The World is going to S - Page 12 - The Planted Tank Forum
 80Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #166 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 07:47 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
Bitcoin will never protect you from a "foreign invader"...
but getting to the gold standard (and yes it is/was a horrible idea)
Nixon Ends Convertibility of US Dollars to Gold and Announces Wage/Price Controls - A detailed essay on an important event in the history of the Federal Reserve.
Quote:
With inflation on the rise and a gold run looming, Nixon’s administration coordinated a plan for bold action. From August 13 to 15, 1971, Nixon and fifteen advisers, including Federal Reserve Chairman Arthur Burns, Treasury Secretary John Connally, and Undersecretary for International Monetary Affairs Paul Volcker (later Federal Reserve Chairman) met at the presidential retreat at Camp David and created a new economic plan. On the evening of August 15, 1971, Nixon addressed the nation on a new economic policy that not only was intended to correct the balance of payments but also stave off inflation and lower the unemployment rate.

The first order was for the gold window to be closed.
There are detractor and for the sake of fairness I will link one:
Note what you know about statistics:
Forbes Welcome

Quote:
This performance is horrendous compared to the post World War II gold standard era, which lasted from 1947 to 1970. During those 21 years of economic ups and downs, unemployment averaged less than 5% and never rose above 7%.
Maybe they just forgot why we went off the gold standard:
Quote:
In the 1960s, European and Japanese exports became more competitive with US exports. The US share of world output decreased and so did the need for dollars, making converting those dollars to gold more desirable. The deteriorating US balance of payments, combined with military spending and foreign aid, resulted in a large supply of dollars around the world. Meanwhile, the gold supply had increased only marginally. Eventually, there were more foreign-held dollars than the United States had gold. The country was vulnerable to a run on gold and there was a loss of confidence in the US government’s ability to meet its obligations, thereby threatening both the dollar’s position as reserve currency and the overall Bretton Woods system............
When Arthur Burns became chairman of the Board of Governors in 1970, he was faced with both slow growth and inflation, or stagflation. Burns believed that tightening monetary policy and the increase in unemployment that accompanied it would be ineffective against the inflation then occurring, because it stemmed from forces beyond the control of the Fed, such as labor unions, food and energy shortages, and OPEC’s control of oil prices. Moreover, many economists in the administration and at the Fed, including Burns, shared the view that inflation could not be reduced with an acceptable unemployment rate. According to economist Allan Meltzer, Andrew Brimmer, a Fed Board member from 1966 to 1974, noted at that time that employment was the principal goal and fighting inflation was the second priority. The Federal Open Market Committee implemented an expansionary monetary policy.

With inflation on the rise and a gold run looming, Nixon’s administration coordinated a plan for bold action
Being on a gold standard didn't stop the US from "spending too much"..

Going back a bit farther:
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...-gold-standard
Quote:
On April 5, 1933, Roosevelt ordered all gold coins and gold certificates in denominations of more than $100 turned in for other money. It required all persons to deliver all gold coin, gold bullion and gold certificates owned by them to the Federal Reserve by May 1 for the set price of $20.67 per ounce. By May 10, the government had taken in $300 million of gold coin and $470 million of gold certificates. Two months later, a joint resolution of Congress abrogated the gold clauses in many public and private obligations that required the debtor to repay the creditor in gold dollars of the same weight and fineness as those borrowed. In 1934, the government price of gold was increased to $35 per ounce, effectively increasing the gold on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheets by 69 percent. This increase in assets allowed the Federal Reserve to further inflate the money supply.
Quote:
The government held the $35 per ounce price until August 15, 1971, when President Richard Nixon announced that the United States would no longer convert dollars to gold at a fixed value, thus completely abandoning the gold standard.
We can always make the trillion dollar platinum "coins"..

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-25-2016 at 07:56 PM. Reason: edit
jeffkrol is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #167 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 08:03 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
[QUOTE=thedood;9419465] Are you proposing they just hand out money willy nilly?[quote]
Yes and no.. See the main point is knowing what the Fed CAN do (and in some peoples mind that is JUST what they do)..
And deciding what they SHOULD spend it on.

Major axiom in business.. it is not how much money you spend but what you spend it on.

Having the Fed. gov "buy" everyone health insurance has a better "return" than sending pallets of $'s to Baghdad..
You keep a country healthy, you keep it safe. You keep a country fed you keep it safe. You educate a populous you keep it safe..
They are all patriotic causes...
Buying bad mortgages from banks (QE) adds little to the "little peoples" safety or happiness...but sure make banksters happy..

On this note .. the BEST WAY to placate and control a population is through fear and division of classes..
AWolf and AWolf like this.

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."
jeffkrol is offline  
post #168 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 08:21 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
AWolf's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,261
When you are living on a raft, looking for work in the Norfolk area, which should have plenty of engineering positions open, and all you have is an Obama phone and a laptop that has a usb cantenna so you can steal internet wifi, washing yourself in the public bathrooms, then you know things have gone very wrong. In 2008 my world changed. Too proud to tell family or ask for help, I thought I'd get a job soon enough, and the nightmare would be over. Well, one day while I was washing up, theives stole my raft and my clothes etc. That raft meant that I was safe from the crazies on the street in Norfolk, Va. Out on the water, I felt safe. That night I was picked up by the police on the beach, and they took pity on me, and one offered his sofa. The next day I called my family, and told them my story. Of course they sent me money for a bus trip to their home. I've been working part time crap jobs since.

So I know what you mean by ..'the world is going to S..'

But there are people out there that have it much worse. Smile and laugh at the world. That is best advice.
AWolf is offline  
 
post #169 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 08:29 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
That could happen w/ any number of presidents and generations..
YES Obama joins a long long line of idiots in the WH....
Sometimes you just must pick the lesser of 2 evils..


Woman in 'Children For Sale' photo dies | Hammond News | nwitimes.com
different:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...eath-1983.html
Quote:
Thompson was quoted in 1978 as saying: 'I wish she [Lange] hadn't taken my picture. I can't get a penny out of it. She didn't ask my name. She said she wouldn't sell the pictures. She said she'd send me a copy. She never did.'

The following year NBC’s Bob Dotson tracked her down to a trailer camp on the site of the old migrant camp in Modesto, California and spoke to her about the hardship she had faced during the depression.
Quote:
I don’t think you could take a woman today and put her out and do what I done to make a living,' she said, her face heavily lined through years of hardship.

'I worked in hospitals. I tended bar. I cooked. I worked in the fields. I done a little bit of everything to make a living for my kids.'

'Did you ever lose hope?' Dotson asked her.

'Nope,' she said. 'If I’d’a lost hope, this country never would have made it.'

Thompson also told Dotson what she had done to provide food for her kids.

'I chopped cotton for forty cents an acre in them days,' she said. 'I used to fill up those old cotton sacks ’til I couldn’t even lift them.'

'Worked before daylight ’til it got so dark I couldn’t see. And I didn’t even weigh a hundred pounds.'

'I had to drag those hundred-pound sacks of cotton. The scales were halfway across the field.'

'I’d pick five hundred pounds each day,' she recalled.
Things always can be worse..
Oh and don't leave out CON-GRESS.. the major domestic policy provider... Especially the HOR..
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx

For fun:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/193496/ga...campaign=tiles
AWolf and AWolf like this.

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-25-2016 at 08:58 PM. Reason: edit
jeffkrol is offline  
post #170 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 09:11 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
AWolf's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkrol View Post




Things always can be worse..
Oh and don't leave out CON-GRESS.. the major domestic policy provider... Especially the HOR..
Congress and the Public | Gallup Historical Trends

For fun:

U.S. Gallup Good Jobs Rate Edges to New High in June
That table could be correct, but I think it too is a Red Herring. Each year we have more people in the work force, but we are losing businesses to employ these workers. So my bet is this table reflects those few employers left. Sure, they hire full time. But a better poll would show how many businesses have gone under, and how many of those workers were not rehired full time. Obama talks about the job growth. Right. The part time job growth. Not the full time. No one is willing to play the health insurance games and tax games, so they only hire part time workers. And as Dood mentioned, 'they f*** you at the drive thru!' (Lethal Weapon, of course), because low pay, low quality. No way around that.
I've been bailing the water out of this ship so long, that I've gotten good at just barely floating. I'm sure that is not the future we want for our children.

Last edited by AWolf; 07-25-2016 at 10:00 PM. Reason: spelling
AWolf is offline  
post #171 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 09:33 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
There are plenty of "public works" projects that could be "paid for" by the Fed. gov. to increase employment.. IF there is a will and IF "we" can see the light.. and remove our "ideology" from the problem....

Again it is OK to "fund" battle groups" not OK to "fund" infrastructure repairs..
THIS IS NOT an economic constraint but a philosophical/ideological one.
I'm actually worried about the day the "sheeple" realize it...

you just have to figure out who the real enemy is.. (maybe not for you but many should look in the mirror)
Ignoring the "fed can afford what it wants to afford" reality for a moment:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...nfrastructure/
Quote:
The answer to what’s holding back U.S. infrastructure investment lies not so much with President Obama and Congress as with county commissioners and state legislatures.

Most of the money spent on building schools, highways and waste disposal facilities comes from state and local governments, not from the federal government. As of April 2014, more than 90 percent of the $267 billion spent by the public sector (at a seasonally adjusted annual rate) was at the state and local levels, according to the latest Census Bureau report on construction spending.
That is soooooooooooo WRONG . States can't afford large infrastructure projects. They are NOT monetary soviergn. They need to pay bills w/ "real" dollars gathered from somewhere..
The BIG LIE goes deep......
Same w/ Medicaid. States can't afford Medicaid, the Fed can.......
Quote:
Raising the federal gas tax is a non-starter, and Congress can’t agree on whether to make up the shortfall, as it has in recent years. Without that funding, and with state debt levels still high, we won’t see very many new bridges any time soon.
Idiots everywhere..for the past 10 years I've wondered what it will take to start asking the REAL question.. What should "we" (fed) buy?
I honestly now know what it feels like to know the earth goes around the sun while "everyone else" says the sun goes around the earth..
Quote:
Congressman Ron Paul:

"Strictly speaking, it probably is not necessary for the federal government to tax anyone directly; it could simply print the money it needs.
US hasn't lost it's greatness, just its intelligence...........
See the "cut taxes" people are correct.
The "buy stuff" (i.e entitlements) are correct.
The "cut taxes AND spending" are incorrect.
The "raise taxes AND spend" are incorrect..
The last 2 are a bit of a zero sum game..
Esp. at this juncture in our country..(broad generalization btw. there are caveats)
So you have 2 parties that are right AND wrong at the same time and wonder why people are confused..

Quote:
If you extend that logic a little further, you might ask, “Well, don’t we pay taxes and buy bonds so that the government can spend?” Well, you first have to ask yourself the question, “Where do you get the money to pay taxes and buy bonds?” And the answer is that we can’t get our hands on the currency until the national government spends it. Spending is the prior act in a fiat monetary system; taxing and borrowing are following acts. In effect, the government is only taxing what it has already spent, and it’s only borrowing back money that it has already spent. Once you start pursuing this logic, you realize that most of the propositions that are occupying the current debate around the world are based upon false premises.
http://hir.harvard.edu/debt-deficits...netary-theory/

Quote:
If you look back through history and examine discussions in various government documents, what you pick up is a solid indication that governments have combined institutional arrangements such as issuing debt with certain accounting practices to make it look as though the debts were actually funding government spending. These institutional arrangements were strengthened in the late 1970s and the 1980s because the mainstream economics profession knew that those arrangements would place constraints on the freedom of governments to spend. The mainstream believes that taxation distorts individual incentives, that government borrowing pushes interest rates up and thereby undermines private sector investment, and that ultimately the danger of government spending is hyperinflation.
Quote:
In sum, we’re quite categorical that we believe that budget deficits can be excessive and can be deficient as well. Deficits can be too large, just as they can be too small, and the aim of government is to make sure that they’re just right to employ all available productive capacity.
Quote:
How does this differ from the dominant New Keynesian paradigm?

Well, the New Keynesian paradigm is built upon a series of false premises that affect policy prescriptions. False premise number 1: government has to borrow to fund spending. False premise number 2: there’s a fixed supply of savings available at any point in time. False premise number 3: the government, by borrowing from that fixed supply of savings, denies private sector borrowers those funds, and competition for those funds drives up interest rates.
Quote:
The third story is what happens when the government runs a budget deficit. What happens in the money market is as follows: the US government buys something from the private sector. They pay the manufacturer, who then pays the workers. A whole range of transactions follows from that initial government purchase. All of those transactions work their way through the system and find their way to the reserves of the banks each day. Typically—though not at the present because we are in an extraordinary situation where the central bank is paying interest on reserves—those reserves would just sit there and earn zero interest for the banks. And so typically, as I’ve explained before, banks try to get rid of those reserves, driving down the interest rate in the interbank market in the process. What you can understand from that is that budget deficits, independent of any monetary operations, drive interest rates down, not up. This is the complete opposite of what orthodox economists claim is the case, and it’s confirmed by the present combination of record low interest rates and very large budget deficits.
The "powers that be" want you ignorant of reality..

Quote:
The role of government bonds, then, is to provide the central bank with the capacity to ensure that there is no competitive pressure on the target interest rate. So you can see that the function of government bonds is something quite other than to lend the government money.
for fun:
https://beinglibertarian.com/mmt/
Quote:
For quite a while now I’ve been pretty unsatisfied with mainstream as well as Austrian economics-based takes on the global economic situation, in particular phenomena such as record low to negative interest rates in countries with record debts (such as Japan), massive excess reserves, and QE 1 through infinity without much consumer price inflation, etc. No economic school I had learned about offered fully coherent answers regarding those.
Quote:
Conclusion

To summarize, the most important things I took away from this exercise are:

In a free floating irredeemable fiat currency system the government cannot be forced to default on its debts (it could of course choose to suspend interest and/or principal payments, but that would be a policy choice, not one of financial necessity)
In such a fiat money system the government creates money by spending and destroys it by taxing
Taxes drive money
Government bonds are basically just like savings accounts at the central bank
Private banks lend first, then obtain reserves
Fractional reserve lending is naturally constrained by the creditworthiness of borrowers

In my opinion MMT helps us explain and understand the current fiat money system much better than conventional or Austrian economics. This is coming from an Anarcho-Capitalist who has read books like Mises’ Human Action, Theory of Money and Credit, Socialism, and many others, so don’t think I say this lightly!

Even if we find moral or economic flaws in a system, it is better for us to understand how it actually “works” right now in order to make policy recommendations down the road. I believe MMT offers a lot of insight on that front and I will provide some contemporary and relevant examples in subsequent posts.
also this:
http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp244.pdf
Quote:
But why should the government need to take from the private sector the money (currency and/or
bank reserves) that it alone is capable of creating? It seems reasonable to suggest that it is not
money but bridges, armies, satellites, etc. that the government wants and that it acquires them by
encouraging the population to provide them in exchange for government money. That is, it
cannot be the government but the public/citizens who need the money in order to settle their tax
liabilities to the state.
Indeed, the entire process of taxing and spending must, as a matter of logic, have begun
with the government first creating (and spending) new government money. How, after all, could
a population settle its tax liabilities using the government’s money (I-PM) before the government
had made its money available? In other words, the government’s purchase of goods and services
using newly-created money must first have supplied the citizens with the means with which to pay
taxes. Thus, taxes can be conceived as the means by which the government directs real resources
from private to public domain. If this theory is accepted, taxes are used to create a demand for
the government’s money, not to “finance” the government’s spending.
Quote:
The destruction of these promises is no different from the private destruction of a promise once it has been fulfilled. In other words, when an individual takes out a loan, she issues a
promise to a bank. Once she ‘makes good’ on that promise (i.e. repays the loan), she may
‘destroy’ that loan debt (liability) by eliminating it from her balance sheet. Likewise, the State,
once it fulfills its promise to accept its own money (HPM) at State pay-offices, can eliminate an
equivalent number of these liabilities from its balance sheet.
Thus, while bank money (Ml) is destroyed when demand deposits are used to pay taxes,
the government’s money, HPM, is destroyed as the funds are placed into the Treasury’s account
at the Fed. Viewed this way, it can be convincingly argued that the money collected from taxation
and bond sales cannot possibly finance the government’s spending. This is because in order to
‘get its hands on’ the proceeds from taxation and bond sales, the government must destroy the
money it has collected. Clearly, government spending cannot be financed by money that is
destroyed when received in payment to the State!


See what happens when one ass-u-me.
JasterMake and JasterMake like this.

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-25-2016 at 10:25 PM. Reason: edit
jeffkrol is offline  
post #172 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 10:24 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
AWolf's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,261
Now we see marijuana making states rich. The tables are turned a bit with this new wealth. I'm not going to condemn a state for raising money this way. The FEDS makes money on drugs, they just don't admit it. In fact, the State make money every time a child is born. That social security number adds to the census statistics for the state to be able to request more money from the feds for social programs. And so the needy and ignorant bureaucratic baby continues to suckle at the Federal udder. ...Ha! That is perhaps the worst metaphor I've ever heard. But the visual is funny. There must be a cartoonist that has drawn similar.
AWolf is offline  
post #173 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 10:27 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
"we" are the Fed....
you get a problem w/ "statists" that think they can go on their own, and oddly enough w/out taxes (see Kansas, WI, and LA).
That "republic" thing. Problem is the expenses are exceeding the revenues, which puts each state in a "tricle down" spiral of more cuts.. leading to less revenue ect.. Compounded by ideology and pride (and ignorance) sold as the Fed. gov can't afford it either..and "we" don't need them..asking for help from the Fed only when it makes them look good..

Pretending the Fed can't afford to help them or there are strings attached (to be honest that is also a psychological point and does have "some" relevance)

Quote:
The 22 states that didn't expand Medicaid eligibility as part of Obamacare last year saw their costs to provide health care to the poor rise twice as fast as states that extended benefits to more low-income residents.

It's a counter-intuitive twist for those states whose governors, most Republicans who opposed the Affordable Care Act, chose not to accept federal funds to extend Medicaid to more people.

A Kaiser Family Foundation survey of Medicaid directors in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., showed that those that didn't broaden coverage saw their Medicaid costs rise 6.9 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. The 29 states that took President Obama up on his offer to foot the bill for expanding Medicaid saw their costs rise only 3.4 percent.

That modest increase in Medicaid spending in the expansion states came even as the rate of Medicaid participation rose 18 percent, three times as much as the states sitting out.

Before Obamacare, able-bodied adults who didn't have children weren't eligible for Medicaid. The expansion allows all adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level to enroll. The federal government pays the entire bill for those people through 2016, after which the federal share tapers down to 90 percent.

In the first two years of eligibility, tens of millions of people have signed up for Medicaid in those states that participated.
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-s...e-higher-costs

Carrots and sticks.............

Refusing to shift costs from the States to the FED . is.. well STUPID.......... there really is no other way to say this.
Every argument against Medicaid expansion is full of ideology and false premises.
See EVERYTHING I posted earlier..

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-25-2016 at 10:50 PM. Reason: edit
jeffkrol is offline  
post #174 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-25-2016, 11:42 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
AWolf's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkrol View Post

Refusing to shift costs from the States to the FED . is.. well STUPID.......... there really is no other way to say this.
Every argument against Medicaid expansion is full of ideology and false premises.
See EVERYTHING I posted earlier..
Yes, like Rudy Giuliani didn't take that money from the Saudi Prince. Foolish. Considering what I have learned over the past few days, I must say it is time to take everything the gov't is willing to offer, and ask for more. Or should I say, from US. All of that federal fake money is ours. Not to mention all of the 'real' money they take from us in taxes on top of it all. There is no excuse for the Gov't to claim we need to cut programs because we can't afford them. There is no reason to raise the retirement from 65 to 70yrs, or whatever they are saying. It's all a ruse. In fact, I think we should lower the retirement to 55 again. That will help those like me who can't find work because of the millions younger with degrees that need the jobs too, while businesses are leaving the U.S. and making it impossible for a large part of the population to find work. I can't compete with someone younger than me. I shouldn't have to. But there aren't enough jobs to go around. It seems we need to start to take what belongs to us.
AWolf is offline  
post #175 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-26-2016, 12:08 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
Quote:
There is no reason to raise the retirement from 65 to 70yrs, or whatever they are saying. It's all a ruse. In fact, I think we should lower the retirement to 55 again.
couldn't agree more.. Flush the work pool ..
I wrote to my Congress people about this a long time ago..

Careful though, you get a bunch of "old arts" like me spending money into the economy (regardless of source) and you may need to tax more..
LOL................
Putting money into the economy creates businesses.. just not usually global giants..

They are creating civil unrest at multiple levels.. and it will not end well. Either we end up in a totalitarian state (fear our neighbors) or anarchy..
It would bother me more except "we" deserve it..
2010.................
Quote:
In the past, Americans would not let anyone make them live in fear. If some unbalanced individual did something bad, it wasn’t the end of the world, was it? No, in the past Americans dusted themselves off and continued to live as free men and women. You see, when we live in fear and radically alter our way of life just to feel a little more secure, we lose. We have let someone else steal our freedom and our dignity.
But now in the name of “security” all kinds of bizarre proposals have been implemented on the local, state and national levels. Somehow we think that if everything that we do is watched, monitored and analyzed we will all be safer somehow.
Maybe we are safer and maybe we aren’t, but we are certainly a whole lot less free.
I'm not going to confirm nor deny any of the things presented here. Just use them as "guidelines"..
20 Signs That The United States Is Rapidly Becoming A Totalitarian Big Brother Police State Ľ Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Quote:
#20) But one other recent poll found that 51 percent of Americans agree with this statement: “It is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.”
Quote:
Political scientist and author Chalmers Johnson, in a review of Wolin's Democracy Incorporated in Truthdig, wrote that the book is a "devastating critique" of the contemporary government of the United States — including the way it has changed in recent years and the actions that "must" be undertaken "if it is not to disappear into history along with its classic totalitarian predecessors: Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and Bolshevik Russia."[6] In Johnson's view, Wolin’s is one of the best analyses of why presidential elections are unlikely to be effective in mitigating the detrimental effects of inverted totalitarianism. Johnson writes that Wolin’s work is "fully accessible" and that understanding Wolin's argument "does not depend on possessing any specialized knowledge."[6] Johnson believes Wolin's analysis is more of an explanation of the problems of the United States than a description of how to solve these problems, "particularly since Wolin believes that the U.S. political system is corrupt[6] and heavily influenced by financial contributions primarily from wealthy and corporate donors, but that nonetheless Wolin’s analysis is still one of the best discourses on where the U.S. went wrong."[6]

Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers expressed the view that:[7]

We are living in a time of Inverted Totalitarianism, in which the tools used to maintain the status quo are much more subtle and technologically advanced ... These include propaganda and major media outlets that hide the real news about conditions at home and our activities around the world behind distractions ... Another tool is to create insecurity in the population so that people are unwilling to speak out and take risks for fear of losing their jobs ... Changes in college education also silence dissent ... Adjunct professors ... are less willing to teach topics that are viewed as controversial. This, combined with massive student debt, are tools to silence the student population, once the center of transformative action.[7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Quote:
In inverted totalitarianism, every natural resource and every living being is commodified and exploited to collapse as the citizenry is lulled and manipulated into surrendering their liberties and their participation in government through excess consumerism and sensationalism.[6][7
Think one needs to add fear here...........


Quote:
“Democracy Incorporated,” details our peculiar form of corporate totalitarianism. “One cannot point to any national institution[s] that can accurately be described as democratic,” he writes in that book, “surely not in the highly managed, money-saturated elections, the lobby-infested Congress, the imperial presidency, the class-biased judicial and penal system, or, least of all, the media.”

Inverted totalitarianism is different from classical forms of totalitarianism. It does not find its expression in a demagogue or charismatic leader but in the faceless anonymity of the corporate state. Our inverted totalitarianism pays outward fealty to the facade of electoral politics, the Constitution, civil liberties, freedom of the press, the independence of the judiciary, and the iconography, traditions and language of American patriotism, but it has effectively seized all of the mechanisms of power to render the citizen impotent.

“Unlike the Nazis, who made life uncertain for the wealthy and privileged while providing social programs for the working class and poor, inverted totalitarianism exploits the poor, reducing or weakening health programs and social services, regimenting mass education for an insecure workforce threatened by the importation of low-wage workers,” Wolin writes. “Employment in a high-tech, volatile, and globalized economy is normally as precarious as during an old-fashioned depression. The result is that citizenship, or what remains of it, is practiced amidst a continuing state of worry. Hobbes had it right: when citizens are insecure and at the same time driven by competitive aspirations, they yearn for political stability rather than civic engagement, protection rather than political involvement.”
http://www.commondreams.org/views/20...otalitarianism

Banks too big to fail.
Banksters too big to jail.
Token fines and then tax breaks on them..ect..
Quote:
“They now have the tools to deal with the very disparities and differences that they have themselves helped to create. It’s a game in which you manage to undermine the cohesiveness that the public requires if they [the public] are to be politically effective. And at the same time, you create these different, distinct groups that inevitably find themselves in tension or at odds or in competition with other groups, so that it becomes more of a melee than it does become a way of fashioning majorities.”

In classical totalitarian regimes, such as those of Nazi fascism or Soviet communism, economics was subordinate to politics. But “under inverted totalitarianism the reverse is true,” Wolin writes. “Economics dominates politics—and with that domination comes different forms of ruthlessness.”

He continues: “The United States has become the showcase of how democracy can be managed without appearing to be suppressed.”

The corporate state, Wolin told me, is “legitimated by elections it controls.” To extinguish democracy, it rewrites and distorts laws and legislation that once protected democracy. Basic rights are, in essence, revoked by judicial and legislative fiat. Courts and legislative bodies, in the service of corporate power, reinterpret laws to strip them of their original meaning in order to strengthen corporate control and abolish corporate oversight.

He writes: “Why negate a constitution, as the Nazis did, if it is possible simultaneously to exploit porosity and legitimate power by means of judicial interpretations that declare huge campaign contributions to be protected speech under the First Amendment, or that treat heavily financed and organized lobbying by large corporations as a simple application of the people’s right to petition their government?”

Our system of inverted totalitarianism will avoid harsh and violent measures of control “as long as ... dissent remains ineffectual,” he told me. “The government does not need to stamp out dissent. The uniformity of imposed public opinion through the corporate media does a very effective job.”
Quote:
His “Democracy Incorporated” was ignored by every major newspaper and journal in the country. This did not surprise him. He knew his power. So did his enemies. All his fears for the nation have come to pass. A corporate monstrosity rules us. If we held up a scorecard we would have to say Wolin lost, but we would also have to acknowledge the integrity, brilliance, courage and nobility of his life.
a bit different:
Quote:
A study by two Princeton University researchers, Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, released last month, tracked 1,800 U.S. policy changes between 1981 and 2002, and compared the outcome with the expressed preferences of median-income Americans, the affluent, business interests and powerful lobbies. They concluded that average citizens “have little or no independent influence” on policy in the U.S., while the rich and their hired mouthpieces routinely get their way. “The majority does not rule,” they wrote.

Smart money versus dumb voters is hardly a fair fight. But it does offer compelling evidence that the survival of the fittest remains an unshakable truth even in American life. A sad sort of proof of evolution
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/america-dumbs-down/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/overtur...rnment/5519295

Sorry I can't really do soundbites...

Sadly we just might have a choice of more inverted totalitarianism or full blown fascism.. What an election huh..........

Quote:
One can only conclude, therefore, that Trump is not really serious about attacking free trade. He is pandering to those with a legitimate and serious real concern who have been deeply harmed by US trade policies. Trump is in that great US presidential candidate tradition, promising voters what they want to hear and then, if elected, doing whatever the economic elites want them to do. US presidential candidates, of either wing—Republican and Democrat—of the Corporate Party of America, are habitual liars and cannot be trusted. We had our pseudo-populist from the ‘left’, Barack Obama, elected eight years ago promising to reform free trade treaties. And he became the biggest free trade advocate in US economic history. In Trump, we have our Obama analog, a pseudo-populist this time from the ‘right’, promising the same. And who then will do the same. To paraphrase an ancient saying, US voters now considering voting for Trump based on his anti-trade views would do well to ‘Beware of Billionaires Bearing Gifts’.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=trump&x=0&y=0

Quote:
Every time you think about the fence, think about the fences being used against us, keeping us in”. [2] This proposed wall is to be built between the US and Mexico border, but not Canada’s border. This is despite the fact that visa overstays from Canada are twice as many than from Mexico.[3] It is also in spite of the fact that 51% of “illegal immigrants” are from a country other than Mexico.[4]

Trump’s plan to build a wall on America’s southern border is dependent on Mexico paying $5-10 billion for it. In order to coerce Mexico into paying for the wall, he proposes a statist solution of magnifying the Federal government’s power of monitoring monetary transactions between individuals. His plan would force privately-owned financial institutions, such as Western Union, to act as bureaucrats who would impede on an individual’s liberty to freely conduct business. This regulation would apply to every individual who uses these services in the US. Such a regulation is a hallmark of a police-state in which every individual’s privacy is subject to government surveillance. Trump’s plan for breaking up the family unit through deportations, known as the sequel to Operation: Wetback, can only be accomplished through a police-state. [5] It is plausible that martial law would be enacted to facilitate these mass deportations
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-don...agenda/5526597

Quote:
Trump is certainly not a working-class hero. He is a pure capitalist, with all the furies of private interest and greed that capitalism selects for. But at this time he is a capitalist who is not rich from looting the public purse as the biggest annual cash flow, nor from exporting the costs of labor and taxes to foreign jurisdictions with subhuman standards that come back to the US as “necessary to compete”. Trump has initiated a long overdue recognition of parasite capitalism eating out the life capacities of the US itself.

Prof. John McMurtry is author of The Cancer Stage of Capitalism: From Crisis to Cure (Pluto)
Quote:
What’s refreshing about Trump is the directness with which he expresses his psychopathy. For example, candidates such as Hillary Clinton sugar-coat theirpsychopathy, or even find ways to get their interviewers to join eagerly in their expressions of it (camaraderie with power-holders), but they don’t say such blatant things as (to paraphrase Trump here), “After we raped them — which we shouldn’t have done — we should have stolen from them, and we should still be stealing from them.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/donald-...ountry/5484737

America?????


http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraq-wh...w-bush/5537806

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-26-2016 at 01:20 AM. Reason: edit
jeffkrol is offline  
post #176 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-26-2016, 03:11 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
ua hua's Avatar
 
PTrader: (58/100%)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 2,519
I have been void of this forum for almost a year and decided today to check it out again as I'm planning a new scape for my tank. Upon my return I find out I can't login as my password is not the same and apparently I needed to change it. If that wasn't a big enough pain in the ass I stumble upon this thread. A thread of this kind was not allowed in any form just a short time ago and would be locked down immediately. When did the paradigm shift on this site take place?

While I personally have no problem with it what the hell happened to TPT as I knew it?

By the way it's nice to still see you around OVT.

All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death life is only a dream which is an imagination of ourselves. Bill Hicks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ua hua is offline  
post #177 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-26-2016, 04:37 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
AWolf's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by ua hua View Post
A thread of this kind was not allowed in any form just a short time ago and would be locked down immediately. When did the paradigm shift on this site take place?

While I personally have no problem with it what the hell happened to TPT as I knew it?

By the way it's nice to still see you around OVT.
Ha! Yea, this is the Lounge section. I've been wondering if we would be shut down, but so far, so good. This topic seems to hold some interest, and is certainly appropriate considering current events. I'm glad that it wasn't shut down, because I've learned a lot. I guess as long as we stay civil, it's all good. The human side of fishkeepers! Welcome back! Any thoughts to add while you're in the Lounge?
AWolf is offline  
post #178 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-26-2016, 04:44 AM
OVT
Carpe Diem
 
OVT's Avatar
 
PTrader: (144/100%)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 7,439
@ua hua - I'm back to troll after a couple of years. There are more ads then people and Mods are hard to find
Good to see you too ��
OVT is online now  
post #179 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-26-2016, 05:25 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 11,589
After reading the guidelines I do suspect that this thread should not be encouraged, or at least a bit more "sanitized"..(yea I know funny huh)
Anyways some things brought up here deal w/ "money".
So to get it a bit away from any more intense politik's..I just thought to add this as a current, more innocuous, food for thought:
Why Bitcoin isn't money, as one Florida judge ruled - CSMonitor.com

Quote:
"Bitcoin may have some attributes in common with what we commonly refer to as money," she said. However, as it lacks backing from any government or bank, "it is very clear, even to someone with limited knowledge in the area, the Bitcoin has a long way to go before it the equivalent of money."
The decision came in a money-laundering case against Michell Abner Espinoza that was the result of a sting operation by Miami Beach detectives...
"It is not a reliable medium of exchange, nor is it a reliable store of value," writes Mr. Kudlow in a column for CNBC. "It has no central bank regulation, network operations or even centralized issuance. And because of its wild price fluctuations, bitcoin can never be a reliable payment system." ............. an economics professor at Barry University in Miami, compared the virtual currency to "poker chips that people are willing to buy from you," The Miami Herald reports. The value of bitcoins, he said, is similar to the assigned value of a comic book or baseball card by collectors.
or:
Quote:
"At various times in history, feathers have been money, shells have been money, dollars and euros are money, Bitcoin is money.... There are many different kinds of money," said Jim Rickards, author of "The Death of Money: The Coming Collapse of the International Monetary System," in a video interview with reinvent.money.
All types of money, he said, "are backed by one thing, which is confidence. If you and I have confidence that something is money and we agree that it’s money, then it can be money."...............
enjoy...

OK one more on economics..
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/...ebt-deflation/
Quote:
A gift of free money with no strings attached, it would find its way into the real economy and trigger the demand needed to power productivity and employment.

What the world got instead was a form of QE in which new money is swapped for assets in the reserve accounts of banks, leaving liquidity trapped on bank balance sheets. Whether manipulating bank reserves can affect the circulating money supply at all is controversial. But if it can, it is only by triggering new borrowing. And today, according to Richard Koo, chief economist at the Nomura Research Institute, individuals and businesses are paying down debt rather than taking out new loans. They are doing this although credit is very “accommodative” (cheap), because they need to rectify their debt-ridden balance sheets in order to stay afloat. Koo calls it a “balance sheet recession.”.....As the Bank of England recently acknowledged, the vast majority of the money supply is now created by banks when they make loans. Money is created when loans are made, and it is extinguished when they are paid off. When loan repayment exceeds borrowing, the money supply “deflates” or shrinks. New money then needs to be injected to fill the breach. Currently, the only way to get new money into the economy is for someone to borrow it into existence; and since the private sector is not borrowing, the public sector must, just to replace what has been lost in debt repayment. But government borrowing from the private sector means running up interest charges and hitting deficit limits.

The alternative is to do what governments arguably should have been doing all along: issue the money directly to fund their budgets. Having exhausted other options, some central bankers are now calling for this form of “helicopter money,” which may finally be raining on Japan if not the US.
Quote:
Critics may disapprove of the helicopter money option, but the market evidently approves. Japanese shares shot up for four consecutive days after Abe announced his new fiscal stimulus program, in the strongest rally since February. As noted in a July 11th ZeroHedge editorial, Japan “has given the world a glimpse of not only how ‘helicopter money’ will look, but also the market’s enthusiastic response, which needless to say is music to the ears of central bankers everywhere.” If the Japanese trial balloon is successful, many more such experiments can be expected globally.

"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-26-2016 at 05:46 PM. Reason: edit
jeffkrol is offline  
post #180 of 194 (permalink) Old 07-29-2016, 12:17 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Jeff5614's Avatar
 
PTrader: (52/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 3,603
The reason the thread hasn't been shut down is because there are only three people reading it .

I kid.
Jeff5614 is offline  
Reply

Tags
None

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The Planted Tank Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome