---
U.S. GOV can kill ANYONE including YOU without trial COVERTLY !!
Youtube video
And a comment that I tend to agree with 100% Obviously written to the sheeple among us
"You don't get it, do you? It's not about Republican versus Democrat. That never mattered. Those parties were created to trick people into believing they actually have a choice. Once in power, both Democrats and Republicans do what they're told by people who have no political affiliation. Now it's just us, the people being controlled, versus them, the people in control. Get this left/right bullshit out of your head, it's all just an illusion."
Thanks
Greg
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Banks 'Too Big to Fail' Have Grown Even Bigger
---
This story is just as true, and even more so, now as it was when it was written in 2009..
Let us not forget where we have been and where we are headed still..
I's time to end Too Big To Fail moral hazard once and for all.
---
By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 28, 2009
When the credit crisis struck last year, federal regulators pumped tens of billions of dollars into the nation's leading financial institutions because the banks were so big that officials feared their failure would ruin the entire financial system.
The crisis may be turning out very well for many of the behemoths that dominate U.S. finance. A series of federally arranged mergers safely landed troubled banks on the decks of more stable firms. And it allowed the survivors to emerge from the turmoil with strengthened market positions, giving them even greater control over consumer lending and more potential to profit.
J.P. Morgan Chase, an amalgam of some of Wall Street's most storied institutions, now holds more than $1 of every $10 on deposit in this country. So does Bank of America, scarred by its acquisition of Merrill Lynch and partly government-owned as a result of the crisis, as does Wells Fargo, the biggest West Coast bank. Those three banks, plus government-rescued and -owned Citigroup, now issue one of every two mortgages and about two of every three credit cards, federal data show.
Continue reading
Greg
This story is just as true, and even more so, now as it was when it was written in 2009..
Let us not forget where we have been and where we are headed still..
I's time to end Too Big To Fail moral hazard once and for all.
---
By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 28, 2009
When the credit crisis struck last year, federal regulators pumped tens of billions of dollars into the nation's leading financial institutions because the banks were so big that officials feared their failure would ruin the entire financial system.
The crisis may be turning out very well for many of the behemoths that dominate U.S. finance. A series of federally arranged mergers safely landed troubled banks on the decks of more stable firms. And it allowed the survivors to emerge from the turmoil with strengthened market positions, giving them even greater control over consumer lending and more potential to profit.
J.P. Morgan Chase, an amalgam of some of Wall Street's most storied institutions, now holds more than $1 of every $10 on deposit in this country. So does Bank of America, scarred by its acquisition of Merrill Lynch and partly government-owned as a result of the crisis, as does Wells Fargo, the biggest West Coast bank. Those three banks, plus government-rescued and -owned Citigroup, now issue one of every two mortgages and about two of every three credit cards, federal data show.
Continue reading
Greg
Monday, June 27, 2011
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Stupid is as stupid does
---
Seems to me like the government is, and has, been trying to legislate stupid for a long time now. Which, in my opinion is a stupid idea.
I guess someone told "them" (the United States congress, Federal Reserve Bank + central banks, most large corporations and, in more general terms, the power elite) that you can't fix stupid. I'm pretty sure that someone may have been Ron White LMAO
I suspect government may have taken that as some sort of challenge and due to their own pride decided to prove it wrong.
From link above, Wikipedia
Pride
Main article: Pride
In almost every list pride (Latin, superbia), or hubris, is considered the original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and the source of the others. It is identified as a desire to be more important or attractive than others, failing to acknowledge the good work of others, and excessive love of self (especially holding self out of proper position toward God). Dante's definition was "love of self perverted to hatred and contempt for one's neighbour." In Jacob Bidermann's medieval miracle play, Cenodoxus, pride is the deadliest of all the sins and leads directly to the damnation of the titulary famed Parisian doctor. In perhaps the best-known example, the story of Lucifer, pride (his desire to compete with God) was what caused his fall from Heaven, and his resultant transformation into Satan. In Dante's Divine Comedy, the penitents were forced to walk with stone slabs bearing down on their backs to induce feelings of humility.
Take seat belt laws..
I don't think there should be a law, passed by the state, to require you to wear a seat-belt. I, personally, do think you might be stupid for not wearing one. Seat-belts, especially in lower speed accidents, have the proven ability to "save your f'ing life".
A pretty cool thing in and of itself.
So you would likely be either suicidal or stupid not to wear one. In my own humble opinion.
But a law? A government requirement that you do so?
No.. That's trying to "fix" stupid..
The absence of law, in this particular situation, may be more helpful to "humanity".
And this "law" about to go in effect. Targeted specifically at one lone industry. Big tobacco.
Editorial: Graphic new warnings on cigarettes are overkill
Public anti-smoking campaigns are understandable, but mandating these macabre images goes too far.
By The Denver Post
Yes I do smoke myself.. Which is stupid..
My own personal "theory" is that genuinely stupid people, left alone, will find a multitude of ways to, so to speak, do themselves in.
Self destruct, if you will.
From jay walking to credit card debt (Click here for stats) to subprime lending.
You can't possibly legislate and regulate all of it. That's a stupid idea.
I'm a libertarian and I believe you should just leave stupid alone and it "will" work itself out, over time.
Be the stupid entity a sub-prime borrower or a sub-prime lender.
Again, in my humble opinion, stupid people should be allowed to self destruct. Drug addicts, gamblers, Jackasses, all of them.
Given their stupidity, gradually, over time, they should disappear.
That is what natural selection is all about.
Were that to occur *I* think the end effect would improve, or evolve, "humanity".
Nuff said..
Greg
Seems to me like the government is, and has, been trying to legislate stupid for a long time now. Which, in my opinion is a stupid idea.
I guess someone told "them" (the United States congress, Federal Reserve Bank + central banks, most large corporations and, in more general terms, the power elite) that you can't fix stupid. I'm pretty sure that someone may have been Ron White LMAO
I suspect government may have taken that as some sort of challenge and due to their own pride decided to prove it wrong.
From link above, Wikipedia
Pride
Main article: Pride
In almost every list pride (Latin, superbia), or hubris, is considered the original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and the source of the others. It is identified as a desire to be more important or attractive than others, failing to acknowledge the good work of others, and excessive love of self (especially holding self out of proper position toward God). Dante's definition was "love of self perverted to hatred and contempt for one's neighbour." In Jacob Bidermann's medieval miracle play, Cenodoxus, pride is the deadliest of all the sins and leads directly to the damnation of the titulary famed Parisian doctor. In perhaps the best-known example, the story of Lucifer, pride (his desire to compete with God) was what caused his fall from Heaven, and his resultant transformation into Satan. In Dante's Divine Comedy, the penitents were forced to walk with stone slabs bearing down on their backs to induce feelings of humility.
Take seat belt laws..
I don't think there should be a law, passed by the state, to require you to wear a seat-belt. I, personally, do think you might be stupid for not wearing one. Seat-belts, especially in lower speed accidents, have the proven ability to "save your f'ing life".
A pretty cool thing in and of itself.
So you would likely be either suicidal or stupid not to wear one. In my own humble opinion.
But a law? A government requirement that you do so?
No.. That's trying to "fix" stupid..
The absence of law, in this particular situation, may be more helpful to "humanity".
And this "law" about to go in effect. Targeted specifically at one lone industry. Big tobacco.
Editorial: Graphic new warnings on cigarettes are overkill
Public anti-smoking campaigns are understandable, but mandating these macabre images goes too far.
By The Denver Post
Yes I do smoke myself.. Which is stupid..
My own personal "theory" is that genuinely stupid people, left alone, will find a multitude of ways to, so to speak, do themselves in.
Self destruct, if you will.
From jay walking to credit card debt (Click here for stats) to subprime lending.
You can't possibly legislate and regulate all of it. That's a stupid idea.
I'm a libertarian and I believe you should just leave stupid alone and it "will" work itself out, over time.
Be the stupid entity a sub-prime borrower or a sub-prime lender.
Again, in my humble opinion, stupid people should be allowed to self destruct. Drug addicts, gamblers, Jackasses, all of them.
Given their stupidity, gradually, over time, they should disappear.
That is what natural selection is all about.
Were that to occur *I* think the end effect would improve, or evolve, "humanity".
Nuff said..
Greg
Saturday, June 25, 2011
In Defense of Speculators - government FED Oil Commodities
---
Once again governments are attempting to blame wildly fluctuating commodity prices on speculation and speculators.
The rise in oil prices, and other commodities, are always blamed on speculators. However, the decrease in those same prices is never credited to those same speculators. Normally lower prices are credited to the outstanding economic policies of central banks and governments.
You can't have it both ways..
The thing about speculators is they don't care if the price of any trading vehicle is going up or down.. Speculators seek to profit on the "fluctuation of price" in either direction. Not to drive price higher or lower.
And it is seldom, if at all, talked about what this speculation is based upon. Speculators base their collective actions on the economic and monetary polices of central banks and governments.
In the current world economy it is quite obvious to most speculators that the intention of the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States of America is to prop up a severely damaged U.S. economy by intentionally devaluing our currency.
Whether or not that is a good or bad idea is beside the point of this post. It just seems to be a fact. Government (ie; central bank) manipulation of the value of their currency is certainly nothing new. The United States dollar has lost 96 percent of it's value since the inception of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913. I seriously doubt that is merely some sort of accident.
But the point here is that speculators base their speculation on the policies of governments and central banks.
When we look at the price of oil the two, or three, real major players appear to be OPEC, middle eastern oil producers worried about profits, pitted against world governments and central banks worried about global economic stability and growth.
OPEC attempts to support the price of oil through supposed management of world oil supply to reflect the proper pricing of the commodity.
Governments, for the most part, seem to claim that they have little control over OPEC and oil prices are at their mercy.
In truth virtually all commodity price "manipulation" can be credited to these major players, not speculators.
However, as we have seen over the last couple of years, it appears that central banks are actually the ones who control all the cards in the matter of commodity prices. For the most part with the blessings of their governments.
Monetary policy is a weapon of mass destruction.
As the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States of America has intentionally devalued it's own currency by printing massive sums of money from thin air we have seen the price of nearly all commodities skyrocket as a result.
So why does the Federal Reserve Bank intentionally devalue it's own currency?
In a word debt..
The Federal Reserve bank is actively monetizing the debt of the United States government by printing massive amounts of money & using that freshly printed "paper" to purchase government bonds / treasuries to keep interest rates low. This helps make sure the debt of the United States remains serviceable.
The problem is that this massive amount of currency printing, which directly affects the value of our currency, also forces inflation upon us all.
Speculators merely see and understand the irresponsible actions of governments and central banks and react to that information, or policies, by taking a position in markets in anticipation of the results.
So.. the next time you here government officials, or even the Federal Reserve Banks, blaming speculators for commodity price fluctuations try to remember that in reality it is governments and central banks who are pulling all the strings.
Speculators merely "react" to the pulling of the strings.
Speculators are no different than you. They work very hard to try to make a living. They do this by attempting to understand and analyze what is going on in the world of economics. Which, by necessity, includes analyzing the policies of central banks and governments.
Greg
Couple of interesting related articles
ABC’s expectations, based on the Monetary Policy Review, May 2011
Global currency speculation and its implications
Once again governments are attempting to blame wildly fluctuating commodity prices on speculation and speculators.
The rise in oil prices, and other commodities, are always blamed on speculators. However, the decrease in those same prices is never credited to those same speculators. Normally lower prices are credited to the outstanding economic policies of central banks and governments.
You can't have it both ways..
The thing about speculators is they don't care if the price of any trading vehicle is going up or down.. Speculators seek to profit on the "fluctuation of price" in either direction. Not to drive price higher or lower.
And it is seldom, if at all, talked about what this speculation is based upon. Speculators base their collective actions on the economic and monetary polices of central banks and governments.
In the current world economy it is quite obvious to most speculators that the intention of the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States of America is to prop up a severely damaged U.S. economy by intentionally devaluing our currency.
Whether or not that is a good or bad idea is beside the point of this post. It just seems to be a fact. Government (ie; central bank) manipulation of the value of their currency is certainly nothing new. The United States dollar has lost 96 percent of it's value since the inception of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913. I seriously doubt that is merely some sort of accident.
But the point here is that speculators base their speculation on the policies of governments and central banks.
When we look at the price of oil the two, or three, real major players appear to be OPEC, middle eastern oil producers worried about profits, pitted against world governments and central banks worried about global economic stability and growth.
OPEC attempts to support the price of oil through supposed management of world oil supply to reflect the proper pricing of the commodity.
Governments, for the most part, seem to claim that they have little control over OPEC and oil prices are at their mercy.
In truth virtually all commodity price "manipulation" can be credited to these major players, not speculators.
However, as we have seen over the last couple of years, it appears that central banks are actually the ones who control all the cards in the matter of commodity prices. For the most part with the blessings of their governments.
Monetary policy is a weapon of mass destruction.
As the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States of America has intentionally devalued it's own currency by printing massive sums of money from thin air we have seen the price of nearly all commodities skyrocket as a result.
So why does the Federal Reserve Bank intentionally devalue it's own currency?
In a word debt..
The Federal Reserve bank is actively monetizing the debt of the United States government by printing massive amounts of money & using that freshly printed "paper" to purchase government bonds / treasuries to keep interest rates low. This helps make sure the debt of the United States remains serviceable.
The problem is that this massive amount of currency printing, which directly affects the value of our currency, also forces inflation upon us all.
Speculators merely see and understand the irresponsible actions of governments and central banks and react to that information, or policies, by taking a position in markets in anticipation of the results.
So.. the next time you here government officials, or even the Federal Reserve Banks, blaming speculators for commodity price fluctuations try to remember that in reality it is governments and central banks who are pulling all the strings.
Speculators merely "react" to the pulling of the strings.
Speculators are no different than you. They work very hard to try to make a living. They do this by attempting to understand and analyze what is going on in the world of economics. Which, by necessity, includes analyzing the policies of central banks and governments.
Greg
Couple of interesting related articles
ABC’s expectations, based on the Monetary Policy Review, May 2011
Global currency speculation and its implications
Friday, June 24, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Mission Critical SPX?
---
Merely as a frame of reference here's what COULD happen to SPX
RIG
Sometimes "good" things happen ;)
Greg
Merely as a frame of reference here's what COULD happen to SPX
RIG
Sometimes "good" things happen ;)
Greg
I'm here to HELP! Usury Predatory Lending
---
When are you good ole boys going to get around to addressing important issues like usury & predatory lending throughout this entire debt based economy?
You KNOW that to seriously address what ails this economy would by necessity destroy it!
Our ponzi debt based economy is based entirely on ever increasing amounts, at an exponential rate no less, of credit and debt. Whether that debt is held by government, business or the private sector.
You KNOW that!
YOU, not I, loan money to banks forever at 0 to 0.25% while average Americans are lucky if they can find money for 13% Many Americans now find themselves without a job and facing 30% interest charges, plus fees, on credit / debt they are unable to pay.
YOU allowed banks and corporations to set up shop in Delaware and North Dakota to allow unrestricted usury.
The congress of the United States of America is and always has been in your pocket!
In 1980 the congress abolished the sin of usury. At the urging of the banking cartel.
Mr Bernanke states.. "We don't have a precise read as to why this slower pace of growth is persisting." (source)
That's a lie, in my humble opinion.. I think you know exactly why. All of you. If it's NOT a bald faced lie then all of you are unqualified to do whatever TF it is that you think you're doing.
You KNOW that if you were to do what is right it would ALL come crashing down!
Reinstate usury laws. Allow states to once again decide what is fair for their constituents. (Figuratively) Nuke Delaware and North Dakota. Get RID of predatory lending now! Everywhere! (Including car dealerships) Make "fine print" (contractual traps) ILLEGAL!
I'm for a 10% interest cap on ALL loans! The economy would instantly COLLAPSE wouldn't it?!
THE CONGRESS, USURY LAWS, CREDIT CARDS AND THE EXCESSIVE FEES YOU PAY
All governments, banks and corporations USE "fine print" to legally STEAL from the people. You KNOW that!
"The Fed chief [(Helicopter) Ben Bernanke] warned that steep near-term cuts in government spending would slow the economy and cost jobs. He advocated a budget deal in Congress that begins to address long-term challenges, but warned against sharp spending declines too soon."
You are also calling on congress to make dramatic spending cuts!
By Ron Scherer, Staff writer / June 14, 2011
New York
Federal Reserve Board chairman Ben Bernanke, in his toughest words yet, warned Congress Tuesday that it has to act “in a timely manner” to reduce the federal budget deficit.
So cut but don't cut too much? Raise taxes but don't raise them too much?
This situation is obviously out of control!
You KNOW that your true intention is to destroy this economy via inflation as you already have the middle east. People, your fellow American citizens, KNOW that you have ALREADY destroyed 96% of our currency's value through inflation since the inception of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913! And now your obvious intention is to "finish the job"!
You KNOW that only gold is real money! That your fiat currency isn't worth the paper it's printed on!
So what's next? Make owning gold illegal again?
You KNOW that to truly FIX this economy would simultaneously destroy it..
Good luck
Greg
When are you good ole boys going to get around to addressing important issues like usury & predatory lending throughout this entire debt based economy?
You KNOW that to seriously address what ails this economy would by necessity destroy it!
Our ponzi debt based economy is based entirely on ever increasing amounts, at an exponential rate no less, of credit and debt. Whether that debt is held by government, business or the private sector.
You KNOW that!
YOU, not I, loan money to banks forever at 0 to 0.25% while average Americans are lucky if they can find money for 13% Many Americans now find themselves without a job and facing 30% interest charges, plus fees, on credit / debt they are unable to pay.
YOU allowed banks and corporations to set up shop in Delaware and North Dakota to allow unrestricted usury.
The congress of the United States of America is and always has been in your pocket!
In 1980 the congress abolished the sin of usury. At the urging of the banking cartel.
Mr Bernanke states.. "We don't have a precise read as to why this slower pace of growth is persisting." (source)
That's a lie, in my humble opinion.. I think you know exactly why. All of you. If it's NOT a bald faced lie then all of you are unqualified to do whatever TF it is that you think you're doing.
You KNOW that if you were to do what is right it would ALL come crashing down!
Reinstate usury laws. Allow states to once again decide what is fair for their constituents. (Figuratively) Nuke Delaware and North Dakota. Get RID of predatory lending now! Everywhere! (Including car dealerships) Make "fine print" (contractual traps) ILLEGAL!
I'm for a 10% interest cap on ALL loans! The economy would instantly COLLAPSE wouldn't it?!
THE CONGRESS, USURY LAWS, CREDIT CARDS AND THE EXCESSIVE FEES YOU PAY
All governments, banks and corporations USE "fine print" to legally STEAL from the people. You KNOW that!
"The Fed chief [(Helicopter) Ben Bernanke] warned that steep near-term cuts in government spending would slow the economy and cost jobs. He advocated a budget deal in Congress that begins to address long-term challenges, but warned against sharp spending declines too soon."
You are also calling on congress to make dramatic spending cuts!
By Ron Scherer, Staff writer / June 14, 2011
New York
Federal Reserve Board chairman Ben Bernanke, in his toughest words yet, warned Congress Tuesday that it has to act “in a timely manner” to reduce the federal budget deficit.
So cut but don't cut too much? Raise taxes but don't raise them too much?
This situation is obviously out of control!
You KNOW that your true intention is to destroy this economy via inflation as you already have the middle east. People, your fellow American citizens, KNOW that you have ALREADY destroyed 96% of our currency's value through inflation since the inception of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913! And now your obvious intention is to "finish the job"!
You KNOW that only gold is real money! That your fiat currency isn't worth the paper it's printed on!
So what's next? Make owning gold illegal again?
You KNOW that to truly FIX this economy would simultaneously destroy it..
Good luck
Greg
Mandatory Drug Testing NOW - War on Drugs
---
Me?
I'm a libertarian myself.. I think if one is stupid enough to lose their job, family and possibly even life, through the abuse of drugs it's a personal problem.
I, personally, believe that society should shame such behavior. Not coddle those who participate in it.
However, this is WAR!
The war on drugs continues unabated for decades now.
All is fair in love & war you know? That's what we say here in America.
So here's my idea to WIN the drug war now!
Stop pussy footing around, it's a f'ing WAR, and make random hair follicle drug testing MANDATORY for ALL employees on a WEEKLY basis.
Anyone / everyone found to have any illegal substance in their body should be fired immediately, on the spot!
Marijuana is a schedule 1 drug right there with heroin. Don't forget that.
Xanax in your blood to calm your nerves and help keep you from shooting up the office? You better produce a Rx for that or you're gone.
That's what a f'ing WAR should look like!
So why don't we do that?
Well because..
You think unemployment is bad now try firing at least another 50% of the worker slaves!
Which is exactly what would happen if you implemented mandatory random hair follicle drug testing.
LMAO
Greg
Me?
I'm a libertarian myself.. I think if one is stupid enough to lose their job, family and possibly even life, through the abuse of drugs it's a personal problem.
I, personally, believe that society should shame such behavior. Not coddle those who participate in it.
However, this is WAR!
The war on drugs continues unabated for decades now.
All is fair in love & war you know? That's what we say here in America.
So here's my idea to WIN the drug war now!
Stop pussy footing around, it's a f'ing WAR, and make random hair follicle drug testing MANDATORY for ALL employees on a WEEKLY basis.
Anyone / everyone found to have any illegal substance in their body should be fired immediately, on the spot!
Marijuana is a schedule 1 drug right there with heroin. Don't forget that.
Xanax in your blood to calm your nerves and help keep you from shooting up the office? You better produce a Rx for that or you're gone.
That's what a f'ing WAR should look like!
So why don't we do that?
Well because..
You think unemployment is bad now try firing at least another 50% of the worker slaves!
Which is exactly what would happen if you implemented mandatory random hair follicle drug testing.
LMAO
Greg
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Guest Post: Predator Capital One
---
TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 2011
Capital One makes me laugh!!!!!
Has anyone out there ever heard of Capital One Bank? I was in the middle of the F6 tornado that hit Joplin Missouri on May 22nd 2011. My car payment was due on the 26th of May, (through Capital One auto finance of course,) and I was unable to send it on time. By the time I got it sent I was a couple of weeks late, not to worry though, I contacted them to let them know what had happened, and they assured me there was no problem, and they would accept it as on time when it got there.
A couple of days had gone by and I recieved a call from their collections department, I once again went over what had happened and was told that they did not make a note on my account at the first call, but would do so at that time. Once again a couple of days went by and I recieved yet another call from their collections department. At this time I am as P.O.'d as I can get at not only the lack of consideration for the loss of my house and belonging's due to the tornado, but also the non ability for any of the three associates I had talked too to make any notification on my account. I let them have a piece of my mind, (not that it ever does any good) and went about my day.
Just a couple of days ago I checked the mail and found a letter from the collections department stating that i was past due, ( even though my account showed for two weeks that they had recieved my payment). And here we get to the "FUNNY" part, I also recieved not one or even two, but eight different credit card offers all from, you guessed it, CAPITAL ONE BANK!!!!! Come on people, how ironic is it that someone can get nonstop calls, and letters from collections on a past due payment, but also receive offers for more credit from the same bank. How can our country survive if this keeps happening? No wonder our economy is this far down in the crapper!!
---
I found this on the net but there are plenty more pages just like it.. It sure seems to me that ALL of our banks, financial companies, corporations are predatory leanders the INSTANT they get the opportunity to be so..
Greg
---
TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 2011
Capital One makes me laugh!!!!!
Has anyone out there ever heard of Capital One Bank? I was in the middle of the F6 tornado that hit Joplin Missouri on May 22nd 2011. My car payment was due on the 26th of May, (through Capital One auto finance of course,) and I was unable to send it on time. By the time I got it sent I was a couple of weeks late, not to worry though, I contacted them to let them know what had happened, and they assured me there was no problem, and they would accept it as on time when it got there.
A couple of days had gone by and I recieved a call from their collections department, I once again went over what had happened and was told that they did not make a note on my account at the first call, but would do so at that time. Once again a couple of days went by and I recieved yet another call from their collections department. At this time I am as P.O.'d as I can get at not only the lack of consideration for the loss of my house and belonging's due to the tornado, but also the non ability for any of the three associates I had talked too to make any notification on my account. I let them have a piece of my mind, (not that it ever does any good) and went about my day.
Just a couple of days ago I checked the mail and found a letter from the collections department stating that i was past due, ( even though my account showed for two weeks that they had recieved my payment). And here we get to the "FUNNY" part, I also recieved not one or even two, but eight different credit card offers all from, you guessed it, CAPITAL ONE BANK!!!!! Come on people, how ironic is it that someone can get nonstop calls, and letters from collections on a past due payment, but also receive offers for more credit from the same bank. How can our country survive if this keeps happening? No wonder our economy is this far down in the crapper!!
---
I found this on the net but there are plenty more pages just like it.. It sure seems to me that ALL of our banks, financial companies, corporations are predatory leanders the INSTANT they get the opportunity to be so..
Greg
---
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Nice little note from FXCM
---
Market Condition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News Announcement Notice
Please be advised that the Greek Parliament has scheduled a confidence vote for 5 PM EDT (10 PM London Time) today. This is typically the time of day with the lowest liquidity, as U.S. trading hours end at 5 PM EDT. You may witness increased market volatility before and after the scheduled event. As a result, you may see increased spreads and decreased market liquidity around this time.
Please note - it is important to manage your open positions accordingly. To learn more about this event, please visit DailyFX.com.
LMAO
Greg
Market Condition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News Announcement Notice
Please be advised that the Greek Parliament has scheduled a confidence vote for 5 PM EDT (10 PM London Time) today. This is typically the time of day with the lowest liquidity, as U.S. trading hours end at 5 PM EDT. You may witness increased market volatility before and after the scheduled event. As a result, you may see increased spreads and decreased market liquidity around this time.
Please note - it is important to manage your open positions accordingly. To learn more about this event, please visit DailyFX.com.
LMAO
Greg
I'm TELLING you you better wake TF up before it's too late Anonymous A99 OpESR
---
This is happening here too.. Be forewarned that government will stop at NOTHING to retain their own power, wealth & control. No matter WHERE in the world that government might be.. Certainly including the United States of America.
Please support Anonymous A99 OpESR
---
Daily Bell: Queen Elizabeth II is worried about her empire breaking up. Should she be? Is the Internet having anything to do with this?
G. Edward Griffin: I am going to pause on that one. They are very alert to what's happening and border-line nervous to see how it's going to play out. They have been beefing up their security forces, their homeland security forces, their police forces; trained their military forces to be capable of combat on their own native soils. They've built internment camps, they have developed weapons for crowd control and they have been working on this for decades. So, what's happening is that we are coming closer to that point.
Please see this full interview
This is happening here too.. Be forewarned that government will stop at NOTHING to retain their own power, wealth & control. No matter WHERE in the world that government might be.. Certainly including the United States of America.
Please support Anonymous A99 OpESR
---
Daily Bell: Queen Elizabeth II is worried about her empire breaking up. Should she be? Is the Internet having anything to do with this?
G. Edward Griffin: I am going to pause on that one. They are very alert to what's happening and border-line nervous to see how it's going to play out. They have been beefing up their security forces, their homeland security forces, their police forces; trained their military forces to be capable of combat on their own native soils. They've built internment camps, they have developed weapons for crowd control and they have been working on this for decades. So, what's happening is that we are coming closer to that point.
Please see this full interview
Monday, June 20, 2011
Toil Is Meaningless - Ecclesiastes 2:17-26
Toil Is Meaningless
17 So I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind. 18 I hated all the things I had toiled for under the sun, because I must leave them to the one who comes after me. 19 And who knows whether he will be a wise man or a fool? Yet he will have control over all the work into which I have poured my effort and skill under the sun. This too is meaningless. 20 So my heart began to despair over all my toilsome labor under the sun. 21 For a man may do his work with wisdom, knowledge and skill, and then he must leave all he owns to someone who has not worked for it. This too is meaningless and a great misfortune. 22 What does a man get for all the toil and anxious striving with which he labors under the sun? 23 All his days his work is pain and grief; even at night his mind does not rest. This too is meaningless. 24 A man can do nothing better than to eat and drink and find satisfaction in his work. This too, I see, is from the hand of God, 25 for without him, who can eat or find enjoyment? 26 To the man who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.
17 So I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind. 18 I hated all the things I had toiled for under the sun, because I must leave them to the one who comes after me. 19 And who knows whether he will be a wise man or a fool? Yet he will have control over all the work into which I have poured my effort and skill under the sun. This too is meaningless. 20 So my heart began to despair over all my toilsome labor under the sun. 21 For a man may do his work with wisdom, knowledge and skill, and then he must leave all he owns to someone who has not worked for it. This too is meaningless and a great misfortune. 22 What does a man get for all the toil and anxious striving with which he labors under the sun? 23 All his days his work is pain and grief; even at night his mind does not rest. This too is meaningless. 24 A man can do nothing better than to eat and drink and find satisfaction in his work. This too, I see, is from the hand of God, 25 for without him, who can eat or find enjoyment? 26 To the man who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.
Wisdom - Ecclesiastes 7 NIV Bible
---
Ecclesiastes is one of my favorite books in the bible. I think it's AWESOME ;)
---
Chapter 7 on Wisdom in it's entirety [link is source]
Ecclesiastes 7
Wisdom
1 A good name is better than fine perfume,
and the day of death better than the day of birth.
2 It is better to go to a house of mourning
than to go to a house of feasting,
for death is the destiny of everyone;
the living should take this to heart.
3 Frustration is better than laughter,
because a sad face is good for the heart.
4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning,
but the heart of fools is in the house of pleasure.
5 It is better to heed the rebuke of a wise person
than to listen to the song of fools.
6 Like the crackling of thorns under the pot,
so is the laughter of fools.
This too is meaningless.
7 Extortion turns a wise person into a fool,
and a bribe corrupts the heart.
8 The end of a matter is better than its beginning,
and patience is better than pride.
9 Do not be quickly provoked in your spirit,
for anger resides in the lap of fools.
10 Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these?”
For it is not wise to ask such questions.
11 Wisdom, like an inheritance, is a good thing
and benefits those who see the sun.
12 Wisdom is a shelter
as money is a shelter,
but the advantage of knowledge is this:
Wisdom preserves those who have it.
13 Consider what God has done:
Who can straighten
what he has made crooked?
14 When times are good, be happy;
but when times are bad, consider this:
God has made the one
as well as the other.
Therefore, no one can discover
anything about their future.
15 In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these:
the righteous perishing in their righteousness,
and the wicked living long in their wickedness.
16 Do not be overrighteous,
neither be overwise—
why destroy yourself?
17 Do not be overwicked,
and do not be a fool—
why die before your time?
18 It is good to grasp the one
and not let go of the other.
Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes.[a]
19 Wisdom makes one wise person more powerful
than ten rulers in a city.
20 Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous,
no one who does what is right and never sins.
21 Do not pay attention to every word people say,
or you may hear your servant cursing you—
22 for you know in your heart
that many times you yourself have cursed others.
23 All this I tested by wisdom and I said,
“I am determined to be wise”—
but this was beyond me.
24 Whatever exists is far off and most profound—
who can discover it?
25 So I turned my mind to understand,
to investigate and to search out wisdom and the scheme of things
and to understand the stupidity of wickedness
and the madness of folly.
26 I find more bitter than death
the woman who is a snare,
whose heart is a trap
and whose hands are chains.
The man who pleases God will escape her,
but the sinner she will ensnare.
27 “Look,” says the Teacher,[b] “this is what I have discovered:
“Adding one thing to another to discover the scheme of things—
28 while I was still searching
but not finding—
I found one upright man among a thousand,
but not one upright woman among them all.
29 This only have I found:
God created mankind upright,
but they have gone in search of many schemes.”
Footnotes:
Ecclesiastes 7:18 Or will follow them both
Ecclesiastes 7:27 Or the leader of the assembly
Ecclesiastes is one of my favorite books in the bible. I think it's AWESOME ;)
---
Chapter 7 on Wisdom in it's entirety [link is source]
Ecclesiastes 7
Wisdom
1 A good name is better than fine perfume,
and the day of death better than the day of birth.
2 It is better to go to a house of mourning
than to go to a house of feasting,
for death is the destiny of everyone;
the living should take this to heart.
3 Frustration is better than laughter,
because a sad face is good for the heart.
4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning,
but the heart of fools is in the house of pleasure.
5 It is better to heed the rebuke of a wise person
than to listen to the song of fools.
6 Like the crackling of thorns under the pot,
so is the laughter of fools.
This too is meaningless.
7 Extortion turns a wise person into a fool,
and a bribe corrupts the heart.
8 The end of a matter is better than its beginning,
and patience is better than pride.
9 Do not be quickly provoked in your spirit,
for anger resides in the lap of fools.
10 Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these?”
For it is not wise to ask such questions.
11 Wisdom, like an inheritance, is a good thing
and benefits those who see the sun.
12 Wisdom is a shelter
as money is a shelter,
but the advantage of knowledge is this:
Wisdom preserves those who have it.
13 Consider what God has done:
Who can straighten
what he has made crooked?
14 When times are good, be happy;
but when times are bad, consider this:
God has made the one
as well as the other.
Therefore, no one can discover
anything about their future.
15 In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these:
the righteous perishing in their righteousness,
and the wicked living long in their wickedness.
16 Do not be overrighteous,
neither be overwise—
why destroy yourself?
17 Do not be overwicked,
and do not be a fool—
why die before your time?
18 It is good to grasp the one
and not let go of the other.
Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes.[a]
19 Wisdom makes one wise person more powerful
than ten rulers in a city.
20 Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous,
no one who does what is right and never sins.
21 Do not pay attention to every word people say,
or you may hear your servant cursing you—
22 for you know in your heart
that many times you yourself have cursed others.
23 All this I tested by wisdom and I said,
“I am determined to be wise”—
but this was beyond me.
24 Whatever exists is far off and most profound—
who can discover it?
25 So I turned my mind to understand,
to investigate and to search out wisdom and the scheme of things
and to understand the stupidity of wickedness
and the madness of folly.
26 I find more bitter than death
the woman who is a snare,
whose heart is a trap
and whose hands are chains.
The man who pleases God will escape her,
but the sinner she will ensnare.
27 “Look,” says the Teacher,[b] “this is what I have discovered:
“Adding one thing to another to discover the scheme of things—
28 while I was still searching
but not finding—
I found one upright man among a thousand,
but not one upright woman among them all.
29 This only have I found:
God created mankind upright,
but they have gone in search of many schemes.”
Footnotes:
Ecclesiastes 7:18 Or will follow them both
Ecclesiastes 7:27 Or the leader of the assembly
Sunday, June 19, 2011
See My Manifesto and Google me ;)
---
I blog on a wide variety of topics that interest me personally..
You can try Googling Ancient Warrior's Ancient Battles [keyword] on virtually any subject of import and get hits..
Samples
ancient warrior's ancient battles debt
ancient warrior's ancient battles militarization of police
ancient warrior's ancient battles martial law
ancient warrior's ancient battles statism
ancient warrior's ancient battles sedition
ancient warrior's ancient battles fiat
ancient warrior's ancient battles banks
Try your own keyword(s) to search my personal knowledge base ;)
To learn what I am about see My Manifesto
End #Times #Prophecy - #Truth about #Religion #God
Thanks
Greg
I blog on a wide variety of topics that interest me personally..
You can try Googling Ancient Warrior's Ancient Battles [keyword] on virtually any subject of import and get hits..
Samples
ancient warrior's ancient battles debt
ancient warrior's ancient battles militarization of police
ancient warrior's ancient battles martial law
ancient warrior's ancient battles statism
ancient warrior's ancient battles sedition
ancient warrior's ancient battles fiat
ancient warrior's ancient battles banks
Try your own keyword(s) to search my personal knowledge base ;)
To learn what I am about see My Manifesto
End #Times #Prophecy - #Truth about #Religion #God
Thanks
Greg
Friday, June 17, 2011
Paradox of Thrift - Anonymous A99 OpESR
---
Knowledge truly is power..
Knowing that our government, the Federal Reserve Bank, central banks and the TBTF banks and corporate America itself are scared to death of certain economic bogeymen gives us power over them.
They all fear, more than anything, deflation and/or a lack of consumption because their ponzi economy is a house of cards built entirely on unsustainable debt.
---
Thursday, February 5, 2009
The paradox of debt
From Princeton University economist Paul Krugman:
Consumers are pulling back because they’ve realized that they’re too far in debt. The economy is shrinking in large part because consumers are pulling back. And the result, almost surely, is to leave household balance sheets worse than ever. I can’t do this accurately until the Federal Reserve’s flow of funds data have been updated, but almost without question the ratio of household debt to personal income has been rising, not falling, as consumers try to save more.
---
We have all the power necessary to end debt slavery to the masters of money manipulation. All we must do is STOP consuming. STOP being predictable cattle (sheeple) for those who would prey upon the weak among us.
Here is what's being addressed by Anonymous & A99. I support this movement 110% Click the link for the full, heartwarming, story.
This Flag Day, Tuesday June 14th, we will launch a non-violent movement with this list of demands:
* End the campaign finance and lobbying racket
* Break up the Fed & Too Big to Fail banks
* Enforce RICO laws against organized criminal class
* Order Ben Bernanke to step down
---
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (click for full discussion)
The Paradox of Thrift
The paradox of thrift (or paradox of saving) is a paradox of economics, popularized by John Maynard Keynes, though it had been stated as early as 1714 in The Fable of the Bees,[1] and similar sentiments date to antiquity.[2][3] The paradox states that if everyone tries to save more money during times of recession, then aggregate demand will fall and will in turn lower total savings in the population because of the decrease in consumption and economic growth. The paradox is, narrowly speaking, that total savings may fall even when individual savings attempt to rise, and, broadly speaking, that increases in savings may be harmful to an economy.[4] Both the narrow and broad claims are paradoxical within the assumption underlying the fallacy of composition, namely that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole. The narrow claim transparently contradicts this assumption, and the broad one does so by implication, because while individual thrift is generally averred to be good for the economy, the paradox of thrift holds that collective thrift may be bad for the economy.
The paradox of thrift is a central component of Keynesian economics, and has formed part of mainstream economics since the late 1940s, though it is criticized on a number of grounds.
The argument is that, in equilibrium, total income (and thus demand) must equal total output, and that total investment must equal total saving. Assuming that saving rises faster as a function of income than the relationship between investment and output, then an increase in the marginal propensity to save, ceteris paribus, will move the equilibrium point at which income equals output and investment equals savings to lower values.
In this form it represents a prisoner's dilemma as saving is beneficial to each individual but deleterious to the general population. This is a "paradox" because it runs contrary to intuition. One who does not know about the paradox of thrift would fall into a fallacy of composition wherein one generalizes what is perceived to be true for an individual within the economy to the overall population. Although exercising thrift may be good for an individual by enabling that individual to save for a "rainy day", it may not be good for the economy as a whole.
Overview
This paradox can be explained by analyzing the place, and impact, of increased savings in an economy. If a population saves more money (that is the marginal propensity to save increases across all income levels), then total revenues for companies will decline. This decrease in economic growth means fewer salary increases and perhaps downsizing. Eventually the population's total savings will have remained the same or even declined because of lower incomes and a weaker economy. This paradox is based on the proposition, put forth in Keynesian economics, that many economic downturns are demand based.
History
While the paradox of thrift was popularized by Keynes, and is often attributed to him,[2] it was stated by a number of others prior to Keynes, and the proposition that spending may help and saving may hurt an economy dates to antiquity; similar sentiments occur in the Bible verse:
There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to poverty.
—Proverbs 11:24
which has found occasional use as an epigram in underconsumptionist writings.[2][5][6][7]
Keynes himself notes the appearance of the paradox in The Fable of the Bees: or, Private Vices, Publick Benefits (1714) by Bernard Mandeville, the title itself hinting at the paradox, and Keynes citing the passage:
As this prudent economy, which some people call Saving, is in private families the most certain method to increase an estate, so some imagine that, whether a country be barren or fruitful, the same method if generally pursued (which they think practicable) will have the same effect upon a whole nation, and that, for example, the English might be much richer than they are, if they would be as frugal as some of their neighbours. This, I think, is an error.
Keynes suggests Adam Smith was referring to this passage when he wrote "What is prudence in the conduct of every private family can scarce be folly in that of a great Kingdom."
The problem of underconsumption and oversaving, as they saw it, was developed by underconsumptionist economists of the 19th century, and the paradox of thrift in the strict sense that "collective attempts to save yield lower overall savings" was explicitly stated by John M. Robertson in his 1892 book The Fallacy of Saving,[8][2] writing:
Had the whole population been alike bent on saving, the total saved would positively have been much less, inasmuch as (other tendencies remaining the same) industrial paralysis would have been reached sooner or oftener, profits would be less, interest much lower, and earnings smaller and more precarious. This ... is no idle paradox, but the strictest economic truth.
—John M. Robertson, The Fallacy of Saving, p. 131–2
Similar ideas were forwarded by William Trufant Foster and Waddill Catchings in the 1920s in The Dilemma of Thrift.
Keynes distinguished between business activity/investment ("Enterprise") and savings ("Thrift") in his Treatise on Money (1930):
...mere abstinence is not enough by itself to build cities or drain fens. ... If Enterprise is afoot, wealth accumulates whatever may be happening to Thrift; and if Enterprise is asleep, wealth decays whatever Thrift may be doing. Thus, Thrift may be the handmaiden of Enterprise.
But equally she may not. And, perhaps, even usually she is not.
and stated the paradox of thrift in The General Theory, 1936:
For although the amount of his own saving is unlikely to have any significant influence on his own income, the reactions of the amount of his consumption on the incomes of others makes it impossible for all individuals simultaneously to save any given sums. Every such attempt to save more by reducing consumption will so affect incomes that the attempt necessarily defeats itself. It is, of course, just as impossible for the community as a whole to save less than the amount of current investment, since the attempt to do so will necessarily raise incomes to a level at which the sums which individuals choose to save add up to a figure exactly equal to the amount of investment.
—John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Chapter 7, p. 84
The theory is referred to as the "paradox of thrift" in Samuelson's influential Economics of 1948, which popularized the term.
Criticism
Within mainstream economics, non-Keynesian economists, particularly neoclassical economists, criticize this theory on three principal grounds.
The first criticism is that, following Say's law and the related circle of ideas, if demand slackens, prices will fall (barring government intervention), and the resulting lower price will stimulate demand (though at lower profit or cost – possibly even lower wages). This criticism in turn has been questioned by Keynesian economists, who reject Say's law and instead point to evidence of sticky prices as a reason why prices do not fall in recession; this remains a debated point.
The second criticism is that savings represent loanable funds, particularly at banks, assuming the savings are held at banks, rather than currency itself being held ("stashed under one's mattress"). Thus an accumulation of savings yields an increase in potential lending, which will lower interest rates and stimulate borrowing. So a decline in consumer spending is offset by an increase in lending, and subsequent investment and spending.
Two caveats are added to this criticism. Firstly, if savings are held as cash, rather than being loaned out (directly by savers, or indirectly, as via bank deposits), then loanable funds do not increase, and thus a recession may be caused – but this is due to holding cash, not to saving per se.[9] Secondly, banks themselves may hold cash, rather than loaning it out, which results in the growth of excess reserves – funds on deposit but not loaned out. This is argued to occur in liquidity trap situations, when interest rates are at a zero lower bound (or near it) and savings still exceed investment demand. Within Keynesian economics, the desire to hold currency rather than loan it out is discussed under liquidity preference.
Third, the paradox assumes a closed economy in which savings are not invested abroad (to fund exports of local production abroad). Thus, while the paradox may hold at the global level, it need not hold at the local or national level: if one nation increases savings, this can be offset by trading partners consuming a greater amount relative to their own production, i.e., if the saving nation increases exports, and its partners increase imports. This criticism is not very controversial, and is generally accepted by Keynesian economists as well,[10] who refer to it as "exporting one's way out of a recession". They further note that this frequently occurs in concert with currency devaluation[11] (hence increasing exports and decreasing imports), and cannot work as a solution to a global problem, because the global economy is a closed system – not every nation can increase exports.
[edit] Austrian criticism
Within heterodox economics, the paradox was criticized by Austrian economist, Nobel Prize winner Friedrich Hayek in a 1929 article, "The 'Paradox' of Savings", attacking the paradox as proposed by Foster and Catchings.[12] Hayek and later Austrian economists agree that if a population saves more money, total revenues for companies will decline, but they deny the assertion that lower revenues lead to lower economic growth.
Austrians believe the productivity of the economy is determined by the consumption-investment ratio, and the demand for money only tells us the degree to which people prefer the utility of money (protection against uncertainty) to the utility of goods. They argue that hoarding of money (an increase in the demand for money) does not necessarily lead to a change in the population's consumption-investment ratio;[13] instead, it may simply be reflected in the price level. for example if spending falls by half, but prices also uniformly fall by half, leaving the consumption-investment ratio and productivity unchanged.
[edit] Related concepts
The paradox of thrift has been related to the debt deflation theory of economic crises, being called "the paradox of debt"[14] – people save not to increase savings, but rather to pay down debt. As well, a paradox of toil has been proposed: wage flexibility in a liquidity trap may lead not only to lower wages, but lower employment.[15]
Greg
Knowledge truly is power..
Knowing that our government, the Federal Reserve Bank, central banks and the TBTF banks and corporate America itself are scared to death of certain economic bogeymen gives us power over them.
They all fear, more than anything, deflation and/or a lack of consumption because their ponzi economy is a house of cards built entirely on unsustainable debt.
---
Thursday, February 5, 2009
The paradox of debt
From Princeton University economist Paul Krugman:
Consumers are pulling back because they’ve realized that they’re too far in debt. The economy is shrinking in large part because consumers are pulling back. And the result, almost surely, is to leave household balance sheets worse than ever. I can’t do this accurately until the Federal Reserve’s flow of funds data have been updated, but almost without question the ratio of household debt to personal income has been rising, not falling, as consumers try to save more.
---
We have all the power necessary to end debt slavery to the masters of money manipulation. All we must do is STOP consuming. STOP being predictable cattle (sheeple) for those who would prey upon the weak among us.
Here is what's being addressed by Anonymous & A99. I support this movement 110% Click the link for the full, heartwarming, story.
This Flag Day, Tuesday June 14th, we will launch a non-violent movement with this list of demands:
* End the campaign finance and lobbying racket
* Break up the Fed & Too Big to Fail banks
* Enforce RICO laws against organized criminal class
* Order Ben Bernanke to step down
---
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (click for full discussion)
The Paradox of Thrift
The paradox of thrift (or paradox of saving) is a paradox of economics, popularized by John Maynard Keynes, though it had been stated as early as 1714 in The Fable of the Bees,[1] and similar sentiments date to antiquity.[2][3] The paradox states that if everyone tries to save more money during times of recession, then aggregate demand will fall and will in turn lower total savings in the population because of the decrease in consumption and economic growth. The paradox is, narrowly speaking, that total savings may fall even when individual savings attempt to rise, and, broadly speaking, that increases in savings may be harmful to an economy.[4] Both the narrow and broad claims are paradoxical within the assumption underlying the fallacy of composition, namely that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole. The narrow claim transparently contradicts this assumption, and the broad one does so by implication, because while individual thrift is generally averred to be good for the economy, the paradox of thrift holds that collective thrift may be bad for the economy.
The paradox of thrift is a central component of Keynesian economics, and has formed part of mainstream economics since the late 1940s, though it is criticized on a number of grounds.
The argument is that, in equilibrium, total income (and thus demand) must equal total output, and that total investment must equal total saving. Assuming that saving rises faster as a function of income than the relationship between investment and output, then an increase in the marginal propensity to save, ceteris paribus, will move the equilibrium point at which income equals output and investment equals savings to lower values.
In this form it represents a prisoner's dilemma as saving is beneficial to each individual but deleterious to the general population. This is a "paradox" because it runs contrary to intuition. One who does not know about the paradox of thrift would fall into a fallacy of composition wherein one generalizes what is perceived to be true for an individual within the economy to the overall population. Although exercising thrift may be good for an individual by enabling that individual to save for a "rainy day", it may not be good for the economy as a whole.
Overview
This paradox can be explained by analyzing the place, and impact, of increased savings in an economy. If a population saves more money (that is the marginal propensity to save increases across all income levels), then total revenues for companies will decline. This decrease in economic growth means fewer salary increases and perhaps downsizing. Eventually the population's total savings will have remained the same or even declined because of lower incomes and a weaker economy. This paradox is based on the proposition, put forth in Keynesian economics, that many economic downturns are demand based.
History
While the paradox of thrift was popularized by Keynes, and is often attributed to him,[2] it was stated by a number of others prior to Keynes, and the proposition that spending may help and saving may hurt an economy dates to antiquity; similar sentiments occur in the Bible verse:
There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to poverty.
—Proverbs 11:24
which has found occasional use as an epigram in underconsumptionist writings.[2][5][6][7]
Keynes himself notes the appearance of the paradox in The Fable of the Bees: or, Private Vices, Publick Benefits (1714) by Bernard Mandeville, the title itself hinting at the paradox, and Keynes citing the passage:
As this prudent economy, which some people call Saving, is in private families the most certain method to increase an estate, so some imagine that, whether a country be barren or fruitful, the same method if generally pursued (which they think practicable) will have the same effect upon a whole nation, and that, for example, the English might be much richer than they are, if they would be as frugal as some of their neighbours. This, I think, is an error.
Keynes suggests Adam Smith was referring to this passage when he wrote "What is prudence in the conduct of every private family can scarce be folly in that of a great Kingdom."
The problem of underconsumption and oversaving, as they saw it, was developed by underconsumptionist economists of the 19th century, and the paradox of thrift in the strict sense that "collective attempts to save yield lower overall savings" was explicitly stated by John M. Robertson in his 1892 book The Fallacy of Saving,[8][2] writing:
Had the whole population been alike bent on saving, the total saved would positively have been much less, inasmuch as (other tendencies remaining the same) industrial paralysis would have been reached sooner or oftener, profits would be less, interest much lower, and earnings smaller and more precarious. This ... is no idle paradox, but the strictest economic truth.
—John M. Robertson, The Fallacy of Saving, p. 131–2
Similar ideas were forwarded by William Trufant Foster and Waddill Catchings in the 1920s in The Dilemma of Thrift.
Keynes distinguished between business activity/investment ("Enterprise") and savings ("Thrift") in his Treatise on Money (1930):
...mere abstinence is not enough by itself to build cities or drain fens. ... If Enterprise is afoot, wealth accumulates whatever may be happening to Thrift; and if Enterprise is asleep, wealth decays whatever Thrift may be doing. Thus, Thrift may be the handmaiden of Enterprise.
But equally she may not. And, perhaps, even usually she is not.
and stated the paradox of thrift in The General Theory, 1936:
For although the amount of his own saving is unlikely to have any significant influence on his own income, the reactions of the amount of his consumption on the incomes of others makes it impossible for all individuals simultaneously to save any given sums. Every such attempt to save more by reducing consumption will so affect incomes that the attempt necessarily defeats itself. It is, of course, just as impossible for the community as a whole to save less than the amount of current investment, since the attempt to do so will necessarily raise incomes to a level at which the sums which individuals choose to save add up to a figure exactly equal to the amount of investment.
—John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Chapter 7, p. 84
The theory is referred to as the "paradox of thrift" in Samuelson's influential Economics of 1948, which popularized the term.
Criticism
Within mainstream economics, non-Keynesian economists, particularly neoclassical economists, criticize this theory on three principal grounds.
The first criticism is that, following Say's law and the related circle of ideas, if demand slackens, prices will fall (barring government intervention), and the resulting lower price will stimulate demand (though at lower profit or cost – possibly even lower wages). This criticism in turn has been questioned by Keynesian economists, who reject Say's law and instead point to evidence of sticky prices as a reason why prices do not fall in recession; this remains a debated point.
The second criticism is that savings represent loanable funds, particularly at banks, assuming the savings are held at banks, rather than currency itself being held ("stashed under one's mattress"). Thus an accumulation of savings yields an increase in potential lending, which will lower interest rates and stimulate borrowing. So a decline in consumer spending is offset by an increase in lending, and subsequent investment and spending.
Two caveats are added to this criticism. Firstly, if savings are held as cash, rather than being loaned out (directly by savers, or indirectly, as via bank deposits), then loanable funds do not increase, and thus a recession may be caused – but this is due to holding cash, not to saving per se.[9] Secondly, banks themselves may hold cash, rather than loaning it out, which results in the growth of excess reserves – funds on deposit but not loaned out. This is argued to occur in liquidity trap situations, when interest rates are at a zero lower bound (or near it) and savings still exceed investment demand. Within Keynesian economics, the desire to hold currency rather than loan it out is discussed under liquidity preference.
Third, the paradox assumes a closed economy in which savings are not invested abroad (to fund exports of local production abroad). Thus, while the paradox may hold at the global level, it need not hold at the local or national level: if one nation increases savings, this can be offset by trading partners consuming a greater amount relative to their own production, i.e., if the saving nation increases exports, and its partners increase imports. This criticism is not very controversial, and is generally accepted by Keynesian economists as well,[10] who refer to it as "exporting one's way out of a recession". They further note that this frequently occurs in concert with currency devaluation[11] (hence increasing exports and decreasing imports), and cannot work as a solution to a global problem, because the global economy is a closed system – not every nation can increase exports.
[edit] Austrian criticism
Within heterodox economics, the paradox was criticized by Austrian economist, Nobel Prize winner Friedrich Hayek in a 1929 article, "The 'Paradox' of Savings", attacking the paradox as proposed by Foster and Catchings.[12] Hayek and later Austrian economists agree that if a population saves more money, total revenues for companies will decline, but they deny the assertion that lower revenues lead to lower economic growth.
Austrians believe the productivity of the economy is determined by the consumption-investment ratio, and the demand for money only tells us the degree to which people prefer the utility of money (protection against uncertainty) to the utility of goods. They argue that hoarding of money (an increase in the demand for money) does not necessarily lead to a change in the population's consumption-investment ratio;[13] instead, it may simply be reflected in the price level. for example if spending falls by half, but prices also uniformly fall by half, leaving the consumption-investment ratio and productivity unchanged.
[edit] Related concepts
The paradox of thrift has been related to the debt deflation theory of economic crises, being called "the paradox of debt"[14] – people save not to increase savings, but rather to pay down debt. As well, a paradox of toil has been proposed: wage flexibility in a liquidity trap may lead not only to lower wages, but lower employment.[15]
Greg
Thursday, June 16, 2011
The Coming Greek Default
---
ATHENS, Greece is once again in turmoil. The Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou is struggling to ensure Parliamentary approval for a critical austerity bill. On June 15th, just one day after the turn of the Economic Confidence Modeltm, the Prime Minister said he would reshuffle his Cabinet and seek a vote of confidence for his new government after coalition talks with opposition parties failed. There is simply no way out. This is the price they had to pay to be part of the Euro. Greece surrendered its ability to naturally offset its debt by allowing the currency to depreciate. That is how ALL governments get out of their debts – inflate their way out! The US is no exception. In 1980, the national debt was $1 trillion. Today, that is less than the annual budget. A trillion isn’t what it used to be any more. With Greece unable to inflate its way out, it is forced to now pay in Euros, as the economy declines, the REAL debt rises making the austerity measures even harsher. The Euro is a complete failure because there was no national identity in Europe. That was the key to making the Euro work. Absent that – sorry; it was a nice dream while it lasted. It has been a brief shining moment of bravado. But it’s over now and it’s time to wake up or else the dream will transform into an economic nightmare and tear down the European monetary system brick by brick.
Continue reading
ATHENS, Greece is once again in turmoil. The Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou is struggling to ensure Parliamentary approval for a critical austerity bill. On June 15th, just one day after the turn of the Economic Confidence Modeltm, the Prime Minister said he would reshuffle his Cabinet and seek a vote of confidence for his new government after coalition talks with opposition parties failed. There is simply no way out. This is the price they had to pay to be part of the Euro. Greece surrendered its ability to naturally offset its debt by allowing the currency to depreciate. That is how ALL governments get out of their debts – inflate their way out! The US is no exception. In 1980, the national debt was $1 trillion. Today, that is less than the annual budget. A trillion isn’t what it used to be any more. With Greece unable to inflate its way out, it is forced to now pay in Euros, as the economy declines, the REAL debt rises making the austerity measures even harsher. The Euro is a complete failure because there was no national identity in Europe. That was the key to making the Euro work. Absent that – sorry; it was a nice dream while it lasted. It has been a brief shining moment of bravado. But it’s over now and it’s time to wake up or else the dream will transform into an economic nightmare and tear down the European monetary system brick by brick.
Continue reading
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
#A99 needs your support #OpESR #Anonymous REAL issues facing our #economy & country are finally being addressed by someone! True #Patriots
---
The REAL issues facing our economy & country are finally being addressed by someone! Please do all you can to support this movement..
On the web http://www.AmpedStatus.org/network/groups/a99
---
The REAL issues facing our economy & country are finally being addressed by someone! Please do all you can to support this movement..
On the web http://www.AmpedStatus.org/network/groups/a99
---
Reich is Right
---
As much as it might pain me to say so Reich is right on this one for the most part.. I don't want to believe that government officials & Federal Reserve Bankers are so ignorant they they don't understand that what we have here is a demand issue but.. they NEVER talk about it! At least not outside of talking about how to manipulate spending higher with cash for clunkers, home buyers credits and 1% interest earnings on savings..
---
Why the President Must Come Up with Demand-Side Solutions, and not go Over to the Supply Side
Author: Robert Reich · June 10th, 2011
“I am concerned about the fact that the recovery that we’re on is not producing jobs as fast as I want it to happen,” President Obama said Tuesday, amid the flood of bad economic news, including last Friday’s alarming jobs report.
Does this mean we’re about to see a bold package of ideas from the White House for spurring growth of jobs and wages? Sadly, it doesn’t seem so.
Obama says he’s interested in exploring with Republicans extending some of the measures that were part of that tax-cut package “to make sure that we get this recovery up and running in a robust way.”
Accordingly, the White House is mulling a temporary cut in the payroll taxes businesses pay on wages. White House advisors figure this may appeal to Republican lawmakers who have been discussing the same idea. It would, in essence, match the 2 percent reduction in employee contributions to payroll taxes this year, enacted as part of the deal to extend the Bush tax cuts.
Other ideas under consideration at the White House include a corporate tax cut, accompanied by the closing of some corporate tax loopholes.
Can we get real for a moment? Businesses don’t need more financial incentives. They’re already sitting on a vast cash horde estimated to be upwards of $1.6 trillion. Besides, large and middle-sized companies are having no difficulty getting loans at bargain-basement rates, courtesy of the Fed.
In consequence, businesses are already spending as much as they can justify economically. Almost two-thirds of the measly growth in the economy so far this year has come from businesses rebuilding their inventories. But without more consumer spending, businesses won’t spend more. A robust economy can’t be built on inventory replacements.
The problem isn’t on the supply side. It’s on the demand side. Businesses are reluctant to spend more and create more jobs because there aren’t enough consumers out there able and willing to buy what businesses have to sell.
The reason consumers aren’t buying is because consumers’ paychecks are dropping, adjusted for inflation. And job losses are mounting. The 83,000 new private-sector jobs created in May represent a net loss because 125,000 jobs are needed merely to keep up with an expanding labor force. The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment benefits edged higher last week.
At the same time, many Americans are falling behind in their mortgage payments. And housing prices continue to drop – making homeowners feel even poorer.
Close to 60 percent of the half-trillion drop in household debt since the depth of recession has been defaults rather than repayments. This makes it harder for people who’d like to enter the housing market to get new mortgage loans, or for anyone to refinance. Other consumer debt burdens are rising. On Tuesday the Fed reported consumer credit outstanding rose in April – mostly from record-high levels of student-loan debt and an up-tick in credit-card borrowing due to food and gas price increases outpacing wage gains.
All this translates into a continuing crisis on the demand side. Consumers can’t and won’t buy more. Between January and March, sales grew just .15 percent around the country – perilously close to no growth at all. May sales look even worse. Chain stores are reporting weaker sales. Consumer confidence has dropped sharply.
How to get jobs back, then? By reigniting demand. Put more money in consumers’ pockets and help them renegotiate their mortgage loans.
For example: Enlarge the payroll tax break for workers — not just for employers. Exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes for a year. Create a WPA for the long-term unemployed. Allow distressed homeowners to declare bankruptcy on their primary residence, thereby giving them more clout with lenders to reorganize their mortgage loans. Lend federal money to (rather than bail out) states and cities that are now firing platoons of teachers, fire fighters, and other workers because state and local coffers are empty.
But we’re not hearing any of these sorts of demand-side solutions from the White House. In seeking Republican votes, Obama is putting forth Republican supply-side ideas – lowering the employer costs of hiring, cutting corporate taxes – that have nothing to do with this demand-side crisis. He may attract some Republican votes for these, but what’s the point if they’re irrelevant to the real problem?
The President’s putative embrace of the false notion that businesses need more financial incentives in order to hire also risks giving legitimacy to other Republican supply-side nostrums being pushed by House Republicans and GOP presidential aspirants. On Tuesday, Tim Pawlenty called for lower taxes on corporations (down to 15 percent from the current 35 percent), and lower taxes on the rich (to 25 percent from the current 35). Newt Gingirch wants to lower corperate income taxes to 12.5 percent and eliminate the estate tax altogether. And so on.
Better that the President advance ideas that work, and go to battle over them.
Supply-side economics doesn’t work. It’s been tried for thirty years, to no avail. And now, when our continuing economic crisis is so palpably being driven by inadequate demand, it’s bogus than ever.
The last thing we need is for the President to go over to the supply side.
This post originally appeared at Robert Reich’s Blog and is reproduced here without permission.
As much as it might pain me to say so Reich is right on this one for the most part.. I don't want to believe that government officials & Federal Reserve Bankers are so ignorant they they don't understand that what we have here is a demand issue but.. they NEVER talk about it! At least not outside of talking about how to manipulate spending higher with cash for clunkers, home buyers credits and 1% interest earnings on savings..
---
Why the President Must Come Up with Demand-Side Solutions, and not go Over to the Supply Side
Author: Robert Reich · June 10th, 2011
“I am concerned about the fact that the recovery that we’re on is not producing jobs as fast as I want it to happen,” President Obama said Tuesday, amid the flood of bad economic news, including last Friday’s alarming jobs report.
Does this mean we’re about to see a bold package of ideas from the White House for spurring growth of jobs and wages? Sadly, it doesn’t seem so.
Obama says he’s interested in exploring with Republicans extending some of the measures that were part of that tax-cut package “to make sure that we get this recovery up and running in a robust way.”
Accordingly, the White House is mulling a temporary cut in the payroll taxes businesses pay on wages. White House advisors figure this may appeal to Republican lawmakers who have been discussing the same idea. It would, in essence, match the 2 percent reduction in employee contributions to payroll taxes this year, enacted as part of the deal to extend the Bush tax cuts.
Other ideas under consideration at the White House include a corporate tax cut, accompanied by the closing of some corporate tax loopholes.
Can we get real for a moment? Businesses don’t need more financial incentives. They’re already sitting on a vast cash horde estimated to be upwards of $1.6 trillion. Besides, large and middle-sized companies are having no difficulty getting loans at bargain-basement rates, courtesy of the Fed.
In consequence, businesses are already spending as much as they can justify economically. Almost two-thirds of the measly growth in the economy so far this year has come from businesses rebuilding their inventories. But without more consumer spending, businesses won’t spend more. A robust economy can’t be built on inventory replacements.
The problem isn’t on the supply side. It’s on the demand side. Businesses are reluctant to spend more and create more jobs because there aren’t enough consumers out there able and willing to buy what businesses have to sell.
The reason consumers aren’t buying is because consumers’ paychecks are dropping, adjusted for inflation. And job losses are mounting. The 83,000 new private-sector jobs created in May represent a net loss because 125,000 jobs are needed merely to keep up with an expanding labor force. The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment benefits edged higher last week.
At the same time, many Americans are falling behind in their mortgage payments. And housing prices continue to drop – making homeowners feel even poorer.
Close to 60 percent of the half-trillion drop in household debt since the depth of recession has been defaults rather than repayments. This makes it harder for people who’d like to enter the housing market to get new mortgage loans, or for anyone to refinance. Other consumer debt burdens are rising. On Tuesday the Fed reported consumer credit outstanding rose in April – mostly from record-high levels of student-loan debt and an up-tick in credit-card borrowing due to food and gas price increases outpacing wage gains.
All this translates into a continuing crisis on the demand side. Consumers can’t and won’t buy more. Between January and March, sales grew just .15 percent around the country – perilously close to no growth at all. May sales look even worse. Chain stores are reporting weaker sales. Consumer confidence has dropped sharply.
How to get jobs back, then? By reigniting demand. Put more money in consumers’ pockets and help them renegotiate their mortgage loans.
For example: Enlarge the payroll tax break for workers — not just for employers. Exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes for a year. Create a WPA for the long-term unemployed. Allow distressed homeowners to declare bankruptcy on their primary residence, thereby giving them more clout with lenders to reorganize their mortgage loans. Lend federal money to (rather than bail out) states and cities that are now firing platoons of teachers, fire fighters, and other workers because state and local coffers are empty.
But we’re not hearing any of these sorts of demand-side solutions from the White House. In seeking Republican votes, Obama is putting forth Republican supply-side ideas – lowering the employer costs of hiring, cutting corporate taxes – that have nothing to do with this demand-side crisis. He may attract some Republican votes for these, but what’s the point if they’re irrelevant to the real problem?
The President’s putative embrace of the false notion that businesses need more financial incentives in order to hire also risks giving legitimacy to other Republican supply-side nostrums being pushed by House Republicans and GOP presidential aspirants. On Tuesday, Tim Pawlenty called for lower taxes on corporations (down to 15 percent from the current 35 percent), and lower taxes on the rich (to 25 percent from the current 35). Newt Gingirch wants to lower corperate income taxes to 12.5 percent and eliminate the estate tax altogether. And so on.
Better that the President advance ideas that work, and go to battle over them.
Supply-side economics doesn’t work. It’s been tried for thirty years, to no avail. And now, when our continuing economic crisis is so palpably being driven by inadequate demand, it’s bogus than ever.
The last thing we need is for the President to go over to the supply side.
This post originally appeared at Robert Reich’s Blog and is reproduced here without permission.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Higher coffee [commodity] prices are brewing - dollar devaluation
---
I want to focus on one short paragraph of this story.. However a link to the full story is also provided below
---
"Spurring the run-up in bean prices is a combination of bad weather in coffee-growing regions, increased demand from developing countries such as China and intense speculation in the commodities markets, experts said."
---
[Who ARE these so-called "experts" who seem to have no CLUE about the ongoing devaluation of our currency?!]
Have you noticed as far as the media is concerned higher food and other commodity prices are always caused by the same thing? Bad weather, check. Increased demand from China, check. Those evil speculators / traders, check.
NEVER do you see any mention of United States Federal Reserve (treasury / government) monetary policy. Which, in my opinion, has been and is designed to forcefully drive down the value of the dollar thereby intentionally creating inflation in the economy.
Check out this Forbes story from 2009..
Excerpt
"I still contend that we are headed for a massive dollar devaluation, regardless of the means--whether it is planned and accomplished by central banks, or by the markets reacting to huge government money printing that force the devaluation. Unlike during the Great Depression, we are no longer on the gold standard. Currencies are free to float and can be manipulated by central banks or politicians and moved by markets. In fact, I believe that one or both has already begun."
Full link Cue The Helicopters, Dollar Devaluation Is Here
The ongoing, intentional devaluing of the dollar has to be one of the best kept secrets of modern times. Will a day come when the Federal Reserve Bank, treasury, government and complicit corporate media will be held accountable for this action?
I have my doubts..
Greg
Full link to coffee story Higher coffee prices are brewing
I want to focus on one short paragraph of this story.. However a link to the full story is also provided below
---
"Spurring the run-up in bean prices is a combination of bad weather in coffee-growing regions, increased demand from developing countries such as China and intense speculation in the commodities markets, experts said."
---
[Who ARE these so-called "experts" who seem to have no CLUE about the ongoing devaluation of our currency?!]
Have you noticed as far as the media is concerned higher food and other commodity prices are always caused by the same thing? Bad weather, check. Increased demand from China, check. Those evil speculators / traders, check.
NEVER do you see any mention of United States Federal Reserve (treasury / government) monetary policy. Which, in my opinion, has been and is designed to forcefully drive down the value of the dollar thereby intentionally creating inflation in the economy.
Check out this Forbes story from 2009..
Excerpt
"I still contend that we are headed for a massive dollar devaluation, regardless of the means--whether it is planned and accomplished by central banks, or by the markets reacting to huge government money printing that force the devaluation. Unlike during the Great Depression, we are no longer on the gold standard. Currencies are free to float and can be manipulated by central banks or politicians and moved by markets. In fact, I believe that one or both has already begun."
Full link Cue The Helicopters, Dollar Devaluation Is Here
The ongoing, intentional devaluing of the dollar has to be one of the best kept secrets of modern times. Will a day come when the Federal Reserve Bank, treasury, government and complicit corporate media will be held accountable for this action?
I have my doubts..
Greg
Full link to coffee story Higher coffee prices are brewing
Monday, June 13, 2011
We ARE all Animals, after all
---
This should come as no surprise to anyone.. I'm pretty sure they even still teach this in what passes for our "education" system.
If we consider this thoughtfully for a few minutes perhaps we can learn something about ourselves..
Are Humans Animals?
From Answers.com
Yes, humans are animals. The human's phylum is Chordata (vertebrate). The human's class is mammalia. It's order is primate (the same as apes). It's family is Hominidae (apes that have no tail and can gather food with their hands.) The Human's sub-family is Homininae. It's tribe is Hominini. It's genus is Homo and it's specie is scientifically named Homo Sapiens.
The following excerpts are from Wikipedia on Humans (See the link for a much deeper discussion) My own highlights of material I, personally, find interesting to ponder are denoted in this way [*section*]
Human evolution is characterized by a number of important changes—morphological, developmental, physiological, and behavioral—which have taken place since the split between the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees. The first major morphological change was the evolution of a bipedal locomotor adaptation from an arboreal or semi-arboreal one,[30] with all its attendant adaptations (a valgus knee, low intermembral index (long legs relative to the arms), reduced upper-body strength).
The human species developed a much larger brain than that of other primates – typically 1,400 cm³ in modern humans, over twice the size of that of a chimpanzee or gorilla. The pattern of human postnatal brain growth differs from that of other apes (heterochrony), and [*allows for extended periods of social learning and language acquisition in juvenile humans*]. Physical anthropologists argue that the differences between the structure of human brains and those of other apes are even more significant than their differences in size.
---
The out of Africa migration is estimated to have occurred about 70,000 years BP. [*Modern humans subsequently spread to all continents*], replacing earlier hominids: they inhabited Eurasia and Oceania by 40,000 years BP, and the Americas at least 14,500 years BP.[35] A popular theory is that they displaced Homo neanderthalensis and other species descended from Homo erectus[36] (which had inhabited Eurasia as early as 2 million years ago) through more successful reproduction and [*competition for resources*].[37] The exact manner or extent of the coexistence and interaction of these species is unknown and continues to be a controversial subject.[citation needed]
---
Transition to civilization
Until c. 10,000 years ago, [*most humans lived as hunter-gatherers*]. They generally [*lived in small nomadic groups*] known as band societies. The advent of agriculture prompted the [*Neolithic Revolution*], when access to food surplus led to the formation of permanent human settlements, the domestication of animals and the use of metal tools for the first time in history. [*Agriculture encouraged trade and cooperation, and led to complex society*]. Because of the significance of this date for human society, it is the epoch of the Holocene calendar or Human Era.
About 6,000 years ago,[Interesting link on man's 6,000 year rule] the first proto-states developed in Mesopotamia, Egypt's Nile Valley and the Indus Valleys. [*Military forces were formed for protection, and government bureaucracies for administration*]. States cooperated and [*competed for resources, in some cases waging wars*]. Around 2,000–3,000 years ago, some states, such as Persia, India, China, Rome, and Greece, developed through conquest into the first expansive empires. Influential religions, such as Judaism, originating in West Asia, and Hinduism, a religious tradition that originated in South Asia, also rose to prominence at this time.
[*The late Middle Ages saw the rise of revolutionary ideas and technologies*]. In China, an advanced and urbanized society promoted innovations and sciences, such as printing and seed drilling. In India, major advancements were made in mathematics, philosophy, religion and metallurgy. The Islamic Golden Age saw major scientific advancements in Muslim empires. In Europe, the rediscovery of classical learning and inventions such as the printing press led to the Renaissance in the 14th and 15th centuries. Over the next 500 years, exploration and colonialism brought great parts of the world under European control, leading to later struggles for independence. The Scientific Revolution in the 17th century and the Industrial Revolution in the 18th–19th centuries promoted major innovations in transport, such as the railway and automobile; energy development, such as coal and electricity; and government, such as representative democracy and Communism.
With the advent of the Information Age at the end of the 20th century, [*modern humans live in a world that has become increasingly globalized*] and interconnected. As of 2010, almost 2 billion humans are able to communicate with each other via the Internet,[40] and 3.3 billion by mobile phone subscriptions.[41]
Although interconnection between humans has encouraged the growth of science, art, discussion, and technology, it has also led to culture clashes and the development and use of weapons of mass destruction. Human civilization has led to environmental destruction and pollution, producing an ongoing mass extinction of other forms of life called the holocene extinction event,[42] that may be further accelerated by global warming in the future.[43]
---
Habitat and population
Early [*human settlements were dependent on proximity to water and, depending on the lifestyle, other natural resources used for subsistence*], such as populations of animal prey for hunting and arable land for growing crops and grazing livestock. But humans have a great capacity for altering their habitats by means of technology; through irrigation, urban planning, construction, transport, manufacturing goods, deforestation and desertification. Deliberate habitat alteration is often done with the [*goals of increasing material wealth*], increasing thermal comfort, improving the amount of food available, improving aesthetics, or [*improving ease of access to resources*] or other human settlements. With the advent of large-scale trade and transport infrastructure, proximity to these resources has become unnecessary, and in many places, these factors are no longer a driving force behind the growth and decline of a population. Nonetheless, the manner in which a habitat is altered is often a major determinant in population change.
Technology has allowed humans to colonize all of the continents and adapt to virtually all climates. Within the last century, humans have explored Antarctica, the ocean depths, and outer space, although large-scale colonization of these environments is not yet feasible. With a population of over six billion, humans are among the most numerous of the large mammals. Most humans (61%) live in Asia. The remainder live in the Americas (14%), Africa (14%), Europe (11%), and Oceania (0.5%).
---
Humans have had a dramatic effect on the environment. As humans are rarely preyed upon, they have been described as superpredators.
---
Diet
Humans are omnivorous, capable of consuming a wide variety of plant and animal material.[84][85] Varying with available food sources in regions of habitation, and also varying with cultural and religious norms, human groups have adopted a range of diets, from purely vegetarian to primarily carnivorous.
Until the development of agriculture approximately 10,000 years ago, [*Homo sapiens employed a hunter-gatherer method as their sole means of food collection*]. This involved combining stationary food sources (such as fruits, grains, tubers, and mushrooms, insect larvae and aquatic molluscs) with wild game, which must be hunted and killed in order to be consumed.
---
Consciousness and thought
Humans are one of only nine species known to pass the mirror test—which tests whether an animal recognizes its reflection as an image of itself—along with all the great apes (gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, bonobos), Bottlenose dolphins, Asian elephants, European Magpies, and Orcas.[98] Most human children will pass the mirror test at 18 months old.[99] However, the usefulness of this test as a true test of consciousness has been disputed, and this may be a matter of degree rather than a sharp divide. Monkeys have been trained to apply abstract rules in tasks.[100]
The human brain perceives the external world through the senses, and each individual human is influenced greatly by his or her experiences, leading to subjective views of existence and the passage of time. Humans are variously said to [*possess consciousness, self-awareness, and a mind*], which correspond roughly to the mental processes of thought. These are said to [*possess qualities such as self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive the relationship between oneself and one's environment*].
---
Motivation and emotion
[*Motivation is the driving force of desire behind all deliberate actions of humans*]. Motivation is based on emotion—specifically, on the search for satisfaction (positive emotional experiences), and the avoidance of conflict. [*Positive and negative is defined by the individual brain state*], which may be influenced by social norms: a person may be driven to self-injury or violence because his brain is conditioned to create a positive response to these actions. Motivation is important because it is involved in the performance of all learned responses. Within psychology, conflict avoidance and the libido are seen to be primary motivators. Within economics, motivation is often seen to be based on incentives; these may be financial, moral, or coercive. Religions generally posit divine or demonic influences.
Happiness, or the state of being happy, is a human emotional condition. The definition of happiness is a common philosophical topic. Some people might define it as the best condition that a human can have—[*a condition of mental and physical health*]. Others define it as [*freedom from want and distress*]; consciousness of the good order of things; assurance of one's place in the universe or society.
[*Emotion has a significant influence on, or can even be said to control, human behavior*], though historically many cultures and philosophers have for various reasons discouraged allowing this influence to go unchecked.
When humans function in civilized tandem, it has been noted that uninhibited acting on extreme emotion can lead to social disorder and crime.
Society and culture
---
Humans are social beings. In comparisons with animalia, humans are regarded like the primates for their social qualities. But beyond any other creature, [*humans are adept at utilizing systems of communication for self-expression, the exchange of ideas, and organization*], and as such have created complex social structures composed of many cooperating and competing groups. Human groups range from families to nations. [*Social interactions between humans have established an extremely wide variety of values, social norms, and rituals, which together form the basis of human society*].
[*Culture is defined here as patterns of complex symbolic behavior*], i.e. all behavior that is not innate but which has to be learned through social interaction with others; such as the use of distinctive material and symbolic systems, including language, ritual, social organization, traditions, beliefs and technology.
Society, government, and politics
---
Society is the system of organizations and institutions arising from interaction between humans. A state is an organized political community occupying a definite territory, having an organized government, and possessing internal and external sovereignty. Recognition of the state's claim to independence by other states, enabling it to enter into international agreements, is often important to the establishment of its statehood.
//Special note// [*The "state" can also be defined in terms of domestic conditions, specifically, as conceptualized by Max Weber, "a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the 'legitimate' use of physical force within a given territory*]."
[*Government can be defined as the political means of creating and enforcing laws; typically via a bureaucratic hierarchy*]. Politics is the process by which decisions are made within groups; this process often involves conflict as well as compromise. Although the term is generally applied to behavior within governments, politics is also observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. Many different political systems exist, as do many different ways of understanding them, and many definitions overlap. Examples of governments include monarchy, Communist state, military dictatorship, theocracy, and liberal democracy, the last of which is considered dominant today. All of these issues have a direct relationship with economics.
Trade and economics
---
Trade is the voluntary exchange of goods and services, and is a form of economics. A mechanism that allows trade is called a market. [*The original form of trade was barter, the direct exchange of goods and services*].
Modern traders instead generally negotiate through a medium of exchange, such as money. As a result, buying can be separated from selling, or earning. The invention of money (and later credit, paper money and non-physical money) greatly simplified and promoted trade.
Economics is a social science which studies the production, distribution, trade, and consumption of goods and services. Economics focuses on measurable variables, and is broadly divided into two main branches: microeconomics, which deals with individual agents, such as households and businesses, and macroeconomics, which considers the economy as a whole, in which case it considers aggregate supply and demand for money, capital and commodities. Aspects receiving particular attention in economics are resource allocation, production, distribution, trade, and competition. Economic logic is increasingly applied to any problem that involves choice under scarcity or determining economic value.
War
---
War is a state of widespread conflict between states or other large groups of humans, which is [*characterized by the use of lethal violence between combatants and/or upon civilians*]. (Humans also engage in lesser conflicts, such as brawls, riots, revolts, and melees. A revolution may or may not involve warfare.) [*It is estimated that during the 20th century between 167 and 188 million humans died as a result of war*]. A common perception of war is a series of military campaigns between at least two opposing sides involving a dispute over sovereignty, territory, resources, religion, or other issues. A war between internal elements of a state is a civil war.
There have been a wide variety of rapidly advancing tactics throughout the history of war, ranging from conventional war to asymmetric warfare to total war and unconventional warfare. Techniques include hand to hand combat, the use of ranged weapons, Naval warfare, and, more recently, air support. Military intelligence has often played a key role in determining victory and defeat. [*Propaganda, which often includes information, slanted opinion and disinformation, plays a key role in maintaining unity within a warring group, and/or sowing discord among opponents*].
Note: The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki immediately killed over 120,000 humans.
Spirituality and religion
---
Religion is generally defined as a belief system concerning the supernatural, sacred or divine, and practices, values, institutions and rituals associated with such belief. Some religions also have a moral code. The evolution and the history of the first religions have recently become areas of active scientific investigation.[117][118][119] However, in the course of its development, religion has taken on many forms that vary by culture and individual perspective. Some of the chief questions and issues religions are concerned with include life after death (commonly involving belief in an afterlife), the origin of life, the nature of the universe (religious cosmology) and its ultimate fate (eschatology), and what is moral or immoral. A common source in religions for answers to these questions are beliefs in transcendent divine beings such as deities or a singular God, although not all religions are theistic—many are nontheistic or ambiguous on the topic, particularly among the Eastern religions. [*Spirituality, belief or involvement in matters of the soul or spirit, is one of the many different approaches humans take in trying to answer fundamental questions about humankind's place in the universe, the meaning of life, and the ideal way to live one's life*]. Though these topics have also been addressed by philosophy, and to some extent by science, spirituality is unique in that it focuses on mystical or supernatural concepts such as karma and God.
Although the exact level of religiosity can be hard to measure,[120] [*a majority of humans professes some variety of religious or spiritual belief*], although some are irreligious: that is lacking or rejecting belief in the supernatural or spiritual. Other humans have no religious beliefs and are atheists, scientific skeptics, agnostics or simply non-religious. [*Humanism is a philosophy which seeks to include all of humanity and all issues common to humans*]; it is usually non-religious.
Philosophy and self-reflection
---
Philosophy is a discipline or field of study involving the investigation, analysis, and development of ideas at a general, abstract, or fundamental level. It is the [*discipline searching for a general understanding of reality, reasoning and values*]. Major fields of philosophy include logic, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind, and axiology (which includes ethics and aesthetics).
All animals, living creatures, possess the following
Self-preservation is behavior that ensures the survival of an organism. It is universal among living organisms. In some vertebrates, pain and fear are parts of this mechanism. Pain causes discomfort so that the organism is inclined to stop the pain. Fear causes the organism to seek safety and may cause a release of adrenaline, which has the effect of increased strength and heightened senses such as hearing, smell, and sight.
[*Self-preservation may also be interpreted figuratively; in regard to the coping mechanisms one needs to prevent emotional trauma from distorting the mind*].
Most all cultures, societies, religions of the world believe it will one day come to an end and/or a new beginning..
Eschatology
Or for a rather unique view from a self proclaimed current day prophet you can read 2008 - God's Final Witness
Besides Eschatology many other sources point to the end of the world or the end of one age and beginning of another as on this 2012 page
Thinking, rationalizing animals.. What a scary concept..
Greg
This should come as no surprise to anyone.. I'm pretty sure they even still teach this in what passes for our "education" system.
If we consider this thoughtfully for a few minutes perhaps we can learn something about ourselves..
Are Humans Animals?
From Answers.com
Yes, humans are animals. The human's phylum is Chordata (vertebrate). The human's class is mammalia. It's order is primate (the same as apes). It's family is Hominidae (apes that have no tail and can gather food with their hands.) The Human's sub-family is Homininae. It's tribe is Hominini. It's genus is Homo and it's specie is scientifically named Homo Sapiens.
The following excerpts are from Wikipedia on Humans (See the link for a much deeper discussion) My own highlights of material I, personally, find interesting to ponder are denoted in this way [*section*]
Human evolution is characterized by a number of important changes—morphological, developmental, physiological, and behavioral—which have taken place since the split between the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees. The first major morphological change was the evolution of a bipedal locomotor adaptation from an arboreal or semi-arboreal one,[30] with all its attendant adaptations (a valgus knee, low intermembral index (long legs relative to the arms), reduced upper-body strength).
The human species developed a much larger brain than that of other primates – typically 1,400 cm³ in modern humans, over twice the size of that of a chimpanzee or gorilla. The pattern of human postnatal brain growth differs from that of other apes (heterochrony), and [*allows for extended periods of social learning and language acquisition in juvenile humans*]. Physical anthropologists argue that the differences between the structure of human brains and those of other apes are even more significant than their differences in size.
---
The out of Africa migration is estimated to have occurred about 70,000 years BP. [*Modern humans subsequently spread to all continents*], replacing earlier hominids: they inhabited Eurasia and Oceania by 40,000 years BP, and the Americas at least 14,500 years BP.[35] A popular theory is that they displaced Homo neanderthalensis and other species descended from Homo erectus[36] (which had inhabited Eurasia as early as 2 million years ago) through more successful reproduction and [*competition for resources*].[37] The exact manner or extent of the coexistence and interaction of these species is unknown and continues to be a controversial subject.[citation needed]
---
Transition to civilization
Until c. 10,000 years ago, [*most humans lived as hunter-gatherers*]. They generally [*lived in small nomadic groups*] known as band societies. The advent of agriculture prompted the [*Neolithic Revolution*], when access to food surplus led to the formation of permanent human settlements, the domestication of animals and the use of metal tools for the first time in history. [*Agriculture encouraged trade and cooperation, and led to complex society*]. Because of the significance of this date for human society, it is the epoch of the Holocene calendar or Human Era.
About 6,000 years ago,[Interesting link on man's 6,000 year rule] the first proto-states developed in Mesopotamia, Egypt's Nile Valley and the Indus Valleys. [*Military forces were formed for protection, and government bureaucracies for administration*]. States cooperated and [*competed for resources, in some cases waging wars*]. Around 2,000–3,000 years ago, some states, such as Persia, India, China, Rome, and Greece, developed through conquest into the first expansive empires. Influential religions, such as Judaism, originating in West Asia, and Hinduism, a religious tradition that originated in South Asia, also rose to prominence at this time.
[*The late Middle Ages saw the rise of revolutionary ideas and technologies*]. In China, an advanced and urbanized society promoted innovations and sciences, such as printing and seed drilling. In India, major advancements were made in mathematics, philosophy, religion and metallurgy. The Islamic Golden Age saw major scientific advancements in Muslim empires. In Europe, the rediscovery of classical learning and inventions such as the printing press led to the Renaissance in the 14th and 15th centuries. Over the next 500 years, exploration and colonialism brought great parts of the world under European control, leading to later struggles for independence. The Scientific Revolution in the 17th century and the Industrial Revolution in the 18th–19th centuries promoted major innovations in transport, such as the railway and automobile; energy development, such as coal and electricity; and government, such as representative democracy and Communism.
With the advent of the Information Age at the end of the 20th century, [*modern humans live in a world that has become increasingly globalized*] and interconnected. As of 2010, almost 2 billion humans are able to communicate with each other via the Internet,[40] and 3.3 billion by mobile phone subscriptions.[41]
Although interconnection between humans has encouraged the growth of science, art, discussion, and technology, it has also led to culture clashes and the development and use of weapons of mass destruction. Human civilization has led to environmental destruction and pollution, producing an ongoing mass extinction of other forms of life called the holocene extinction event,[42] that may be further accelerated by global warming in the future.[43]
---
Habitat and population
Early [*human settlements were dependent on proximity to water and, depending on the lifestyle, other natural resources used for subsistence*], such as populations of animal prey for hunting and arable land for growing crops and grazing livestock. But humans have a great capacity for altering their habitats by means of technology; through irrigation, urban planning, construction, transport, manufacturing goods, deforestation and desertification. Deliberate habitat alteration is often done with the [*goals of increasing material wealth*], increasing thermal comfort, improving the amount of food available, improving aesthetics, or [*improving ease of access to resources*] or other human settlements. With the advent of large-scale trade and transport infrastructure, proximity to these resources has become unnecessary, and in many places, these factors are no longer a driving force behind the growth and decline of a population. Nonetheless, the manner in which a habitat is altered is often a major determinant in population change.
Technology has allowed humans to colonize all of the continents and adapt to virtually all climates. Within the last century, humans have explored Antarctica, the ocean depths, and outer space, although large-scale colonization of these environments is not yet feasible. With a population of over six billion, humans are among the most numerous of the large mammals. Most humans (61%) live in Asia. The remainder live in the Americas (14%), Africa (14%), Europe (11%), and Oceania (0.5%).
---
Humans have had a dramatic effect on the environment. As humans are rarely preyed upon, they have been described as superpredators.
---
Diet
Humans are omnivorous, capable of consuming a wide variety of plant and animal material.[84][85] Varying with available food sources in regions of habitation, and also varying with cultural and religious norms, human groups have adopted a range of diets, from purely vegetarian to primarily carnivorous.
Until the development of agriculture approximately 10,000 years ago, [*Homo sapiens employed a hunter-gatherer method as their sole means of food collection*]. This involved combining stationary food sources (such as fruits, grains, tubers, and mushrooms, insect larvae and aquatic molluscs) with wild game, which must be hunted and killed in order to be consumed.
---
Consciousness and thought
Humans are one of only nine species known to pass the mirror test—which tests whether an animal recognizes its reflection as an image of itself—along with all the great apes (gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, bonobos), Bottlenose dolphins, Asian elephants, European Magpies, and Orcas.[98] Most human children will pass the mirror test at 18 months old.[99] However, the usefulness of this test as a true test of consciousness has been disputed, and this may be a matter of degree rather than a sharp divide. Monkeys have been trained to apply abstract rules in tasks.[100]
The human brain perceives the external world through the senses, and each individual human is influenced greatly by his or her experiences, leading to subjective views of existence and the passage of time. Humans are variously said to [*possess consciousness, self-awareness, and a mind*], which correspond roughly to the mental processes of thought. These are said to [*possess qualities such as self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive the relationship between oneself and one's environment*].
---
Motivation and emotion
[*Motivation is the driving force of desire behind all deliberate actions of humans*]. Motivation is based on emotion—specifically, on the search for satisfaction (positive emotional experiences), and the avoidance of conflict. [*Positive and negative is defined by the individual brain state*], which may be influenced by social norms: a person may be driven to self-injury or violence because his brain is conditioned to create a positive response to these actions. Motivation is important because it is involved in the performance of all learned responses. Within psychology, conflict avoidance and the libido are seen to be primary motivators. Within economics, motivation is often seen to be based on incentives; these may be financial, moral, or coercive. Religions generally posit divine or demonic influences.
Happiness, or the state of being happy, is a human emotional condition. The definition of happiness is a common philosophical topic. Some people might define it as the best condition that a human can have—[*a condition of mental and physical health*]. Others define it as [*freedom from want and distress*]; consciousness of the good order of things; assurance of one's place in the universe or society.
[*Emotion has a significant influence on, or can even be said to control, human behavior*], though historically many cultures and philosophers have for various reasons discouraged allowing this influence to go unchecked.
When humans function in civilized tandem, it has been noted that uninhibited acting on extreme emotion can lead to social disorder and crime.
Society and culture
---
Humans are social beings. In comparisons with animalia, humans are regarded like the primates for their social qualities. But beyond any other creature, [*humans are adept at utilizing systems of communication for self-expression, the exchange of ideas, and organization*], and as such have created complex social structures composed of many cooperating and competing groups. Human groups range from families to nations. [*Social interactions between humans have established an extremely wide variety of values, social norms, and rituals, which together form the basis of human society*].
[*Culture is defined here as patterns of complex symbolic behavior*], i.e. all behavior that is not innate but which has to be learned through social interaction with others; such as the use of distinctive material and symbolic systems, including language, ritual, social organization, traditions, beliefs and technology.
Society, government, and politics
---
Society is the system of organizations and institutions arising from interaction between humans. A state is an organized political community occupying a definite territory, having an organized government, and possessing internal and external sovereignty. Recognition of the state's claim to independence by other states, enabling it to enter into international agreements, is often important to the establishment of its statehood.
//Special note// [*The "state" can also be defined in terms of domestic conditions, specifically, as conceptualized by Max Weber, "a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the 'legitimate' use of physical force within a given territory*]."
[*Government can be defined as the political means of creating and enforcing laws; typically via a bureaucratic hierarchy*]. Politics is the process by which decisions are made within groups; this process often involves conflict as well as compromise. Although the term is generally applied to behavior within governments, politics is also observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. Many different political systems exist, as do many different ways of understanding them, and many definitions overlap. Examples of governments include monarchy, Communist state, military dictatorship, theocracy, and liberal democracy, the last of which is considered dominant today. All of these issues have a direct relationship with economics.
Trade and economics
---
Trade is the voluntary exchange of goods and services, and is a form of economics. A mechanism that allows trade is called a market. [*The original form of trade was barter, the direct exchange of goods and services*].
Modern traders instead generally negotiate through a medium of exchange, such as money. As a result, buying can be separated from selling, or earning. The invention of money (and later credit, paper money and non-physical money) greatly simplified and promoted trade.
Economics is a social science which studies the production, distribution, trade, and consumption of goods and services. Economics focuses on measurable variables, and is broadly divided into two main branches: microeconomics, which deals with individual agents, such as households and businesses, and macroeconomics, which considers the economy as a whole, in which case it considers aggregate supply and demand for money, capital and commodities. Aspects receiving particular attention in economics are resource allocation, production, distribution, trade, and competition. Economic logic is increasingly applied to any problem that involves choice under scarcity or determining economic value.
War
---
War is a state of widespread conflict between states or other large groups of humans, which is [*characterized by the use of lethal violence between combatants and/or upon civilians*]. (Humans also engage in lesser conflicts, such as brawls, riots, revolts, and melees. A revolution may or may not involve warfare.) [*It is estimated that during the 20th century between 167 and 188 million humans died as a result of war*]. A common perception of war is a series of military campaigns between at least two opposing sides involving a dispute over sovereignty, territory, resources, religion, or other issues. A war between internal elements of a state is a civil war.
There have been a wide variety of rapidly advancing tactics throughout the history of war, ranging from conventional war to asymmetric warfare to total war and unconventional warfare. Techniques include hand to hand combat, the use of ranged weapons, Naval warfare, and, more recently, air support. Military intelligence has often played a key role in determining victory and defeat. [*Propaganda, which often includes information, slanted opinion and disinformation, plays a key role in maintaining unity within a warring group, and/or sowing discord among opponents*].
Note: The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki immediately killed over 120,000 humans.
Spirituality and religion
---
Religion is generally defined as a belief system concerning the supernatural, sacred or divine, and practices, values, institutions and rituals associated with such belief. Some religions also have a moral code. The evolution and the history of the first religions have recently become areas of active scientific investigation.[117][118][119] However, in the course of its development, religion has taken on many forms that vary by culture and individual perspective. Some of the chief questions and issues religions are concerned with include life after death (commonly involving belief in an afterlife), the origin of life, the nature of the universe (religious cosmology) and its ultimate fate (eschatology), and what is moral or immoral. A common source in religions for answers to these questions are beliefs in transcendent divine beings such as deities or a singular God, although not all religions are theistic—many are nontheistic or ambiguous on the topic, particularly among the Eastern religions. [*Spirituality, belief or involvement in matters of the soul or spirit, is one of the many different approaches humans take in trying to answer fundamental questions about humankind's place in the universe, the meaning of life, and the ideal way to live one's life*]. Though these topics have also been addressed by philosophy, and to some extent by science, spirituality is unique in that it focuses on mystical or supernatural concepts such as karma and God.
Although the exact level of religiosity can be hard to measure,[120] [*a majority of humans professes some variety of religious or spiritual belief*], although some are irreligious: that is lacking or rejecting belief in the supernatural or spiritual. Other humans have no religious beliefs and are atheists, scientific skeptics, agnostics or simply non-religious. [*Humanism is a philosophy which seeks to include all of humanity and all issues common to humans*]; it is usually non-religious.
Philosophy and self-reflection
---
Philosophy is a discipline or field of study involving the investigation, analysis, and development of ideas at a general, abstract, or fundamental level. It is the [*discipline searching for a general understanding of reality, reasoning and values*]. Major fields of philosophy include logic, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind, and axiology (which includes ethics and aesthetics).
All animals, living creatures, possess the following
Self-preservation is behavior that ensures the survival of an organism. It is universal among living organisms. In some vertebrates, pain and fear are parts of this mechanism. Pain causes discomfort so that the organism is inclined to stop the pain. Fear causes the organism to seek safety and may cause a release of adrenaline, which has the effect of increased strength and heightened senses such as hearing, smell, and sight.
[*Self-preservation may also be interpreted figuratively; in regard to the coping mechanisms one needs to prevent emotional trauma from distorting the mind*].
Most all cultures, societies, religions of the world believe it will one day come to an end and/or a new beginning..
Eschatology
Or for a rather unique view from a self proclaimed current day prophet you can read 2008 - God's Final Witness
Besides Eschatology many other sources point to the end of the world or the end of one age and beginning of another as on this 2012 page
Thinking, rationalizing animals.. What a scary concept..
Greg
Friday, June 10, 2011
Your Taxes Already Went Up!
---
I have been talking about this for a little while now because I want people to be aware of it. And also aware of the facts about how our government in the USA operates..
The so-called obama tax cut for 95% of Americans was introduced to HIDE a rather large tax increase that has already occurred.
The federal withholding tax went up for everyone this year.
The 2% cut to Social Security withholding serves two purposes.. It allows obama to say, truthfully, that he gave everyone a tax cut. And, number two, it protects tax refunds "for this year". So the sheeple who use large tax refunds as a savings account will still see those large refunds this year. Even though they have already experienced a tax increase that they are heretofore unaware of. (You KNOW you shouldn't do that because it's an interest free loan to the government. Pay YOURSELF first!)
The 2% Social Security tax cut vanishes after this year. However the increase in federal withholding will remain in effect. This means your taxes will increase by around 2% next year. This even though all you have heard about from the government and the main stream media is that you received a tax cut!
This brings up another issue that really bothers me about this..
Most all economists have been and continue saying that Americans have that 2% Social Security tax cut available as additional expendable income (an average of $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 this year). These economists also often state that the aforementioned tax cut should help consumer spending this year.
The increase in the federal withholding tax was designed to hide the fact that a George Bush tax deduction was discontinued last year. The disappearance of that Bush tax deduction would have caused tax refunds to be smaller this year. Which would negatively effect consumer spending. So.. the federal withholding tax was increased so sheeple, who depend on large tax refunds, would overpay their taxes to the federal government this year which would hide the elimination of the Bush tax cut by leaving federal income tax refunds pretty much unaffected.
So. The 2% Social Security tax cut this year in effect hides the fact that the federal withholding tax went up.
When that tax cut is eliminated next year your taxes will go up equivalent to the amount of the increased tax withholding.
So playing with the tax code results in the federal withholding tax held against the 2% Social Security tax cut = very close to a wash for most people, depending on income and tax bracket. Compare your net check amount now to the same period last year and you will see that it hasn't gone up or down much at all but should be relatively close to the same.
So my question is this..
Do professional economists not KNOW these important facts? Which would bring the intelligence of the entire industry into question. (If they have such ;)
Or DO they know about it? Are they fully aware of it and in collusion with the federal government to hide the facts from the American people? Which would make them complicit in the cover-up of a tax increase. Which would bring the integrity of the entire industry into question. (Again, if they have such ;)
Either way professional economists, in this particular instance are either stupid or intentionally obfuscating the truth.
I know this post is somewhat complex and difficult to understand. However, I suspect that a complex tax code is also by design. The tax code can easily be used to obfuscate the truth.
Obviously the USA now finds itself in dire need of additional revenue via tax increases. What better scheme than this by which to conceal such a tax increase?
So sheeple will have more spending money this year, which is apparently the intended effect of this tax code Tom foolery, since their refunds will remain about the same with a tax increase already on the books for next year.
So economists are not exactly lying about the $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 of extra spending money for consumers this year. They just won't see it until the end of the year in the form of a tax refund.
Greg
I have been talking about this for a little while now because I want people to be aware of it. And also aware of the facts about how our government in the USA operates..
The so-called obama tax cut for 95% of Americans was introduced to HIDE a rather large tax increase that has already occurred.
The federal withholding tax went up for everyone this year.
The 2% cut to Social Security withholding serves two purposes.. It allows obama to say, truthfully, that he gave everyone a tax cut. And, number two, it protects tax refunds "for this year". So the sheeple who use large tax refunds as a savings account will still see those large refunds this year. Even though they have already experienced a tax increase that they are heretofore unaware of. (You KNOW you shouldn't do that because it's an interest free loan to the government. Pay YOURSELF first!)
The 2% Social Security tax cut vanishes after this year. However the increase in federal withholding will remain in effect. This means your taxes will increase by around 2% next year. This even though all you have heard about from the government and the main stream media is that you received a tax cut!
This brings up another issue that really bothers me about this..
Most all economists have been and continue saying that Americans have that 2% Social Security tax cut available as additional expendable income (an average of $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 this year). These economists also often state that the aforementioned tax cut should help consumer spending this year.
The increase in the federal withholding tax was designed to hide the fact that a George Bush tax deduction was discontinued last year. The disappearance of that Bush tax deduction would have caused tax refunds to be smaller this year. Which would negatively effect consumer spending. So.. the federal withholding tax was increased so sheeple, who depend on large tax refunds, would overpay their taxes to the federal government this year which would hide the elimination of the Bush tax cut by leaving federal income tax refunds pretty much unaffected.
So. The 2% Social Security tax cut this year in effect hides the fact that the federal withholding tax went up.
When that tax cut is eliminated next year your taxes will go up equivalent to the amount of the increased tax withholding.
So playing with the tax code results in the federal withholding tax held against the 2% Social Security tax cut = very close to a wash for most people, depending on income and tax bracket. Compare your net check amount now to the same period last year and you will see that it hasn't gone up or down much at all but should be relatively close to the same.
So my question is this..
Do professional economists not KNOW these important facts? Which would bring the intelligence of the entire industry into question. (If they have such ;)
Or DO they know about it? Are they fully aware of it and in collusion with the federal government to hide the facts from the American people? Which would make them complicit in the cover-up of a tax increase. Which would bring the integrity of the entire industry into question. (Again, if they have such ;)
Either way professional economists, in this particular instance are either stupid or intentionally obfuscating the truth.
I know this post is somewhat complex and difficult to understand. However, I suspect that a complex tax code is also by design. The tax code can easily be used to obfuscate the truth.
Obviously the USA now finds itself in dire need of additional revenue via tax increases. What better scheme than this by which to conceal such a tax increase?
So sheeple will have more spending money this year, which is apparently the intended effect of this tax code Tom foolery, since their refunds will remain about the same with a tax increase already on the books for next year.
So economists are not exactly lying about the $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 of extra spending money for consumers this year. They just won't see it until the end of the year in the form of a tax refund.
Greg
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Economic Discussions FED
Monthly Report on Credit and Liquidity Programs
and the Balance Sheet
Federal Reserve Board of Governors
[From the page]
The Federal Reserve prepares this monthly report as part of its efforts to enhance transparency about the range of programs and tools that have been implemented in response to the financial crisis and to ensure appropriate accountability to the Congress and the public.
I would ask then why the FED is so adamant about not being audited? Talk about transparency & accountability.. A thorough audit would take us a long way in that direction. The standard complaint is that the FED refuses to be politicized while it certainly seems to many of us that the FED is COMPLETELY politicized. Election cycles have been serious factors in FED policy making since, at least, Jimmy Carter and the Reagan administration.
One of my favorite books is Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country by William Greider (Jan 15, 1989)
It is not at all hard to find thoughtful, reliable commentary on the internet these days..
See Dangerous trend: Politicization of Fed
And this from reason.com
Fed monetary policy has unintended/intended effects all over the world as seen here and here is what Bernanke had to say (We didn't do it)
Many people, including myself, believe that the FED has been and still intends to intentionally weaken the dollar as seen here, here & here
However, Geithner says U.S. 'will never' intentionally devalue the dollar
So how's that for transparency and accountability?
Some of the other issues involved with FED "extraordinary actions"
The FED is punishing savers
The role of the Primary Dealers
Our real problem is debt and very little has happened since the Great Recession began to address it at all.
---
Basically, if you boil down this next paragraph, what you end up with is "We had to save the banks/corporations or we would have entered a depression and all of the economy, government, Federal Reserve Bank would have been wiped out."
Anarchy and chaos, obviously the things our government and the FED/banks/corporations fear most, would have reined supreme.
---
The Federal Reserve's statutory mandate in conducting monetary policy is to foster maximum employment and stable prices. Financial stability is a critical prerequisite for achieving sustainable economic growth and price stability, and the steps taken since the summer of 2007 were necessary to support the liquidity of important financial markets and institutions in light of the extraordinary strains in financial markets.
---
Maybe Anarchy and chaos wouldn't be all that bad.. To me it would be better than living in a country where the rule of law can be thrown out the window at any moment.
Here's what some GM bond holders had to say back in 2009.
Some information on the rule of law and its important consideration throughout history.
Once we find ourselves faced with a government who feels free to write, at any time they wish, any new law and a Federal Reserve Bank that operates in secrecy while passing out billions of tax payer dollars to foreign banks what is that called?
Tyranny?
Totalitarianism?
Kleptocracy?
Plutocracy?
This article on zerohedge sums up what we should do about everything pretty well in my opinion..
The Big Banks Have Sold Us Out. Democrats And Republicans Have Sold Us Out. No One Is Defending Our Interests. Our Future Is Going Up In Flames. It’s Time For Us To Stand Up And Defend Ourselves
The great thing about the internet is that all the information in the world is available to anyone who wishes to seek it out..
Greg
and the Balance Sheet
Federal Reserve Board of Governors
[From the page]
The Federal Reserve prepares this monthly report as part of its efforts to enhance transparency about the range of programs and tools that have been implemented in response to the financial crisis and to ensure appropriate accountability to the Congress and the public.
I would ask then why the FED is so adamant about not being audited? Talk about transparency & accountability.. A thorough audit would take us a long way in that direction. The standard complaint is that the FED refuses to be politicized while it certainly seems to many of us that the FED is COMPLETELY politicized. Election cycles have been serious factors in FED policy making since, at least, Jimmy Carter and the Reagan administration.
One of my favorite books is Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country by William Greider (Jan 15, 1989)
It is not at all hard to find thoughtful, reliable commentary on the internet these days..
See Dangerous trend: Politicization of Fed
And this from reason.com
Fed monetary policy has unintended/intended effects all over the world as seen here and here is what Bernanke had to say (We didn't do it)
Many people, including myself, believe that the FED has been and still intends to intentionally weaken the dollar as seen here, here & here
However, Geithner says U.S. 'will never' intentionally devalue the dollar
So how's that for transparency and accountability?
Some of the other issues involved with FED "extraordinary actions"
The FED is punishing savers
The role of the Primary Dealers
Our real problem is debt and very little has happened since the Great Recession began to address it at all.
---
Basically, if you boil down this next paragraph, what you end up with is "We had to save the banks/corporations or we would have entered a depression and all of the economy, government, Federal Reserve Bank would have been wiped out."
Anarchy and chaos, obviously the things our government and the FED/banks/corporations fear most, would have reined supreme.
---
The Federal Reserve's statutory mandate in conducting monetary policy is to foster maximum employment and stable prices. Financial stability is a critical prerequisite for achieving sustainable economic growth and price stability, and the steps taken since the summer of 2007 were necessary to support the liquidity of important financial markets and institutions in light of the extraordinary strains in financial markets.
---
Maybe Anarchy and chaos wouldn't be all that bad.. To me it would be better than living in a country where the rule of law can be thrown out the window at any moment.
Here's what some GM bond holders had to say back in 2009.
Some information on the rule of law and its important consideration throughout history.
Once we find ourselves faced with a government who feels free to write, at any time they wish, any new law and a Federal Reserve Bank that operates in secrecy while passing out billions of tax payer dollars to foreign banks what is that called?
Tyranny?
Totalitarianism?
Kleptocracy?
Plutocracy?
This article on zerohedge sums up what we should do about everything pretty well in my opinion..
The Big Banks Have Sold Us Out. Democrats And Republicans Have Sold Us Out. No One Is Defending Our Interests. Our Future Is Going Up In Flames. It’s Time For Us To Stand Up And Defend Ourselves
The great thing about the internet is that all the information in the world is available to anyone who wishes to seek it out..
Greg
James 5:3-7 "Your #gold and #silver have become #worthless"
New International Version (©1984)
James 5:3-6
New Living Translation (NLT)
3 Your gold and silver have become worthless. The very wealth you were counting on will eat away your flesh like fire. This treasure you have accumulated will stand as evidence against you on the day of judgment. 4 For listen! Hear the cries of the field workers whom you have cheated of their pay. The wages you held back cry out against you. The cries of those who harvest your fields have reached the ears of the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.
5 You have spent your years on earth in luxury, satisfying your every desire. You have fattened yourselves for the day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and killed innocent people,[a] who do not resist you.[b]
James 5:3-6
New Living Translation (NLT)
3 Your gold and silver have become worthless. The very wealth you were counting on will eat away your flesh like fire. This treasure you have accumulated will stand as evidence against you on the day of judgment. 4 For listen! Hear the cries of the field workers whom you have cheated of their pay. The wages you held back cry out against you. The cries of those who harvest your fields have reached the ears of the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.
5 You have spent your years on earth in luxury, satisfying your every desire. You have fattened yourselves for the day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and killed innocent people,[a] who do not resist you.[b]
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
THE #MILITARIZATION OF THE #AMERICAN #POLICE
---
Found this pretty good article with a google search and wanted to share it. By clicking the previous link you can find many more like it as this is a REAL issue.. Police states don't just happen, they are planned..
This well educated former Kansas State trooper was talking about our corrupt politicians, the bank and corporate thieves among us in 2006..
I might add here that after our recent experience with an EF5 tornado that wiped out fully 30% of our entire city the emergency personnel who responded were fantastic. They did, and are still doing, a great job in assisting our community in the aftermath.
What did unnerve me a bit was the speed with which our small city of 50,000 could be filled with police, sheriff's officers, state patrol personnel and national guard troops.
I support military and police personnel and always have. It is NOT the people who are the problem but the policies of the federal government and states who continue to push us toward a one world government with police state style control that often fails to differ much at all from Saddam Hussein's former dictatorship.
God bless America
You may click here for the source post.
---
By Greg Evensen
August 13, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
As a former state police trooper, I can state emphatically, that I oppose the move away from local policing to a heavily armed “national” quasi-military police force policy. You need look no further than New Orleans after Katrina. You could watch California Highway Patrol officers and many out of state police agencies going door to door, disarming innocent civilians. Police officers were on a mission to confiscate firearms from people trying to protect themselves. Observing this, was to incite a first class riot in my home.
It was bad enough to watch these poor, helpless, but courageous civilians, trying to defend themselves against criminals who spoke “Ebonics” and Spanish. It was horrendous to watch the suffering of old men and women abandoned by families or simply unable to leave before the storm hit. But it was absolutely heartbreaking to see beefy, skin-headed officers prying shotguns out of the hands of men and women whose only “crime” was that they tried to keep themselves alive while the “officers” could not be found.
We have become accustomed to standing quietly on the sidelines while our local police Chiefs and Sheriffs have accepted huge amounts of federal dollars and military equipment for their special response units. They are all under a variety of mission specific names and classified standing orders. Once they take the cash however, they are handcuffed to the Feds for whatever future “mission” they may be assigned. It could come from some whacked out Special Agent from the ABC Bureau who dreamed up a little publicity (like Waco) and/or a “show of force” to keep the natives in line. This is to soften up the American public in case they held thoughts of fending for themselves or decisively telling these servants that they weren’t needed, thank you. But then, a well armed citizenry doesn’t fit the UN model of a disarmed nation bowing before the machine-gun toting black clad soldiers of the Omaha, Atlanta or Dayton police departments. Let’s see, black uniforms, coal bucket style helmets, machine-guns at every corner. Hmm, looks like Berlin in 1942?
The excuse being used for starting, equipping and using these “teams” is that we are under siege and cannot let common criminals (99.65% of the unlawful element in society) take down our cities. Criminals and gangs have already done that. The only effective deterrent is citizens carrying concealed weapons with permits. Statistically 2-5% of crimes in progress never see a police officer. The beat cop arrives to take a report, afterwards.
The other 35% of the safety and security issue in the USA is found in terrorist sleeper cells and devotees of world class Jihad’s. These are thugs truly worth special response teams from an agency that will find and destroy these efforts before they trigger the BIG blast.
I simply do not understand the thinking of upper level criminal justice system directors who have not recently, if ever, read their US or state constitution. This is especially true in regard to the public’s right to privacy and self-protection. Issues regarding the 2nd amendment, due process, limited government, and how far we have strayed from the Founder’s beliefs abound. They are well known and I will not opine about them here.
Suffice it to say that as a nation, we have stood by while the police forces of the USA have become a force that projects intimidation, fear from the community, and a reputation for excessive force. Regardless of the needed response, it makes even routine contact with the public a major ordeal.
Now understand, I have not had my head in my uttermost parts during the past several years. I know that the world is a changed and dangerous place. The world has ALWAYS been a dangerous place. However, I simply do not believe that even if local terrorism erupted tomorrow, we would somehow be better off in our wounded cities by the presence of the Anchorage PD in Detroit. Instead of hyper-reliance on anything state or fed, we should be equipping ourselves and our local neighborhoods for dealing with major security and safety issues on the model of Switzerland and Israel. Any major event is going to see an immediate breakdown of law and order. Officers normally committed to protecting the public, could be out of action from injury, death or an overwhelming desire to protect their own families. There could well be an absence of police leadership at all levels. If we are anticipating the New Orleans example, we will see rogue officers make the common criminal seem like an old lost friend.
My point is this. As a nation, we have lost our way on many fronts from the wisdom of our Republic builder’s dreams for a free, independent and courageous American nation. Most citizens are able to handle most crises situations fairly well. What ever happened to local “Peace Officers?” You remember. The cop everyone knew, liked and respected because of his courage, devotion to duty and the citizens of his/her community. We are moving daily toward reviving the demons of the Waffen SS. This MUST stop. We have become nursery school children herded by our “parent” government to rely on WHATEVER is said by WHOEVER says it, and you WILL obey, or else!
In all fairness, and to my many friends in law enforcement who know what I am saying is accurate, I appreciate each of you for a job well done. You are not the problem. You are the solution. Stay true to your oath.
If many Americans like a militarized police state future they may well get it. For me, that is not acceptable. I choose to work toward my destiny and that of a free America within the constitution, for sure. I prefer an American future without the unconstitutional agencies, laws, judge’s rulings, and decrees from many treasonous bureaucrats. We don’t need threats and intimidation from goons masquerading as local and state lawmakers or brain-washed, gun-toting morons like the New Orleans Chief of Police. He is the one who ordered honest civilians to surrender their lawful weapons in the face of gangs, to a living hell on earth. There are many more like him, waiting to impose police dictatorships, just because they can.
The time is coming fast, when millions of Americans who understand what this colossal struggle is all about in the United States and around the world, have severe choices that will be required to be made. The UN will not simply allow the US to continue as a sovereign nation when the rest of the world is under its domination. That is not paranoia. That is simply the deduction one gets from understanding the UN’s published plans. Your future actions will determine whether you will go to the re-education camp, or the internment camp for “troublemakers” (read that constitution supporters). Did you really believe that those “conservative” republicans and “little guy” protecting democrats were going to keep you from harm? Remember this, they are the ones who allowed this situation to occur and wrote the laws that permit it to continue unabated with avengence.
It will soon be too late to ever be free again. It will not be possible for a liberty-minded people to set the building blocks for a redirected prosperous nation, under God, and united to stand against the real evil in the world. The very people we armed and organized into this “national police force” and relied on to protect us, have become the new enforcers for an international banking, business, and centrally controlled world. The UN just might allow us to live on a few feet granted by Agenda 21. These agents would be safe to force us into captivity because of world gun control. You see, gun control is people control. Just ask Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Sadaam, or the California Highway Patrol and the other “good guys” in New Orleans.
© 2006 Greg Evensen - All Rights Reserved
Greg earned a Master’s Degree in Education Administration from Northern Michigan University, and a doctoral degree from the London International University, in Criminal Justice Administration.
He was appointed a United States Secret Service Special Agent with duties assigned to Presidential Candidate Protection, but was budget cut along with his contingent in 1974. Greg also served as a Kansas State Trooper and as a Kansas Marshal.
Greg has called for a national summit of some 1000 American organizations working for constitutional restoration in America. This critical coalition, reflecting the people’s desire to rebuild a nation that has been virtually destroyed by the political sell-outs in our nation’s capitol, will energize citizens to get involved. Greg is the author of “The Sovereignty Papers.”
E-mail: gevensen@up.net
Found this pretty good article with a google search and wanted to share it. By clicking the previous link you can find many more like it as this is a REAL issue.. Police states don't just happen, they are planned..
This well educated former Kansas State trooper was talking about our corrupt politicians, the bank and corporate thieves among us in 2006..
I might add here that after our recent experience with an EF5 tornado that wiped out fully 30% of our entire city the emergency personnel who responded were fantastic. They did, and are still doing, a great job in assisting our community in the aftermath.
What did unnerve me a bit was the speed with which our small city of 50,000 could be filled with police, sheriff's officers, state patrol personnel and national guard troops.
I support military and police personnel and always have. It is NOT the people who are the problem but the policies of the federal government and states who continue to push us toward a one world government with police state style control that often fails to differ much at all from Saddam Hussein's former dictatorship.
God bless America
You may click here for the source post.
---
By Greg Evensen
August 13, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
As a former state police trooper, I can state emphatically, that I oppose the move away from local policing to a heavily armed “national” quasi-military police force policy. You need look no further than New Orleans after Katrina. You could watch California Highway Patrol officers and many out of state police agencies going door to door, disarming innocent civilians. Police officers were on a mission to confiscate firearms from people trying to protect themselves. Observing this, was to incite a first class riot in my home.
It was bad enough to watch these poor, helpless, but courageous civilians, trying to defend themselves against criminals who spoke “Ebonics” and Spanish. It was horrendous to watch the suffering of old men and women abandoned by families or simply unable to leave before the storm hit. But it was absolutely heartbreaking to see beefy, skin-headed officers prying shotguns out of the hands of men and women whose only “crime” was that they tried to keep themselves alive while the “officers” could not be found.
We have become accustomed to standing quietly on the sidelines while our local police Chiefs and Sheriffs have accepted huge amounts of federal dollars and military equipment for their special response units. They are all under a variety of mission specific names and classified standing orders. Once they take the cash however, they are handcuffed to the Feds for whatever future “mission” they may be assigned. It could come from some whacked out Special Agent from the ABC Bureau who dreamed up a little publicity (like Waco) and/or a “show of force” to keep the natives in line. This is to soften up the American public in case they held thoughts of fending for themselves or decisively telling these servants that they weren’t needed, thank you. But then, a well armed citizenry doesn’t fit the UN model of a disarmed nation bowing before the machine-gun toting black clad soldiers of the Omaha, Atlanta or Dayton police departments. Let’s see, black uniforms, coal bucket style helmets, machine-guns at every corner. Hmm, looks like Berlin in 1942?
The excuse being used for starting, equipping and using these “teams” is that we are under siege and cannot let common criminals (99.65% of the unlawful element in society) take down our cities. Criminals and gangs have already done that. The only effective deterrent is citizens carrying concealed weapons with permits. Statistically 2-5% of crimes in progress never see a police officer. The beat cop arrives to take a report, afterwards.
The other 35% of the safety and security issue in the USA is found in terrorist sleeper cells and devotees of world class Jihad’s. These are thugs truly worth special response teams from an agency that will find and destroy these efforts before they trigger the BIG blast.
I simply do not understand the thinking of upper level criminal justice system directors who have not recently, if ever, read their US or state constitution. This is especially true in regard to the public’s right to privacy and self-protection. Issues regarding the 2nd amendment, due process, limited government, and how far we have strayed from the Founder’s beliefs abound. They are well known and I will not opine about them here.
Suffice it to say that as a nation, we have stood by while the police forces of the USA have become a force that projects intimidation, fear from the community, and a reputation for excessive force. Regardless of the needed response, it makes even routine contact with the public a major ordeal.
Now understand, I have not had my head in my uttermost parts during the past several years. I know that the world is a changed and dangerous place. The world has ALWAYS been a dangerous place. However, I simply do not believe that even if local terrorism erupted tomorrow, we would somehow be better off in our wounded cities by the presence of the Anchorage PD in Detroit. Instead of hyper-reliance on anything state or fed, we should be equipping ourselves and our local neighborhoods for dealing with major security and safety issues on the model of Switzerland and Israel. Any major event is going to see an immediate breakdown of law and order. Officers normally committed to protecting the public, could be out of action from injury, death or an overwhelming desire to protect their own families. There could well be an absence of police leadership at all levels. If we are anticipating the New Orleans example, we will see rogue officers make the common criminal seem like an old lost friend.
My point is this. As a nation, we have lost our way on many fronts from the wisdom of our Republic builder’s dreams for a free, independent and courageous American nation. Most citizens are able to handle most crises situations fairly well. What ever happened to local “Peace Officers?” You remember. The cop everyone knew, liked and respected because of his courage, devotion to duty and the citizens of his/her community. We are moving daily toward reviving the demons of the Waffen SS. This MUST stop. We have become nursery school children herded by our “parent” government to rely on WHATEVER is said by WHOEVER says it, and you WILL obey, or else!
In all fairness, and to my many friends in law enforcement who know what I am saying is accurate, I appreciate each of you for a job well done. You are not the problem. You are the solution. Stay true to your oath.
If many Americans like a militarized police state future they may well get it. For me, that is not acceptable. I choose to work toward my destiny and that of a free America within the constitution, for sure. I prefer an American future without the unconstitutional agencies, laws, judge’s rulings, and decrees from many treasonous bureaucrats. We don’t need threats and intimidation from goons masquerading as local and state lawmakers or brain-washed, gun-toting morons like the New Orleans Chief of Police. He is the one who ordered honest civilians to surrender their lawful weapons in the face of gangs, to a living hell on earth. There are many more like him, waiting to impose police dictatorships, just because they can.
The time is coming fast, when millions of Americans who understand what this colossal struggle is all about in the United States and around the world, have severe choices that will be required to be made. The UN will not simply allow the US to continue as a sovereign nation when the rest of the world is under its domination. That is not paranoia. That is simply the deduction one gets from understanding the UN’s published plans. Your future actions will determine whether you will go to the re-education camp, or the internment camp for “troublemakers” (read that constitution supporters). Did you really believe that those “conservative” republicans and “little guy” protecting democrats were going to keep you from harm? Remember this, they are the ones who allowed this situation to occur and wrote the laws that permit it to continue unabated with avengence.
It will soon be too late to ever be free again. It will not be possible for a liberty-minded people to set the building blocks for a redirected prosperous nation, under God, and united to stand against the real evil in the world. The very people we armed and organized into this “national police force” and relied on to protect us, have become the new enforcers for an international banking, business, and centrally controlled world. The UN just might allow us to live on a few feet granted by Agenda 21. These agents would be safe to force us into captivity because of world gun control. You see, gun control is people control. Just ask Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Sadaam, or the California Highway Patrol and the other “good guys” in New Orleans.
© 2006 Greg Evensen - All Rights Reserved
Greg earned a Master’s Degree in Education Administration from Northern Michigan University, and a doctoral degree from the London International University, in Criminal Justice Administration.
He was appointed a United States Secret Service Special Agent with duties assigned to Presidential Candidate Protection, but was budget cut along with his contingent in 1974. Greg also served as a Kansas State Trooper and as a Kansas Marshal.
Greg has called for a national summit of some 1000 American organizations working for constitutional restoration in America. This critical coalition, reflecting the people’s desire to rebuild a nation that has been virtually destroyed by the political sell-outs in our nation’s capitol, will energize citizens to get involved. Greg is the author of “The Sovereignty Papers.”
E-mail: gevensen@up.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)