industries
• www.americansforprosperity.org/121708-why-should-government-employment-grow-when-everyone-else-cuts-back
• 600,000 new federal government jobs: blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/prez-elect-make.html
• www.jobfetch.com/blog/washington-dc-government-jobs/
• www.brookings.edu/articles/2000/1001governance_light.aspx

j2t2 wrote: Based on the great depression we cannot count on the wealthy or corporate America to help in any way.

That’s why the tax system should be fixed so that the wealthy pay an equal percentage in total federal taxes. Today, the pay less, as evidenced by Warren Buffet, the 2nd wealthiest person in the U.S., pays a lower percentage of income to federal taxes (e.g. 17.7% on $46 Million in year 2006), than his secretary (who paid 30% in federal taxes on an income of $60K). Warren Buffet told Tom Brokaw on “NBC Nightly News” that the U.S. tax structure is unfair. Warren Buffet performed an informal poll in his office, where the average tax rate was 32.9%, compared to his 17.7% percent, citing that as evidence that “the tax system has tilted toward the rich in the last 10 years”. And we shouldn’t be raising H-1B Visa limits as other people have suggested (such as Bill Gates). How greedy is that?

j2t2 wrote: If infrastructure spending isn’t the answer and tax cuts of $1k to people in debt will probably work about as well as the last stimulus package which didn’t seem to help at all.

Infrastucture spending is a good idea if it is for important infrastructure projects. Not like $75,000 for Onondaga County for the Greater Syracuse Sports Hall of Fame; or $250,000 added by the House for the North Creek Ski Bowl in the district of House appropriator John Sweeney (R-N.Y.); or $775,000 for the Biltmore Hotel in the district of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.); or $800,000 for a restroom on Mt. McKinley; etc. They should concentrate on energy independence; cheaper and more efficient transportation; better power grids; border security; eVerify; and ending the abuses hammering most Americans (e.g. One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm).

j2t2 wrote: I guess my point is there is no easy choices or sure things that will work soon. According to some the “recession” will resolve itself by 2010 why do anything until 2011 if there is still a problem?

There are LOTs of things we can and should do, and one of those things is spending more wisely, because there is too MUCH waste and unnecessary spending that will most likely bring about another depression is it continues to grow the debt, inflation, and federal government larger. Especially if the debt is near (if not already) untenable, which it probably is (61.9% higher per-capita than the previous record-high in year 1945 after World War II).

j2t2 wrote: BTW d.a.n in comment 274161 you have duplicated your efforts on the following items …

You’re right. Thanks! I corrected that in my source-reference file.

marysdude wrote:

d.a.n wrote: marysdude, I never asserted that stimulus and cost-cutting should be in the same BILL.

d.a.n., If Obama has not even submitted his first budget, and we will work from the Cheney/Bush budget until it runs out…do you think he can do all you want with Executive Orders and Signing Papers?

I’m referring to the time when laws and rules permit action by Obama, Congress, and the new administration.

marysdude wrote: Apparently you want everything taken care of at once, but, if you were president how would you go about that?

Not true. That’s a weak obfuscation.

As much as can be done should be done as soon as possible.
What is wrong with that?
Time is critical.
We can start pursing all of the following simultaneously:

• (01) Stop these 10 abuses (One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm) now.


• (02) Stop the dishonest, usurious, predatory, lending practices. Stop the Ponzi-scheme and the steep leveraging of debt-to-reserves (i.e. 9-to-1 fractional lending) by the Federal Reserve and the federal government; banks are loan-sharking, with ridiculously high interest rates (commonly up to 10%-to-20% and as high as 64%) and other predetory lending practices. Banks are preying on the young, poor, minorities, and financially naive.


• (03) Stop growing and eliminate all of the massive bloat and waste in the federal government now. We don’t need all of this bloat: www.akdart.com/gov1.html


• (04) Stop the war in Iraq;


• (05) Stop or reduce our involvment the war in Afghanistan too perhaps? Insist that other nations help or suffer the consequences of refusing to help in Afghanistan. The terrorists are now mostly in northern Pakistan.


• (06) Stop the U.S. presence in 134 nations around the world. That costs a LOT! Is all of that necessary? No. Reduce that presence significantly (if not totally), without becoming excessively protectionist.


• (07) Stop throwing money, subsidies, tax breaks, and welfare at failing banks, financial corporations, the wealthy, and Wall Street; stop rewarding failure;


• (08) Stop rampant corruption by increasing and enforcing more transparency and accountability;


• (09) Stop Constitutional violations; reduce lawlessness; enforce existing laws (e.g. Article V); stop illegal immigration and $70-to-$327 Billion in annual net losses due to illegal immigration;


• (10) Stop plundering Social Security surpluses; $12.8 Trillion has been borrowed and spent, leaving Social Security pay-as-you-go, with 77 Million baby-boomers approaching;


• (11) Stop regressive taxation: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm#Taxes


• (12) Stop killing 195,000 per year due to preventable medical mistakes. Between 1999 and 2004, over 1.5 million people were killed by preventable medical mistakes. That is more than all the American soldiers killed in the American Revolution (4,435), the War of 1812 (2,260), the Indian Wars (1,000), the Mexican War (1,733), the Civil War (462,000), the Spanish American War (385), WWI (53,402), WWII (291,557), Vietnam War (58,209), Korean War (36,574), the Iraq Gulf War (529), and the current Iraq war Mar-2003-present (3,963), combined! Create a non-profit national health insurance system (get rid of the millions of unnecessary middlemen); build non-profit hospitals and clinics.


• (13) Stop Congress from rewarding itself with a raise almost every year (Congress recently gave itself the 10th raise in 12 years; the raises are actually automitic and a BILL is required to stop the automatic raise; must be nice, eh?). Is that necessary? No. What arrogance! ? ! Especially when U.S. Troops go without armor, adequate medical care, promised benefits, and have to do 2, 3, or 4+ tours in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.


• (14) Stop pandering politicians who are virtually are FOR-SALE. Allow only equal public financing of elections. Otherwise, politicians will continue to sell-out most Americans.!


• (15) Stop pork-barrel; pass a ONE-PURPOSE-PER-BILL amendment;


• (16) Stop career politicians and judges; pass TERM LIMITS for all offices;


• (17) Stop the unfair incumbent advantages: One-Simple-Idea.com/FAQ.htm#UnfairAdvantages


• (18) Stop the deterioration of public education; eliminate the over-paid and incompetent adminstrative staff; More education solutions: One-Simple-Idea.com/Education.htm


• (19) Stop repeatedly rewarding irresponsible, FOR-SALE, incompetent, and/or corrupt incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates. Stop rewarding corruption, or suffer the painful consequences: One-Simple-Idea.com/NeverWorse.htm


• (20) Create jobs to research, develop, and implement better and renewable energy resources and rebuild and improve the nation’s infrastructure (which will create long-term savings and benefits);


• More Solutions: One-Simple-Idea.com/Solutions1.htm


• (21) Stop all unnecessary and wasteful spending. Do as Obama recommended; go through the budget with a fine-tooth comb. Shift unnecessary spending to spending that doesn’t result in net losses. Work on making the U.S. more energy independent. Work in the most important infrastructure projects. Work on more efficient transportation. Develop a non-profit health insurance system amd possibly more non-profit hospitals, clinics, and healthcare centers.


• (22) More solutions: One-Simple-Idea.com/Solutions1.htm

marysdude wrote: If he sends his stimulus package to Congress on the same day he sends proposed policy changes, how much work will get done on the stimulus right away? You leave me scratching my head.

Who ever said the BILLs had to be on the same day?

marysdude wrote: You leave me scratching my head.

Again, who ever said the BILLs had to be on the same day?

Is that the best argument you’ve got?
Surely you can do better than that?
Why is there so much resistance to cutting wasteful spending?
Or do you believe the waste is insignificant?
And why do you believe these things can’t be done near simultaneously?
Especially with 535 persons in Congress, their 2 hundred thousand employees, millions employed in the federal executive branch, and tens of thousands employed in the federal judicial system?

But don’t worry.
I personally beleive the waste will continue, the government will continue to grow, and the painful consequences of it will follow.
It probably is unrealistic to think do-nothing Congress has turned over a new leaf, when 86.9% of incumbents were re-elected and Congress just gave itself its 10th raise in 12 years.
It probably is unrealistic to think the federal government will do anything but continue to grow ever bigger, until it finally collapses under the weight of so much waste, debt, and fiscal and moral bankruptcy.
I believe there is an overall solution to this economic mess, but I seriously doubt Congress will come through, because it is too corrupt, and has been too corrupt for too many decades.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 24, 2009 12:27 PM

d.a.n.,

There is nothing wrong with WANTING everything to happen at once, but to EXPECT it to happen, and to find fault because it does not happen on your schedule, seems a waste of energy.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 24, 2009 01:02 PM

marysdude wrote: d.a.n., There is nothing wrong with WANTING everything to happen at once, but to EXPECT it to happen, and to find fault because it does not happen on your schedule, seems a waste of energy.

Nonsense, since no one here ever said it should “happen at once”, nor on their “schedule”.

However, 535 persons in Congress, their 2 hundred thousand employees, about a million employed in the federal executive branch, and tens of thousands employed in the federal judicial system, all combined, are capable of doing more than one thing at a time. It isn’t unrealistic to believe that there are multiple teams working on different problems. If there aren’t, then something is terribly wrong. Also, as stated several times above, stimulus and spending cuts can (and should) be proposed in a series of BILLs. Not only one BILL. ? So your comments have no credibility.

marysdude wrote: d.a.n., … but to EXPECT it to happen, and to find fault because it does not happen on your schedule, …

In failing to offer any credible arguments for cutting wasteful spending, we now have the lamest of excuses that falsely asserts that things must happen at once and on my “schedule”.

Have you got anything credible to offer, or more obfuscation and childish lies about what I expect or want?

marysdude wrote: d.a.n., … seems a waste of energy.

Funny how some people accuse others of the very thing they do themselves.

What is truly a “waste of energy” is the childish lie that anyone here ever asserted that things must all “happen at once”, or on their “schedule”, which is truly the epitome of wasting energy.

But that is often what happens when some people lack any credible arguments, and they turn to attacking the messenger by making-up lies that they want “everything to happen at once” and on their “schedule”.

But then perhaps it is too much to expect from someone who openly admits …

marysdude wrote: “Marysdude is just a fat old fart sitting at his computer …” and “What Marysdude doesn’t see is…plenty.”

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 24, 2009 02:14 PM

Marysdude, multiply d.a.n.’s voice by 60 or 70 million other American’s and astonishing things will happen. Do you recall the outrage when congress attempted to pass outrageous illegal alien legislation? Millions of American’s flooded congressional phone lines and computers with outrage and they quickly gave notice and abandoned their plans.

We the people do have power if only we will exercise it properly. When good men and women do nothing and merely complain to each other what message is being sent to Washington?

It is impossible to have huge spending without significant waste. Should congress approach our current problem with cutting waste and government first, followed by meaningful spending, I believe both main street and corporate America would react much more favorably and with enormously more confidence. PO has called for change. A great change would be to attack our problems first by eliminating wasteful spending. Wow, what a change that would be. The nation would be startled and moved to confidence. Another huge spending bill is the expected and usual and hardly represent a change from the past. It’s merely more of what got us into trouble in the first place. It was impossible for PB to do this even if he had wanted to. It is not impossible for PO to do this with all the political capital he has amassed.

Many economists, some in PO’s own cadre, don’t believe the current spending plans will work. But, no one doubts that ending wasteful spending will work. Who, among us writing on these blogs, will advocate for wasteful spending to continue and increase?

When government acts responsibly and gets its own house in order they will have not only set a great example for corporate America, but also have earned the bonafides to demand the same from the private sector. Until then, government excess merely fuels corporate excess. Good government leads by example and given its record who should be surprised by the poor behavior of many in the private sector?

Posted by: Jim M at January 24, 2009 02:29 PM

Jim M wrote: Good government leads by example and given its record who should be surprised by the poor behavior of many in the private sector?

Exactly.

Part of this crisis is a loss of confidence too.
It’s no wonder Americans have lost confidence, since Congress has had its head up its ass for decades.

There are many things the government could do to help resolve this problem and rebuild confidence. Cutting the waste, bloat, graft, corporate welfare, welfare and subsidies for the wealthy, and cu$hy perk$ for Congress persons, and limiting Congress’ ability to give itself a raise every year as it did this year (10 times in the past 12 years).

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 24, 2009 04:33 PM

The consensus is that this is an emergency…perhaps it is, perhaps it is not. I leave that part up to the people who should know. There are as many top Republicans as Democrats who think so, so it is likely an emergency.

The steps, policies and methods you all speak of are time consumers, i.e., they require consensus, compromise and in many cases, legislation. In an emergency, while being careful not too cause more damage with the cure than with the disease, it is imperative to act with dispatch. Hence, it would be a little foolish to put policy changes and items requiring compromise and legislation on the front burner.

Conservatives are now saying that tax cuts would be better than those programs proposed by Mr. Obama…my question…better for whom? Those tax cuts would more likely spur inflation than spending on infrastructure, and we are desperate for modernization of our infrastructure. Something accomplished, jobs provided, money moving in the economy…hmmm!

Tax cuts…weigh…weigh…weigh…economy spurring projects…weigh…weigh…weigh…okay, I win, projects it is.

I have more of a problem with my own man. ‘O’ thinks he has to placate when he’s the one with the mandate…he seems to be giving in to those who know less and who may be more politically motivated than concerned with what is best for America..

Posted by: Marysdude at January 24, 2009 07:25 PM

marysdude wrote: “There is nothing wrong with WANTING everything to happen at once, but to EXPECT it to happen, and to find fault because it does not happen on your schedule, seems a waste of energy.”

From watching the action for some 50 years I would say it ain’t goin to happen period. You want see any reform from this government. A few changes maybe. Close down Gitmo, out of Iraq in 16 months, etc. Tax reform, meaningful REDUCTION in healthcare, REAL campaign finance reform, REAL ethics reform, appeal Corporate Personhood and money is free speech, etc. Just ain’t going to happen. This government cannot, will not carry out serious reform. Why? Business has been, and is at the helm. They have manipulated the strings of government for the last two hundred years to the point where the status quo is now the order of the day. Congress gave up their oversight on immigration and trade so they wouldn’t have to take the heat for business interests. The Executive comes and goes but Congress is for a life time. The bailed out bankers carried the water for the inauguration costing some $150M. Yet, to look good Obama is holding Ex. wages to $100k. To me the whole thing is a charade of gigantic proportions.
Reform can only be acieved by a 3rd party with citizens’ oversight for elected and appointed officials. A centrists populist front that can offer a countervailing influence to the moneyed interest, achieve reform and keep it that way.
Jim M. I do recall the extraordinary number of calls that helped to defeat amnesty. I also recall that round one was won when Regan grated amnesty to 3 or 4M. I would say Congress wrestled the people to a tie with rounds 2 and 3 of amnesty. Within a year we will have round 4 with a stacked deck. That being a Dem Ex and Congress. And if they should lose round 4 they will be back for round 5, and so on. The people can’t monitor these guys 24/7. Thats why I call for a 3rd party complete with watchdogs for perceived wrong doing. Kind of like the Minutemen riding to alert the countryside. You gotta like that!

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy There is nothing wrong with WANTING everything to happen at once, but to EXPECT it to happen, an at January 25, 2009 01:00 PM

“Until then, government excess merely fuels corporate excess. Good government leads by example and given its record who should be surprised by the poor behavior of many in the private sector?”

Well then does this apply to the individual as well. Should we give all criminals the same excuse- well the government is….. and then let them off the hook as well? We are killing people in Iraq so it is ok for you to murder your neighbor? Sounds utterly ridiculous to me,and Jim M. as one who preaches the virtues of conservatism I am flabbergasted to see you espouse this line. Personal responsibility goes out the window when we can use the government as an excuse for your own personal gain but not if your poor and in need. Do I have this right?

So corporate lobbyist determine the agenda, use money as free speech to influence our elected reps, our elected representatives follow the agenda in hopes of receiving campaign contributions for re election yet it is our elected officials who are at fault because corporations well… explain this to me. If it were not for those offering bribes disguised as free speech how would these elected representatives become corrupt in the first place.

Wasteful spending needs to be curbed. It is we the people that cause this wasteful spending in government by crediting our representatives for bringing government to their district. While it may seem wasteful something such as “# $300,000 for Baltimore for the relocation of the Center Garage;” creates work for companies and people in the area. Lobbyist paying for golfing trips to Scotland for elected officials doesn’t.

Posted by: j2t2 at January 25, 2009 01:42 PM

When there is a pig in every poke people don’t much care how the gov. spends the money. Now that we are on hard times government is under the microscope. Also, a lot of people used to voice that this nation is so wealthy it doesn’t matter how they throw our money around, there’s always more money to be found. So many wasteful projects are included in the bail outs. Now that we aren’t so wealthy waste matters. So much infrastructure has been built that must be maintained. There for a while Atlanta was paving over 50 acres a day. Think of all the piping, drainage, pumping, electrical etc. that goes into that scope of development. In the end, it has to be maintained. So, it matters where the bucks get spent these days, beyond just putting people to work. Ironical too, that the repair of a bridge today can equal the cost of the construction of the original bridge. All a good reason for people to want less government, not more.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 25, 2009 02:53 PM

But does “$300,000 for Baltimore for the relocation of the Center Garage” create any real value that will help the economy?

That is, if government is going to spend money, shouldn’t it create something of more value than relocation of a garage?

Of course it should.
That’s the point.
How the money is spent is important.

Also, tax cuts is not a bad idea either, if done correctly, because that instantly leaves more money in the hands of working people. The current tax system is regressive, and that should be changed ASAP.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 25, 2009 03:29 PM

good point d.a.n. Not knowing why the garage is being relocated you may be right. However it seems the lobbyist think these kind of earmarks are beneficial to the economy despite what the POTUS says.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28840571

I guess the fact that it puts people to work locally is a plus but the fact that our grandkids and great grandkids are paying for it makes it much more expensive than it needs to be.

Posted by: j2t2 at January 25, 2009 04:09 PM

Marysdude said: “I have more of a problem with my own man. ‘O’ thinks he has to placate when he’s the one with the mandate…he seems to be giving in to those who know less and who may be more politically motivated than concerned with what is best for America..”

Absolutely right. Economic stimulus will fail unless dollars are put directly into the hands of the poor and bankrupt. For it is ONLY the poor and bankrupt who will spend the dollars they receive in the economy of exchange in goods and services to leverage economic activity upward.

The middle class will save those dollars and they won’t recycle in the economy until their confidence in their keeping their jobs is restored, and that won’t be at least for another year.

The plan also calls for infrastrucutre spending, WHICH IS NOT part of the emergency economic stimulus plan for the obvious reason that more than 3/4 of these dollars will not enter the economy for another year to two at minimum.

Obama is missing the one bill, one purpose political reform opportunity that is right in front of his face and absolutely necessary if tax payer’s debt obligation dollars of the future are not wasted on these efforts today.

One bill for emergency political budgetary reform. One bill for emergency economic stimulus. Another bill for infrastructure development and investment. Obama should lead, insist, and rile the American public support up for these approaches, instead of leaving Congress free to pursue another wasteful omnibus package that will fail its objectives and cost our future another trillion plus dollars of wasted debt and wealth transfer to China.

Obama is disappointing on many fronts here, so far.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 25, 2009 05:29 PM

j2t2 wrote:

Thanks for the link.

That actually surprises me a little.
I wasn’t aware it would be so easy to go around the ban on earmarks.
I was hoping there would be a huge reduction (or elimination) of the pork-barrel.
Hopefully, Obama will veto any BILLs containing pork-barrel. However, I’m now hearing rumors of new definitions of pork-barrel, such that pork-barrel is simply any earmarks that have not been discussed.

As I feared, it appears many in Congress (probably too many) do not have the discipline to do the right thing now when it is needed the most. We may have to wait until enough voters are feeling enough pain (which is in the pipeline now) to motivate the voters to stop repeatedly rewarding incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates (as most unhappy voters did in year 1933 when the voters ousted 206 incumbent politicians from Congress).

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 25, 2009 06:03 PM

Roy Ellis wrote: The Executive comes and goes but Congress is for a life time.

Which is perhaps why we need term-limits?

Especially now that we see that the voters repeatedly reward politicians with 85%-to-90% re-eleciton rates, despite dismally low 9%-to-18% approval ratings for Congress.

By the time voters are finally feeling the painful consequences of decades of corruption and other manifestations of unchecked greed, it is too late to avoid the painful consequences. But, perhaps that is best. The best lessons are often the most painful. However, that lesson is forgotten after 1 or 2 generations, which reveals the importance of education. Those that don’t learn from history are doomed to relive the painful consequences. Today, the parallels with the Great Depression are extraordinarily similar. A few things are better today, provided Social Security, Medicare, and welfare systems don’t fail. However, some things today are worse.
National Debt per-capita is 61% larger.
Nation-wide debt per-capita is higher today.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 25, 2009 06:37 PM

Just how much is a Million, or Billion or Trillion dollars? Heard this on a ‘saveUbucks’ show today. A million seconds would take you back almost two weeks. A billion seconds would take you back to 1966. A trillion seconds would take you back to 30,000 years BC. If they want to do something with the trillions to really help give it to the people in reduced taxes. Tax time is coming up here soon and people would have more money to pay bills and start spending. Yes, of course, something would need to be done for those on the low end who pay no taxes.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 25, 2009 09:10 PM

Tax time is coming it is high time to fix the regressive tax curve (in which the middle class pays the highest percentage of income to federal taxes) …

• ___ The Current Regressive Federal Tax System:____
• 35% |——————————o————————————————————
• 33% |———————-o—————o—————————————————
• 30% |——————o—————————o——————————————= (30% total
• 27% |—————-o————————————-o———————————- federal tax for
• 24% |—————o————————————————o————————- secretay making $60K)
• 21% |————-o————————————————————-o————-
• 18% |————o————————————————————————-o-= (17.7% Warren
• 15% |———-o——————————————————————————- Buffet’s total
• 12% |———o——————————————————————————— federal taxes on
• 09% |——-o———————————————————————————- $46 Million)
• 06% |——o————————————————————————————
• 03% |—-o————————————————————————————-
• 00% |ooo—————————————————————————————
• ____$0__30K__60K__90K_120K_150K_180K_210K_240K … … $GROSS INCOME …

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 25, 2009 11:53 PM

I stated; “Good government leads by example and given its record who should be surprised by the poor behavior of many in the private sector?”

j2t2 responds by writing; “I am flabbergasted to see you espouse this line. Personal responsibility goes out the window when we can use the government as an excuse for your own personal gain but not if your poor and in need. Do I have this right?”

No, you don’t paraphrase my statement correctly. Government and corporate America is made up of individuals who make decisions which affect all of us in some way for good or bad. As individuals we too have a responsibility to act in ways beneficial to the common good. When government lards up legislation with pork, when corporations steal from stockholders, when individuals commit crimes all have detracted from the common good and each must bear their respective responsibility.

However, just as celebrities have more public exposure so do government and corporations. Government acting as a whole and corporations acting thru management influence us all and we draw our direction from their actions and mandates. When government or the corporation is corrupt in whole or part, it can not expect that its example will not influence the actions and decisions of the private person. Conversely, when the private person acts for or against the common good it is only noteworthy by the entire populace when it reaches a level of celebrity or notoriety.

Posted by: Jim M at January 26, 2009 11:30 AM

Well said Jim M. There ain’t much We The People left in this game. There is too much democracy floating around. We need to restore our Republic to it’s original purpose as best we can. Here is an article by Gary Wood, www.hearmythunder.org that helps sort out the Republic and Democracy part of it. You hear it from the news media daily, ‘this great democracy’, etc.
“The what you say? We hear it everyday from someone, “We need to help spread the cause of freedom and democracy around the world,” or, “We support the aiding of democracy wherever, whenever, and however possible.” This misguided or misdirected rhetoric helps the citizens of this country forget one very important historical concept the United States was founded upon, we were not to be democratic thanks to the history lessons our founding fathers learned. Not only was democracy not their goal, a republic, a monarchy, dictatorship, and hereditary aristocracy were also to be avoided.

Hey, if we aren’t to be a republic why are we then labeling the form of government founded by the U.S. Constitution as a Federalist Republic? Where does this federalist theme come in? Actually, we were not to be a pure federalist system, nor were we to be a pure nationalist system. Although some wanted federalism and some wanted nationalism to firmly set the roots in, either of these types of soil would have alienated entire groups of representatives from the different States. A Federalist Republic actually indicates both the system of interaction between the government and the states as well as the system of ruling or operating the system as a whole between the governing and the governed.

STOP!! What a bowl of noodles that all is…and you will see, it really is and there in rests the concept that what the Constitution of the United States produced was a form of government “…unprecedented under the sun,” according to Historian Forrest MacDonald. Just how, then, do we unwind these noodles to see what is in this bowl? Hold on to your hats, here we go.

First thing is separating the two main noodles, the Federalist noodle on the left, and the Republic noodle on the rightt. The debate over how much authority the States should have in this new nation created two camps of philosophy between a system founded on federalism vs. a system founded on nationalism. So, those two will be compared to attempt to discover what ingredients went into the making of that Federalist noodle. The debate over how to rule the country, as a whole, is where the debate raged over creating a Democracy, Monarchy (yes, some thought it best…being British and all), or Republic. Serious consideration was never given to a socialistic dictatorship but we will peek at those as well. Everyone set on that so far? It does get confusing but if you press forward I think it will become clearer, not clear mind you, but clearer.

Ok, let’s tackle the left noodle first, Federalist. In the most basic of definitions federalism and nationalism were the two areas of debate which would ultimately determine the role of the States. To look at each in my view (I encourage you to research more deeply for your interpretation);

Federalism – A unity of States joined together through a centralized Federal Government. Sovereignty is maintained by the States and control of activities within the State borders are the responsibility of the State and those citizens living within the State. The Federal Government is limited in its responsibilities to such matters which impact or affect more than one of the States within the union. States appoint representatives to aid in governing at the Federal level. Citizenship is within the State rather than the Federal level.

Nationalism – A National Government directly governing all citizens living within the nation. The nation is of the utmost importance over any other, outside national interest. The National Government is responsible for all matters within its borders. Within a pure form of National Government different townships and cities will be formed but there is no recognition of a State legislative body or Statehood. All citizens of the nation impact the decisions of the government and the governing oversight is selected directly by the people.

The form of government that was created in Philadelphia in 1787 was neither a pure federalism approach nor a pure nationalism approach. Alexander Hamilton invested the entire body of Federalist Paper No. 39 to outlining how the different areas were influenced either from a federalist approach or a nationalist approach. “The proposed Constitution, therefore, even when tested by the rules laid down by its antagonists, is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both.”5

Thus was born the raging debate between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalist during the three year period it took to sell the proposed Constitution to the different States for ratification. The collection of speeches used by both sides has become known as The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers. The Federalists had the distinct advantage of being able to point out there were combinations of both nationalism and federalism within their proposal. Cries of potential tyrannous opportunities against the people came loud from the opposing camp. The major argument won by the Anti-Federalist camp was the lack of a Bill of Rights. Later 12 amendments would be proposed and 10 of those would be ratified. Oddly, many of the warnings and concerns of tyranny not corrected in the Bill of Rights can be seen attacking the country today.

Even though the Constitution is not pure federalism the left noodle is called Federalist solely based on the fact we are a United States or a nation built from individual States joined in union to a Federal Government. Thus, we have the first term used in describing the experiment born in 1776, Federalist. There now, don’t you feel better?

Ok, let’s get this right noodle, Republic, figured out. There are many general names used to describe how countries are ruled. Without turning this into a book of its own we are going to briefly look at a monarchy and hereditary aristocracy, dictatorship, socialism (confused with a system of rule), democracy, and republics. Over the centuries there has been a grand mixture of these varying philosophies which go well beyond the scope of this writing yet it is the mixture of democracy and republicanism which causes such confusion in the U.S. today. This mixture is why it is so easy for the politicians to tout how we support democracy around the world and the citizens merely cheer in support as well since it sounds right to our ears.

Monarchy - ruled over by a single king or queen. Holding dominion over the 13 colonies prior to the founding events of the United States was the British Monarch King George III. In a monarchy power usually changes through heredity with no public input into who would rule over them as the people’s king or queen. Citizens are referred more often as subjects since they are subject to the laws of their monarch. However, through nationalist pride the subjects are often extremely loyal to their monarch and their land. This loyalty breaks down if the monarchy imposes too many oppressive laws. Although the country is ruled by the monarch it is well beyond the ability of a single person to control the whole of a country or empire, as was the case of the British Empire, so the king required assistants. This assistance was generally appointed by the monarch and carried a variety of titles such as lord or duke, etc. Once appointed to such a noble position these individuals became a part of an aristocracy within the country. The titles, rights and responsibilities were generally expected to be passed on from generation to generation which is how we obtain hereditary aristocracy as part of the ruling class of a country or empire. Quite! (A bit of a side note, if there is no monarch and the rule is by the hereditary aristocracy then it is known as an Oligarchy)

Dictatorship – in the hopes of not having too many professors of history slap their foreheads in further discuss this form of governing is going to be summed up real simply. A dictator is as powerful as a monarch but there is simply a decision not to use the title of king or queen. A dictatorially ruled country is controlled by a single person and generally rule is enforced with an iron fist. Citizens obey the laws either through nationalistic admiration for their country and ruler or by force from the usually strong policing arm of the dictator. The dictator appoints advisors and officers within his cabinet or ministry to aide in the running of affairs. The voice of the people is of no concern. It is an extremely authoritarian means of rule.

Socialism – often connected in our minds with a dictatorial ruler or the communist approach to government there is a good reason we have this connection. The rule over a socialistic country usually is extremely authoritative, especially if the economic conditions of the citizens becomes heavily depressed which is a common effect in socialist societies. With a socialist society the citizens are basically provided their needs as property and the distribution of wealth are handled by the government, or community. The entire concept was not really a philosophy of consideration during the founding of the United States as its chief voice came in the late 1800s due to the disillusionment of a capitalistic, private ownership approach to economy. We think of socialism as a form of government for whatever reasons however it really is more accurately an economic system. Just as capitalism and private property ownership are part of economics so to is socialism so we need to separate it as such. The confusion is part of the reason many U.S. citizens cannot grasp the fact we are becoming more and more socialistic due to the government control and distribution of a large percentage of personal income earned by the people. Yet if someone were to say we are becoming socialistic, which we are, most are in denial due to the connection with a dictatorial form of government, which we are not becoming. To say we are more a socialistic democracy today than a federalist republic would be a true and accurate statement but many will call a person’s patriotism into question if they dare declare it to be.

Communism – the system U.S. citizens faced off against for much of the time after WWII until the eventual collapse of the U.S.S.R. was believed to be communism. Just as discussed with socialism, communism is actually an economic system where pure control of all assets of the community are equally controlled and distributed by the community. It is a sort of utopian world envisioned by Karl Marx. The means of reaching this nirvana was to be through a shift from capitalism to socialism based on the dictatorial control of the ‘proletariat’ or working class. The path to communism, therefore, is routed through socialism by a dictatorship form of rule. Most of us remember that the U.S.S.R. was the Soviet Union. The actual name of the union was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. This union never reached the ultimate end of the evolution of their society, as Marx believed, that of pure communism living equally, happily sharing in all fruits of each citizen’s labors with no private property entanglements or capitalistic greed. It was not reached by the U.S.S.R. nor has it ever been obtained in history, to date.

Once we can accept the fact both socialism and communism belong linked with capitalism as economic systems we can then more easily understand the remaining methods of rule. A final note, the U.S.S.R. was a union so it could be considered federalist and the individual States or countries were termed to be Republics so we could say the Soviet Union was a Federalist Republic. This is where all this mixing of a few different ingredients produces entirely different dishes. Lenin and Stalin (among others) mixed together dictatorship and socialism to produce their version of a Federalist Republic known as the Soviet Union. Jefferson and Hamilton (among others) mixed together democracy and capitalism for our version known as the United States of America. The Soviet Union version lasted 69 years while the USA version lasted 133 years (go ahead, pick your chin up off the floor, you are thinking we still have the USA version but wait until you read the book, 1913: Death of the Federalist Republic: Who Dare Revive the Dead?) All right, enough straying away from the kitchen, lets get back to that right noodle.

Democracy – in its pure form is government rule by those being ruled. Jefferson described it this way. “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” He must have been thinking about the Greek origin with the roots of demos, “people,” “the mob, the many,” and kratos, “rule.” History traces democracy as far back as Mesopotamia but the best historical reference of democracy was found in Athens, Greece. To truly describe democracy now is like playing the game where you whisper in your neighbor’s ear and then your message is passed from person to person until the last person has a completely different message but they could still say it originated from you. Even the North Korean constitution claims democracy yet there is little doubt of the totalitarian dictatorship in control of that country.

Democracy is a majority rule philosophy of government. Within a democracy factions can rise to majority status and gain control over the minority. As Jefferson said, this can be as little as a 2% difference, 51% to 49% but in a democracy the 49% would have to follow the rules of the 51%. In a civil society of 100,000 citizens, organized under pure democracy, 49,000 may be quite unhappy while 51,000 tell them to suck it up. This simple fact led the Federalists to observe the following. “Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”6 Clearly, history had taught the founders if the United States was to survive in peace and prosperity, if inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was to have a chance the United States could not be founded as a democracy.

That being said, we humanoids like to rule over ourselves, the ideals of liberty and freedom rally our hearts and passions. This is why you can no longer clearly define democracy and this is why there are so very many variations on the theme today. This is also why you find it woven into the methods selected for electing representatives, although it was never to be the method of electing all representatives as we are so close to doing today in the United States.

Republicanism – is a method of governing through a division of powers into branches of government, as developed in Rome during the time of the Roman Empire. The initial scheme was based on the creation of a legislative branch, the senate. Senators were prominent citizens who served in the senate for life. The senate selected two of its members to serve as the executive branch for a period of one year, after which they returned to the senate. It was devised after the citizens of Rome deposed their monarchy. After failing to survive in Rome it disappeared for centuries. There were some 16th century philosophers, among them Machiavelli who authored The Prince, yet most applied the form to small city states rather than nations. As we have seen with other forms of government the variations really started to morph the concept of a Republic with many sound aspects being hailed while many of the tyrannical possibilities being assailed as too dangerous to implement.

Modern republic states desired to tie in the philosophy of the people’s rights which the Philosopher of Liberty, John Locke, wrote extensively about in the 17th Century and his philosophies would be among the most influential in the minds of the founding fathers. In order to actually maintain a nation under a republican form of government many factors were considered essential. One was the establishment of openly known and accepted laws, commonly referred to as the rule of law. Second was the need for citizens to actively participate, oppose corruption and live their lives with civic virtue. If these factors could be sustained then a Republic was thought to have a good chance to not only survive but to thrive.

With this in mind those representatives attending the Constitutional Convention, behind locked doors, put together a system that dared to bring all the positive elements of federalism, nationalism, democracy and republicanism into one. It may be easier to now understand why this is often called an experiment and why it was, and is, considered unprecedented and unlike anything under the sun.

The United States was meant to be a Federalist Republic that was unified federally and decentralized politically. “The federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures,” is how Hamilton explained it. There cannot be enough emphasis on how fragile the balance was to keep things level. All aspects have to be maintained, all ingredients must be mixed properly, if the experiment is to succeed. If a baker is making a pumpkin cheesecake and substitutes the cheesecake with more pumpkin does it not then become pumpkin pie instead, no matter what he calls it?

Because we have moved away from the experiment of the Constitution we are seeing the polarizing effects which history has taught and we are moving toward teaching the same lesson again. We are more democratic today; we altered the ingredient of how each branch of the federal government was elected turning us into more of a democracy, still called a Federalist Republic but look at us. We altered how we funded the Federal government and demanded the Federal government do more for us in our daily lives balancing out the inequality of capitalism, moving us closer to socialism, still called a Federalist Republic but look at us. How violent will the U.S. be in its death if we keep marching on our path toward this new bowl of noodles more accurately described as a socialist democracy?

Dan, all good points in countering the loss of manufacturing and jobs. However, I’m afraid the people aren’t up to a boycott and the government isn’t up to fining or punishing corporate crime, unless it looms large on the radar horizon of the public such as an ENRON or Madoff. Phil Gramm is still walkin around with a smile, etc. I see the only job creator as the Fed. But, that is not a self sustaining economic model. So much wealth has been transferred from the middle class to the wealthy over the last 30 years. Some are saying the middle class can’t spend to restore the economy as a recovery mechanism. It seems the game plan is to shove the middle class down while the wealthy go into a holding pattern until a new world economy takes hold. With the wealth sucked out of the middle class and so much debt it should not take long for the country to capitulate to the new world order, maybe ten years. A few calls for protectionism are being heard. A couple of legislators are pushing a ‘buy American’ mandate for the coming bailouts. They are apt to lose their heads before they lose their seats!
Read an article on Latvia where 10k people demonstrated and then pretty much rioted in the streets over the recession. Can you imagine 10k folks going off on the government in this country? I guess Latvia has cold nights this time of year but they were up for it. I don’t know what it is with American’s, myself included, but we are not inclined to loudly protest government failings. I should be in the streets trying to sell the Revolution and our 3rd Party but, it’s much easier to get on the blog and rant.

Yes, a flat tax is highly desirable. It is fair, sufficient, simple to implement and manage. Just a couple of problems though. Wealthy folks like the current regressive tax structure and therefore so does Congress. Therefore, we should not expect a flat tax system to be adopted, ever, by this government.
On another note. For healthcare in 2007 we spent almost as much as China’s $2.7T GDP. Wouldn’t it be nice to see a breakdown on healthcare dollars? Include such line items as fraud, embezzlement, misuse of funds, immigrants, etc. If left to run it’s course, by 2082 healthcare will consume the entire federal budget.
Some prescription drugs have been

I think you could take the concept of NAFTA back to the Carter era when Robert Pastor, father of the NAU, had his ear. He convinced Jimmy to fork over the Canal. He was National Security Advisor for Latin America (1977-81) and has been a consultant to the Departments of State and Defense. From 1985 until arriving at AU, Dr. Pastor was Goodrich C. White Professor of Political Science at Emory University, and he was a Fellow and Founding Director of the Carter Center’s Latin American and Caribbean Program and the Democracy and China Election Projects. At The Carter Center, he founded and served as the Executive Secretary of the Council of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, a group of 32 leaders of the Americas, chaired by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. This Council mediated elections in more than thirty countries around the world.
He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from Harvard University and an M.P.A. from the John F. Kennedy School of Government. He is the author or editor of sixteen books, including most recently, Toward a North American Community: Lessons from the Old World for the New (2001); Exiting the Whirlpool: U.S. Foreign Policy Toward Latin America and the Caribbean (2001); and A Century’s Journey: How the Great Powers Shape the World (1999). Dr. Pastor was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Malaysia, a Fulbright Professor in Mexico, and a Visiting Professor at Harvard University.
Dr. Pastor has been a foreign policy advisor to each of the Democratic Presidential Candidates since 1976 and was Chair of the Working Group on North America for the Kerry-Edwards campaign. President Bill Clinton nominated him to be Ambassador to Panama, and he served as the Senior Advisor to the Carter-Nunn-Powell Mission to restore constitutional government in Haiti in 1994. He is the Vice Chair of the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on North America, and he is also Executive Director of the Commission on Federal Election Reform.
Dr. Pastor’s early professional career involved a working association with the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). Here he participated on the Ad Hoc Working Group on Latin America, which produced a 1977 report, “The Southern Connection: Recommendations for a New Approach to Inter-American Relations,” arguing for the U.S. to abandon our anti-communist allies in Latin America in favor of supporting “ideological pluralism,” a code word for the revolutionary socialist forces taking hold in Latin America, including the communist Sandanistas and other revolutionary terrorist groups that were developing in countries such as El Salvador. Author David Horowitz’s discoverTheNetworks.org identifies the IPS as “America’s oldest leftwing think tank” that “has long supported Communist and Anti-American causes around the world,” with a place for KGB agents from the Soviet embassy in Washington “to convene and strategize.”
From February 1975 to January 1977, Dr. Pastor was executive director of the Linowitz Commission on U.S./Latin American Relations. The Linowitz Commission supported President Carter’s decision to negotiate a treaty to turn over the Panama Canal to Panama. Pastor left the Linowitz Commission to join become director of the Office of Latin American and Caribbean Affairs in the National Security Council in the Carter White House. There Pastor served as Carter’s “point man” in getting the Senate to narrowly vote for the Carter-Torrijos Treaty on April 18, 1978, despite staunch objections from conservative politicians including Ronald Reagan.
In December 1993, President Bill Clinton nominated Pastor to be U.S. ambassador to Panama. Pastor’s nomination was approved by a 16-3 vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his confirmation looked virtually certain. The nomination failed, however, and was withdrawn by the administration in February 1995, after then-Sen. Jesse Helms (R.-N.C.) swore to prevent a Senate vote on Pastor’s nomination. Helms, who had vehemently opposed the turn-over of the Panama Canal, placed much of the blame squarely on Pastor, declaring when he opposed Pastor’s nomination that Pastor “presided over one of the most disastrous and humiliating periods in the history of U.S. involvement in Latin America.” Helms also claimed that Pastor bore responsibility for what Helms saw as “a Carter administration cover-up of alleged involvement by Nicaragua’s Sandinista government in arms shipments to leftist rebels in El Salvador.”
Dr. Pastor has also co-authored a 1989 book with his long-time friend, Jorge G. Castañeda, who began his career as a member of the Mexican Communist Party. Castañeda, a life-long admirer of the radical left, published in 1998 an admiring biography of the revolutionary “hero” Che Guevara. Castañeda, like Pastor, has sought to work in government positions to implement his theories, not satisfied to be a political scientist who writes books and teaches at universities. Castañeda too has mixed his career as a government employee by alternating time spent as an author of more than a dozen books and a university professor at various times on the faculties of the University of California at Berkeley, Princeton University, and the New York University.
Castañeda was an aggressively pro-illegal immigration foreign minister when he accompanied President Vincente Fox in the U.S. in 2001. Those were the days when Vincente Fox was declaring himself to be the president of 100 million Mexicans at home and 23 million Mexicans in the United States. Castañeda also attended with President Fox on a three-day state visit to pre-9/11 Washington. There in a joint statement on Sept. 6, 2001, the two leaders announced a bilateral “Partnership for Prosperity,” which after 9/11 evolved into the trilateral summit statement of a “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” announced in Waco, Tex., on March 23, 2005. Castañeda is probably best remembered for telling in 2001 a group of mostly Latino union workers that Mexico was going to press for “the whole enchilada,” intending to legalize all illegal Mexicans aliens in the U.S.
In his pressing enthusiasm for realizing the NAU, Robert Pastor argued in a 2004 article in CFR’s Foreign Affairs, entitled “North America’s Second Decade,” that the United States would benefit by giving up U.S. national Sovereignty. “Countries are benefited,” he wrote, “when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete.”
Characteristically, Dr. Pastor has seen the U.S. as a North American bully that needs to be restrained, for the good of the region and possibly even for the good of the world. On Oct. 21, 2003, he testified to the House Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere affairs along these lines:
A new approach to the Americas needs to begin with some humility and a willingness to bridge the post-Iraq gap. The United States needs to realize that its power has limits and obligations. U.S. power can compel other governments to take our agenda seriously, but if we brandish it or ignore other views, we unintentionally invite resistance or simply no cooperation. To achieve our goals in the region (and elsewhere), we need to listen more and lecture less.
In 2004, Dr. Pastor declared his support for the presidential campaign of John Kerry. Dr. Pastor’s 19-page curriculum vitae (c.v.) on the website of American University where he is currently a faculty member documents that Dr. Pastor has served as an adviser to every Democratic Party presidential candidate for three decades, since he first supported Jimmy Carter in 1976.
Dr. Pastor was the co-chair of the May 2005 CFR report, “Building a North American Community,” argued that the Security and Prosperity Partnership signed by President Bush with Mexico and Canada on March 23, 2005 should become by 2010 a “North American economic and security community, the boundaries of which would be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter.” According to his published c.v., Dr. Pastor was the “principal editor” of this CFR report as well as the vice chair of the task force that produced it.
The May 2005 CFR task force report made clear that the borders between the U.S. and Mexico and between the U.S. and Canada would be erased, with the only border to be protected to be around North America. As the report stated on page 3, the boundaries of the North American Union “will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly, and safe.” The “outer security perimeter” referred specifically to the border around Canada, the U.S., and Mexico — such that the borders between these countries would be virtually erased. Dr. Pastor left no doubt about his view of U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada in his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee:
Instead of stopping North Americans on the borders, we ought to provide them with a secure, biometric Border Pass that would ease transit across the border like an E-Z pass permits our cars to speed through toll booths.
Note that Dr. Pastor’s reference was to “North Americans,” a term he meant to replace the current designations of “Mexicans,” “Americans,” and “Canadians,” much as he also was arguing for the NAU to replace the USA.
Dr. Pastor himself proclaims that the May 2005 CFR task force report on which he was vice chair and principal editor was a “blueprint” for the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP.gov). In his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate, Dr. Pastor informed the Foreign Relations Committee of this link:
Entitled “Building a North American Community,” the report offered a blueprint of the goals that the three countries of North America should pursue and the steps needed to achieve these goals.
The CFR report, under Robert Pastor’s direction, recommended expanding the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) into a North American military command, creating a North American Development Fund to help pay for Mexico’s economic development, establishing a North American Union Court to resolve disputes, establishing a North American Advisory Council to serve as the NAU executive branch, and creating a North American Inter-Parliamentary Group to act as NAU lawmaker. These recommendations derive directly from Robert Pastor’s many published books and papers, as well as his extensive professional testimony to Congress and groups such as the Tri-Lateral Commission. His most comprehensive statement of his views on creating the NAU by transforming NAFTA into a political entity were expressed in his 2001 book, “Toward a North American Community”, where he also advocated the creation of a common NAU currency, the Amero, as first proposed by Canadian economist Herbert Grubel.
Critics who argue that the NAU is a “conspiracy theory” are well advised to take a hard look at Robert Pastor. With U.S. policy toward Latin America, Dr. Pastor first approached the issue in writing (for the radical IPS, as we have noted), next as a university professor, and finally as a government official. Had John Kerry won the 2004 presidential election, Robert Pastor most likely would have emerged with a government position from which he could have pursued his NAU agenda. Given the re-election of George Bush, Dr. Pastor has surfaced within the CFR, an influential “think-tank” NGO whose history of impacting U.S. policy would suggest the CFR impact on SPP.gov could easily be more than academic.

lDan, I choose scenario #4. The klepto-Plutocracy will continue with a policy of getting us ready for globalization. The way I see it is we have to reach wage parity with the developing world in order to have a self sustaining manufacturing base. Also, I believe the k-p realizes the fiat ponzi money system was nearing it’s useful life and by winding the economy and wages back to something comparable to that of the developing world they can keep the train on the track. If we start to see some type of protectionist policies put on the table I would have a different opinion.

you didn’t mention assigning staffer’s as Agency heads. I like that idea as a means to stop/slow the revolving door process. Also, would serve to keep the “most informed, most intelligent, most likely to succeed, most influential, and most wealthy’ business folks on the side lines or in a non-policy making status. Now, I like that.

A 3rd party with a different political attitude would focus their politicians on such an agenda and bring real reform to government pretty toute suite. For example: as long as the wealthy are subject to a regressive tax structure we will never see a flat tax. It would take an Article V amendment or a 3rd party with a different political attitude to pull that off. Article V, while useful, is a single dimensional tool. VOID would work for some things but has no focus on specific issues. The better way, IMHO, is to focus politicians on a specific agenda through a 3rd party with citizens’ oversight for elected and appointed officials. That would get er dun!

Scenario 4: We Muddle Through: The federal government cuts a lot of unnecessary spending and shifts the spending to create 2.5 million jobs to pursue energy independence and infrastructure projects. The total federal debt is grown larger by about 200%. A significant number of abuses are eliminated. However, government spending is always far too slow to have any impact for the 1st year. Therefore, tax cuts are also used to provide stimulus. But many Americans are deep in debt, so increased spending is limited since they are also paying down debt. The nation-wide debt unwinds slowly but surely. After a few years, the benefits of the elimination of several abuses and shifting of federal spending to productive jobs gradually stabilizes the economy with slightly negative growth for 2 years and ZERO growth for 1-to-2 years.
Regardless of which of scenarios 1 through 4 occurs, afterward, the U.S. returns to bad habits, and restarts the inflation-fueled boom-to-bust bubble-after-bubble, and the debt pyramid start growing again.
Scenario 5: We Learn and Do Better: Most (if not all) unnecessary federal bloat and wasteful spending is eliminated, and those money saved from those spending cuts is shifted to spending to create 3.5 million jobs to pursue energy independence, infrastructure projects, and a national non-profit health insurance sysetm. U.S. Troops leave Iraq. The U.S. military presence in 132 nations is greatly reduced (if not eliminated), including Afghanistan. Deficit spending is stopped the 1st year. The Federal Reserve’s fractional banking system is reformed to decrease the debt-to-reserve ratio. Zero inflation/deflation is targeted. After the 2nd year, the federal debt is slowly reduced which also reduces the interest payments. The federal government stops spending Social Security surpluses. Most (if not all) of these abuses are eliminated. However, government spending is always far too slow to have any impact for the 1st year. Therefore, tax cuts are also used to provide stimulus. The tax system is also made fairer and less regressive (if not a flat percentage on all income above the poverty level). Public education is improved. eVerify is required and 12-to-20 illegal aliens are NOT given amnesty. Most self-deport. Unfair trade deals are rescinded. Usury laws prohibit loan sharking. But many Americans are deep in debt, so increased spending is limited since they are also paying down debt. The nation-wide debt unwinds slowly but surely. After a few years, the benefits of the elimination of several abuses and shifting of federal spending to productive jobs gradually stabilizes the economy after 1 year, followed by ZERO growth for 2-to-4 years, and then modest growth for a few years thereafter. The federal debt and nation-wide debt continues to be slowly reduced. Hopefully it never grows back to the previous nightmare proportions ever again. And if Congress fails to do these things, voters hopefully will not reward incumbents in Congress again with 85%-to-90% re-election rates. However, we will most likely revisit these mistakes again someday.

Lawnboy wrote: “What is the evidence? That some government agencies at both the local and federal level within the US and in Mexico and Canada have advocated some changes that would increase trade connections with our neighbors. Also, some independent think tanks have advocated going further and proposed some long-term broader integration’s.”

‘Advocated’ is the hinge word. In fact we have some 40M illegals, open borders, un-enforced federal law, border patrol agents in prison, a re-write of many administrative laws, so-called trade agreements that subvert US law, etc. I’m not so much into conspiracy as I am rational thinking. Took about 30 years to convert Europe into the EU. Started with trade agreements and ramped up from there. Where there is smoke you are rightly concerned about fire. It will be interesting to see what Obama does with it. As it stands it will fail if dumped on Congress because of the sovereignty issues. But, Obama may not like supporting such a hot potato (65M url’s on the NAU) through an Executive Order. On the other hand, it could cost him mightly with the business sector. The NAU may already be too big to fail.

Why the secrecy? Kinda like the Cheny and the oil patch gang meeting in the White House. Could have been done through Congressional and public debate. Could have mixed a little protectionism with free trade together to get folks on board. Nope, just turned it over to big biz and let them run with it.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

In looking over some websites one could conclude that the push for a NAU is waning. From a couple of related excerpts: (Ron) Paul says, however, the real issue raised by the superhighway plan and the SPP is national sovereignty.
“Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress,” says Paul. “Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution – which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade.”
The ultimate goal, he says, is not simply a superhighway “but an integrated North American Union – complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy and virtually borderless travel within the union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether.”
Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has introduced a resolution expressing the sense of Congress that the U.S. should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway, or enter into any agreement that advances the concept of a North American Union.

What does Pastor propose? “The alternative approach needs to start with a vision of a North American Community and some institutions—quite different from Europe’s - designed to pursue a bold agenda that includes a customs union, a North American commission, a North American investment fund, and a common team of customs and border guards to man (sic) the borders and the continental perimeter. To move toward these goals, the next president should designate a national adviser for North American affairs, who would chair a cabinet-level committee to formulate a comprehensive plan and to help the president negotiate the difficult tradeoffs between special interests and national and continental interests. Instead of refighting the NAFTA debate, this comprehensive approach would lay the foundation for a new North America.”
He adds, “The three leaders should institutionalize summit meetings at least annually, and they should establish a North American commission composed of independent and distinguished leaders from academia, civil society, business, labor, and agriculture and with an independent research capacity. The commission should offer continental proposals to the three leaders. The leaders would continue to be staffed by their respective governments, but they would respond to a continental, rather than a dual-bilateral, agenda. The commission should develop a North American plan for transportation and infrastructure and plans on labor, agriculture, the environment, energy, immigration, drug trafficking, and borders.”

From a 2008 speech by Can. Amb. Michael Wilson: We need to “minimize trade barriers between our countries,” said Wilson. We need “to continually position ourselves better — position North America better — to compete with Asia and Europe.” And we must do this “without falling into the protectionist trap.”
As to the economic downfalls of globalization and integration, such as the manufacturing exodus from Canada, the United States and, increasingly, Mexico, we just need to educate our workers better on how to suck it up and move on. When life gives you lemons, as they say…”

While it appears the NAU concept may be stalled at the moment it bears watching.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve!

Womanmarine, my perspective on the NAU is shaped by what I’ve read and political trends I’ve observed.
First, some gisted excerpts from Pat Choate’s “Dangerous Business”.

US sugar producers were able to force a full NAFTA exemption for their product. However, US tomato growers had not such luck and today Mex. has 40% of the tomato industry. Fewer than 1% of the trucks carrying Mex produce into the country are inspected.
NAFTA:1993, NAFTA advocates such as Robert Pastor view it as the first step in a longer term initiative to integrate the economical and political institutions of the three countries leading to the creation of a NAU.

Feb 2001: Less than one month after taking office Bush met with the Mexican President and established the Security and Prosperity Partnership. They agreed to work with Canada on an economic community, negotiate long and short term agreements on immigration and labor issues, immediately implement NAFTA provision giving Mex. trucks and drivers full access to US highways, devise a trilateral approach to energy development and support the extension of NAFTA to all of the Americas.

Oct. 2004: Council on Foreign Relations established a trilateral task force that would recommend on creating a NA Community. Comprised of and funded by major business leaders, ten panelist from each country was selected.
May 2005, Council on Foreign Relations Task Force released it’s report “Building a North American Community”.
Create an annual summit meeting by the three leaders.
Create North American Advisory Council (NAAC).
Adopt a common security perimeter for NA, harmonize existing entry/exit procedures, joint container inspections, and share travel data on foreign nationals.
Adopt a common tariff, create permanent roster of trade judges.
Establish a NA Investment Fund to grow Mexico..
Create resource security strategy allowing US to invest in Mexican and Canadian energy development.
Educational ties.

Further defined in a news release:
Full labor mobility among the three nations.
Common security perimeter by 2010 - North American border pass (biometrics).
Unified border action plan with expanded custom facilities.
A single economic space in North America.
Seamless movement of goods within NA/
A NA energy strategy.
Expanded temporary worker programs.
Institutionalization of the tri-partite partnership.
Establishment of a NA Investment Fund to build Mexican infrastructure.
Permanent tribunal for trade and investment disputes.
Annual NA summit.

April 2005: The Council of the America’s (COA) headed by ex US Ambassador to Mexico, James Jones, and reported out basically the same plan.

March 23, 2005: The three leaders of NA and issued a press release” (Gist) Develop common border security strategies, pursue regulatory coop, and promote coop in energy, trnsp, fin. services, technology and other areas.

2005: Trilateral Prosperity Working Group (cabinet level and corp. high-level) formed to develop an integrated NA strategy for 20 industries including steel, autos and e-commerce.

Sept 2006: the NACC issued a 58 page report on recommendations for work. A long sought goal for big business was to get around stiff US standards. Therefore, the NAAC recommended ‘harmonizing regulations around international standards. Thus lowering food and safety standards was to be secured through the guise of creating trilateral uniformity.
The council recommend that rail cars, inspected every 1000 miles in the US, be inspected by Mex. authorities and then sent into the US market, and etc.
To date congress has not held a single hearing on the effort to integrate the economies and policy making machinery of the three countries, The US executive branch lacks the legal authority to integrate the US economy and political system with those of Mex and Can. In June 2007, Bus persuaded some members of congress to slip a special provision into Section 413 of the Kennedy-McCain Immigration Act. stating that “congress…should accelerate the implementation of the SPP to generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mex which will lead to reduced migration.

The Senate rejected the bill. Nonetheless, the SPP continues to be implemented and expanded, out of sight of the US congress and the Am. people.

Since NAFTA the US has signed similar agreements with several other nations. In the first years of the 21st century the US trade deficit has soared to a cumulative total of $4.5T, the largest, fastest unilateral transfer of wealth from one nation to others in the history of the world.

From Jerome Corsi’s book, “The Late Great USA” : (Gist) In 2005 the D/Commerce said “ The SPP announced last March by …. unveiled a blueprint for a safer and more prosperous North Am. for the 21st century.”

From www.spp.gov: “The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.”

According to Corsi from reviewing 1000’s of pages of FOIA material “It is clear that the SPP is creating new regional infrastructure that includes Mex and can and is agressively rewriting US administrative law, all without congressional oversight or public disclosure.”

He notes that there are 13 working groups with the US government, The security folks report through the NSC and HSC. Ten working groups report to the DOC. It appears the DOS is the cabinet-level coordinator chosen to coord directly with the HSC/NSC. These groups come from the DOS, DOC, HSC, DOT, USDA, USDOT, DOE, HHS, and the USTR.
“The Bush admin has attempted to get a Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico as we have with 21 other countries. This agreement would allow Mexican workers to qualify for SS after working six quarters (eighteen months) of employment in the US. A US worker typically needs forty calendar quarters (120 months) to receive US SS benefits.” The GAO estimates 78M the first year growing to 650B by 2050.”

Three Presidential administrations have pursued strategies consistent with precipitating a NAU.
While the NAU is being run through an Executive Order, Pastor has led the intellectual fight for the creation of the NAU and the adoption of the amero as the standard currency. We see the results in the border shooting incidents relating to Ramos and Compean and in another incident involving Deputy Hernandez. We see the Southern border being virtually electronically eliminated with the intent of moving the security perimeter to the lower Mexican borders with free movement of people within the tripartite. Sometimes the legal government tends to arrest them but not too often. We are subject to WTO trade law that supercedes the US Supreme Court. I recently cited a case where the USDA gave subsidies to cotton growers while Brazil and the WTO has brought a $4B suit against the US (taxpayers) for subsidizing cotton growers. Don’t know where that case is as the WTO tribunal operates in secrecy. If we paid the $4B I’m fumed bigtime. Knowing also, that the US taxpayer nor any other entity can take the case to US courts.
The State legislatures of Oregon, Arizona, Missouri, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia and Washington have introduced bills opposing the NAU and NAFTA It’s clear the plan is to integrate the NAU into the US GOV in much the same way the EU was integrated in Europe. Incrementally, over time, one small slice at a time. At some point the NAU tentacles will be so embedded into every aspect of public, private and government that people will just concede our sovereignty, our Constitution and our democratic principles and go with it.

Womanmarine, that’s my perception as to how we are serving two governments – one legal and one not. Obama seems on board for the open borders/amnesty effort thus one could assume he will continue to run the NAU through an EO. I’d like to know the taxpayer cost in supporting a two-government operation. .

Otherwise, we have the government/NAU we deserve.

Dawn, had no problem reading through your article. I like to see different writing styles, which portray the way folks express themselves. Your points are noted BUT, I am continually blown away by editors, writers, bloggers, etc beating the minutiae out of the perceived personality of this celebrity or that politician. Surely you realize that every second of O’s waking moments are choreographed to the least detail. While much will be written about his tendencies and portrayals of his demeanor I tend to ignore that kind of fluff. Like any politician Obama is part of a political machine in that you operate from a consensus and not off the top of your head or what you personally might like to do. I would venture to say that Obama has not wrote a single speech, made a public performance, nor has his wife, that didn’t have the political machine stamp of approval. Obama’s selection of a preacher or speaker is made in consensus with a room full of people. If his political mood changes it’s because the mood of the political machine has changed, etc. Now, to the point that he can coerce the machine to give him the lead he will take it. But, I suggest he has little wiggle room to push his own personality or ideas.
Otherwise, we have these huge problems: $80T of debt, 1 of 10 hedgefunds under. 7000 killed in Mexico and the border area last year, 15% unemployment, 40M uninsured, 28K mortgage defaults each month, 64k businesses filed for bankruptcy last year, country being partially run by an illegal (NAU) government, etc. For me there is plenty to blog about. I fail to appreciate whether a member of the duopoly is arrogant or makes an odd choice for a speaker, etc. Seems more in tune with Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

WASHINGTON - Eighty-three of the nation’s 100 largest corporations, including Citigroup, Bank of America and News Corp., had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens in 2007, and some of the companies received federal bailout funding, a government watchdog said Friday.
The Government Accountability Office released a report that said Bank of America Inc., Citigroup Inc. and Morgan Stanley all had more than 100 units in countries that maintain low or no taxes. The three financial institutions were included in the $700 billion financial bailout approved by Congress.
Insurance giant American International Group Inc., which has received about $150 billion in bailout money, had 18 subsidiaries. JPMorgan Chase & Co. had 50 units and Wells Fargo & Co. had 18; both financial institutions received government bailout money.
Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who requested the report, have pushed for tougher laws to fight offshore tax havens around the globe. Levin, who leads the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has estimated abusive tax havens and offshore accounts cost the U.S. government at least $100 billion a year in lost taxes.
“I think we should take action to shut down these tax dodgers and we will be introducing legislation to do just that,” Dorgan said.
General Motors Corp., which received $13.4 billion from the federal rescue package, had 11 offshore subsidiaries while GM’s financing arm, GMAC LLC, had two offshore units. GMAC, whose majority owner is private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP, received $5 billion from the Treasury Department in late December.
Citigroup said in a statement that it has more than 4,000 subsidiaries around the globe “which enables us to serve hundreds of millions of individuals and institutions in more than 100 countries.” A News Corp. spokeswoman declined comment. Messages were left with several of the companies identified in the report.
Separately, the GAO said 63 of the 100 largest federal contractors maintain subsidiaries in 50 tax havens.
Levin noted that many competitors use the tax havens to varying degrees. PepsiCo Inc. has 70 subsidiaries while the Coca-Cola Co. has eight units. Caterpillar Inc. had 49 while Deere & Co. had three.
“We need to put an end to the use of offshore secrecy jurisdictions as tax havens,” Levin said.
The GAO said the subsidiaries could be established in the countries “for a variety of nontax business reasons” and said having a business unit in one of the countries “does not signify that a corporation or federal contractor established that subsidiary for the purpose of reducing its tax burden.”
Citigroup had 427 units in 23 countries, including 91 subsidiaries in Luxembourg and 90 in the Cayman Islands. Morgan Stanley had 273 units, News Corp. had 152 and Bank of America had 115. Procter & Gamble Co. had 83 subsidiaries and Pfizer Inc. had 80 in the jurisdictions.
Several major corporations have announced plans to leave Bermuda, a leading offshore business center, amid the global financial crisis and fears of tighter tax rules. Tyco Electronics Ltd., which makes electronic components, and Foster Wheeler Ltd., an engineering and construction company, are reincorporating in Switzerland - which has a tax treaty with the U.S. - for tax and other reasons. Covidien Ltd., a health care products company, is heading to Ireland
David, you matter of factly dismiss 3rd parties as an option for reform. I do too. I’m not interested in advocating for a 3rd party. I’m interested in advocating for a 3rd party or parties with a different political attitude. A party established with some rules. Rules that require that party members provide oversight for other members that become elected or appointed officials. Rules that can’t be added to, edited or deleted without a 66% vote approval by membership. Rules that allow members to vote and reject a nascent official from office on the perception or reality of some misdeed. A party that stresses a pure reform agenda and requires, by rule, that members elected to office work to carry out that agenda.
David, by trying to pass my party off as just another 3rd party is misguided in my opinion. You seem to opt for a one man superhero that can wrestle the congress and the world into following him. I like the idea of a grassroots movement building a party that can act as a countervailing force to the status quo and provide the tools for reform. A party that can then go out and find some regular Joe politicians, preferably retired baby boomers, to become candidates for office and take up the mantle of reform.
David, you seem willing to accept crap for leadership ad infinitum. I’m not. I want reform of government.

Some time ago Weary Willie took me to task for being me, me, me, me minded with my party. And your post takes much the same attitude. Because my party is not in power I must be looking ‘for acquisition and maintenance of power’. I won’t argue with that but on an equal measure I am looking for political accountability, reform of government and keeping it that way. That’s my perspective on a 3rd party or parties with a DIFFERENT political attitude.

Rockey wrote: No group of people could possibly be so grossly uninformed that they would continue to re-elect the same group of charlatans if they truly thought they were being screwed

I think you miss the point Rocky. While there are millions upon millions of Americans who could serve well in Congress they have not chance. The parties very strictly control who gets to run and who gets the support. The electorate doesn’t get to vote for “their” man. They only get to vote for who the party puts up. A Roland Burris for example or a Caroline Kennedy. The party selects those that are seen as most helpful to the continuation of party power. Who has given the most in campaign funds to other struggling party candidates. Who is the best fundraiser. It’s much like the Pres. handing out ambassadorships. Sure, a few will go to knowledgeable and deserving people. But most will go to big campaign donors or in some way had a big influence on the Pres coming to power. Providing corporate jets and hotel rooms, etc.
Not sure you can put the blame on the way people vote when they are given little choice in the candidate.

Agree with you Weary Willie. Was in no way one or the other parties that got us here. It was the Klepto-Plutocracy government we have had for the last 40-50 years. Or, the best government money can buy.

Was to a wood yard yesterday and can relate this story. A US plyboard mfctr. can ship the wood materials to China, have them cut, dry, laminate/press the plywood core and ship it back to the US where a final finish layer is applied and sell the product for $20 more than if the US mfctr did the entire process. Shows you the power of six cents an hour labor. Gives reason to why US manufacturing ain’t goin anywhere fast anytime soon. I sure hope Obama can have a talk with them Chinese and straighten things out!

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Well, I thought my suggestion for a balanced budget was at least as proper and well founded as that proposed by my good buddy Jefferson. From wiki: “I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government; I mean an additional article taking from the Federal Government the power of borrowing. I now deny their power of making paper money or anything else a legal tender. I know that to pay all proper expenses within the year would, in case of war, be hard on us. But not so hard as ten wars instead of one. For wars could be reduced in that proportion; besides that the State governments would be free to lend their credit in borrowing quotas.”
(Although Jefferson made a point of seeking a balanced budget during the early years of his administration, he seems to have later reversed himself in purchasing the Louisiana Territory. But note also that he made no exception for war, but rather saw the requirement of maintaining a balanced budget as a salutary deterrent.)
. Except for a short period during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, since its inception the United States Government has always been in debt. During the second term of President Bill Clinton at the end of the twentieth century, the President and Congress managed to craft a budget surplus. This surplus was a ‘budgeted surplus’ only however as the outstanding national debt has increased every year since 1957.

A few others have called for a balanced budget over time. “Article V of the Constitution specifies that if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states petition Congress for a constitutional amendment on the same subject, then Congress must call a convention for proposing that amendment. Between April 29, 1975 and January 29, 1980, 34 petitions from 30 different state legislatures were submitted to Congress on the subject of a Balanced Budget Amendment. The participating states were Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming. Since 1980, two additional state legislatures have petitioned Congress for a convention for a Balanced Budget Amendment, bringing the total number of participating states to 32. If two additional state legislatures were to petition, then the required two-thirds majority of states would be reached (34 out of 50 states) and Congress would be required to call a convention to propose a Balanced Budget Amendment. In December 2008, the Ohio legislature considered making Ohio the 33rd state to petition for a convention on the subject, but decided against it.”

I would have supported a $2B program to buy up the defaulted home loans earlier on, say Aug-Sep 08. That’s about the time that AIG and Goldman’s was stating that they were riding high, coming up roses, etc.
I don’t support throwing good money after bad. US debt is expected to reach 60% of GDP by 2010. Today’s Wash Post notes that Japan went Keynesian in the 90’s when debt reached 71% of GDP. That helped them to achieve 154% debt to GDP in 2002. Wowee! Maybe we can do as well.

Got no stomach for bailing out the likes of AIG or Goldman Sac’s. Here we have an insurance company reporting profits of more than 80%. That says the product is either useless because the risk to the company is nonexistent, or the insurer doesn’t intend to meet it’s obligations. Goldman Sac’s helped bring us NAFTA, the NAU and has done more to make China a major player, including sovereign funds investments, than any other financial institution. These crooks need bailouts like I need a hole in the head. And, even with the bailouts they are pushing to continue spewing millions in bonus pay to top end exec’s.

To determine why such corp’s are being bailed out you only need to look to the revolving door syndrome and the fact that we have the best government money can buy.

Well, I want nothing to do with the duopoly, the klepto-plutocracy. Reform of government is needed, and soon. Jefferson said if we go 20 years with

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 27, 2009 06:00 PM

Whoops! Slippsies on that last post~!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 27, 2009 08:21 PM

What you said Jim M. was “Until then, government excess merely fuels corporate excess. Good government leads by example and given its record who should be surprised by the poor behavior of many in the private sector?”

I was and still am flabbergasted that you would let corporations off the hook so easy. They are involved in the electoral and legislative process to such a degree that it is their influence upon the government that has lead us to where we are today. Further the influx of corporate people into watchdog positions in the government has made the regulatory process lax and suspect the past 20 years. To blame corporate malfeasance on the government hides the cause of the problem.

To think that corporations and other individuals should use the excuse that “government is screwed up” as a reason to act in the same manner only serves to shift responsibility for one’s own actions onto others, IMHO, Jim M..

Posted by: j2t2 at January 28, 2009 12:23 AM

Roy Ellis wrote: Well, I want nothing to do with the duopoly, the klepto-plutocracy.

Roy, you know why there are two main political parties (i.e. the duopoly).

Because no one can fool all of the people all the time.

: )

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at January 28, 2009 12:08 PM

d.a.n, yeah, or good cop bad cop. Tag teaming on the electorate! Takes both to do the job of one! Between the two of them they can’t seem to spend a $T. A rep/dem is a politician with their brains knocked out! I better quit.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 28, 2009 11:12 PM