IRENE MODELS SHIFTING WESTWARD – NOT GOOD

My University uses this website to get a more accurate prediction for snowfall amounts. Meteorologists post every day. Their prediction accuracy is much better than the network TV crap. It seems all the models are shifting Irene’s track westwards. One model has it hitting NYC directly. That would be a damned shame.

Eyeing Irene’s Encounter

Computer modeling on Hurricane Irene has reversed its eastward nudge over the past couple of days and has been on a slow, arduous westward trend for the last couple of major computer model runs. I spoke yesterday about the 100 mile error that computer modeling can have with hurricanes in the four day out timeframe and how that meant nothing was certain (I was optimistic, perhaps wishing, that the east nudge would hold but pointed out that a 100 mile shift would change everything). While the models have not adjusted a full 100 miles, we’ve seen a movement of 50-75 miles to the west since this time yesterday and the modeling outcome has changed a good deal for this region.

A few caveats I’ll put out there.   First, Irene will be a large storm when it gets to this latitude and will impact many (especially if the “close to coast” or inland track verifies) but it should not pack the same intensity punch (Category 3 status) to our latitude as ocean temperatures in this part of the world are lower than they are in the Bahamas.  Hurricanes thrive on hot water and ocean temperatures locally are not conducive to supporting high intensity storms.   Irene will probably not be as strong as she is now but still pack a wallop when it visits us on Sunday.   Second, we probably have not seen the last of the nudges with this storm’s modeled path in either direction and it’s possible that we see a bit more nudging west or east in the coming day or two.

The models have shifted the storm’s projected track to the west, with the Euro taking Irene’s eye up the Chesapeake Bay through the western suburbs and north through the Poconos into Upstate New York after initial landfall in Eastern North Carolina.  Irene could bring near hurricane force sustained winds on its eastern side to South Jersey Shore Points in this scenario, with higher gusts.  Winds in Philadelphia could reach 50 mph in this scenario but the worst impacts would definitely be felt at the Shore from a wind and storm surge standpoint, with everyone impacted from heavy rainfall on the order of several inches.  The surge of water pushing up Delaware Bay would result in potentially significant coastal flooding on southern facing beaches (NJ side) in Delaware Bay and then lead to the risk of reverse coastal flooding on the northern facing beaches (Lewes) as winds veer around after the eye passes by.  The “saving grace” is that the landfall point being in the Carolinas would result in an inland track for Irene.  The result of Irene’s center being removed from the Atlantic for a period of time could weaken the storm some from its landfall intensity.  Definitely an ugly scenario but Irene is not as strong here as in the GFS’ case.

The GFS has a landfall point along the Jersey Shore and tracks the storm nearly over New York City.  This is nearly as ugly a scenario as the models can envision for track.  The storm will have had more time over water (granted, water not as warm but it’s still water and not land) and will be a bit stronger when it makes landfall.   The storm track could result in hurricane force winds hammering the Jersey and Delaware coastlines and bring heavy rain to the entire region.  Winds in Philly are not as strong in this scenario but we get a bit more rain in this scenario as we would be on the western side (rainy) of the storm.

One last point to make this morning:    East of the “eye” will have stronger winds than west of the eye, with the eastern side of the storm providing a better potential for quick spin-up tornadoes compared to the western side.   The west side of the storm provides a better potential for heavier rainfall.   Unless the storm takes a track over 100 miles east of the coastline, the region will see impacts from it…unfortunately, some of those will be rather significant.

LLPOH’s Short Funny Stories

I can’t take it anymore. Admin’s stories are putting me into a deep depression. So I have decided to fight back. Following are a few stories from my life that always bring a smile to my face when I think of them. Perhaps they will lose something in the retelling. But I will smile to remember them.

1) I was brought up around guns. We had all kinds of guns come and go through my home – rifles/handguns/shotguns/single shot/pump/semi-auto – you name it and it passed through. We were always trading guns with friends. It was sort of like the way some folks trade baseball cards.

One day, a friend of my dad’s was around, and of course wanted to see what new (not new new, but new to us) guns we had. We had a new semi-auto shotgun. The brand I have long forgotten. This particular gun had a particular little quirk – the loading mechanism was self-loading. You put the shell to the magazine, and ‘ka-ching ka-ching”, the shell would be loaded. Two pointy prongs would grab the shell and load it into the gun. It would also grab whatever else came near and load it into the gun as well. It was particularly fond of loading fingers – which was something you wanted to avoid owing to the pointy prong things.

My dad duly brought out the new shotgun, and handed it to his friend, who began examining it. He started to probe around the loading mechanism with his fingers. My dad said “you want to be careful of that or it will get you.” His friend replied, “It’s ok, I have one just like it at home.” This was immediately followed by “‘ka-ching ka-ching” and a loud howl – the friend had loaded his thumb up past the second knuckle into the gun. Without missing a single beat my father replied “And I bet you do that all the time, too”. (My old man was funny as hell.). Blood poured out of the opening – the sharp prongs had done their job nicely – down the man’s hand and arm and onto the floor. He was screaming “get it off get it off!” But my father and I were totally incapable of helping him – we were laughing so hard tears were streaming down our cheeks. It was by far the single funniest thing I have ever seen. It was the “I have one just like it at home” comment that was the cherry on top.

We finally stopped laughing long enough to get him loose from that gun (we got rid of it ASAP as it was a man-trap, for sure), and sent him for stitches. But every time we got together my father and I retold that story and would laugh like it had just happened.

2) One day I was sitting in my car outside a grocery store. I was in my early 20’s. In the parking lot and on the adjoining sidewalk there was a group of teenage girls talking. A boy of the same age was riding his bike back and forth – one of the old stingray types – and obviously decided it was a good opportunity to impress the girls. He began to do wheelies up and back along the side walk. He was pretty good at it, but the girls were feigning disinterest. After several passes, during a wheelie, he hit a bump in the sidewalk, which flipped him backward and sideways onto his back – and into a large pothole about a foot deep full of water. He climbed out of the pothole covered in mud and muddy water, and red-faced – with the girls snickering of course. I was perhaps 10 or 15 feet away.

Being the kind soul I am, I rolled down the window of the car, leaned out, pointed, and went “Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Bwahahahahahahahaha!” He turned an incredible shade of purple and started cussing me, and picked up his bike and stalked off. The girls went from small snickers to full-on braying at this stage. Maybe you had to be there, but it sure was funny.

3) When I was a young teen – perhaps thirteen – a friend and I set out one summer day in search of adventure. We carried with us the holy grail of all boys of our age – a bag full of firecrackers. We had everything – black cats, cherry bombs, and the big daddy of them all – the mighty M-80. An M-80 would take down a mailbox or take your hand off if you weren’t careful (seriously). We loved M-80s. So off we went, in search of adventure, armed to the teeth with a bagful of fireworks.

We were country boys, and so there were lots of things to blow up, which we duly did. During our wander, we came upon a stack of irrigation pipes. These pipes were perhaps 20 feet or so long and maybe 8” in diameter. The stack was quite long – perhaps 20 yards long and over 6” high – in other words a huge wall of irrigation pipes. As we came to the wall of pipes, we noticed Farmer John on the other side of the wall working – we could see him through the pipes, but he had his back to us. We immediately hatched our evil plan. We took out one of our prized M-80s, and put it into one of the pipes as far as we could reach, at approximately Farmer John’s head height, and lit it and stood back several feet.

Anyone familiar with M-80s knows that they are loud – and I mean really loud. However, I simply cannot explain the way a stack of irrigation pipes is able to magnify the sound of an M-80 going off. It is the single loudest thing I have ever heard. It was simply ground shaking. And it went off at head height of poor Farmer John, who was only 3 or 4 feet away from the pipes.

We immediately crapped ourselves, because it was way more than we had expected, and took off across the field lickety-split, continuously looking over our shoulders (Farmer Johns were known to carry shotguns, and weren’t afraid to use them in such a situation). We had gotten well and truly away when Farmer John finally made it around the corner of the pipe stack, clutching both hands over his ears.

Nothing ever came of it – although he must have known it was us. We made ourselves scarce from Farmer John’s farm for quite a while, though. And my friend and I laughed about it for years afterwards. And it still makes me smile to this day. Sorry Farmer John.

OK – so there is a start. Let’s hear some of your stories that make you smile. We need a good laugh. And if you do a good job, I will tell you my “cherries” story, which is my family’s favorite story (largely because I am the butt of the joke). Enough of the Admin’s doom and gloom. Time to fight back. OK, let’s have them.

KEYNESIAN SOLUTIONS – AFTER TOTAL FAILURE – TRY, TRY AGAIN

“Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth.” – John Maynard Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace

  

While Barack Obama vacations on Martha’s Vineyard this week he’ll be thinking about his grand vision to save America – again. There is one thing you can say about Obama – he’s predictable. He promises to unveil his “new” plan for America in early September. The White House said Obama will give a speech after the September 5 Labor Day holiday to outline measures to boost hiring and find budget savings that surpass the $1.5 trillion goal of a new congressional deficit-cutting committee. It is heartening to see that Barack has turned into a cost cutter extraordinaire. He should be an inspiration to the Tea Party, except for one little problem. The plan he unveils in a few weeks will increase spending now and fret about spending cuts at some future unspecified date.

I can reveal his plan today because the White House has already leaked the major aspects of his plan. He will call for an extension of the Social Security payroll tax cut of 2% for all working Americans. This was supposed to give a dramatic boost to GDP in 2011. Maybe it will work next time. He will demand that extended unemployment benefits be renewed. Somehow providing 99 weeks of unemployment benefits is supposed to create jobs. It’s done wonders thus far. He will propose some semblance of an infrastructure bank or tax cuts to spur infrastructure spending. It will include a proposal for training and education to help unemployed people switch careers. He will attempt to steal the thunder from the SUPER COMMITTEE of 12 by coming up with $2 trillion of budget savings by insisting the Lear jet flying rich fork over an extra $500 billion.

You may have noticed that followers of Keynesian dogma like Paul Krugman, Larry Summers, Brad Delong, Richard Koo, John Galbraith, every Democrat in Congress, and every liberal pundit and columnist have been shrieking about the Tea Party terrorists and their ghastly budget cuts that are destroying our economy. They contend the stock market is tanking and the economy is heading into recession due to the brutal austerity measures being imposed by the extremists in the Republican Party. There is just one small issue with their argument. It is completely false. It is a bold faced lie. This is 2011. The economy has been in freefall since January 1. No spending cuts have occurred. Nada!!! As the CBO chart below reveals, the horrendous slashing of government will amount to $21 billion in 2012 and $42 billion in 2013. Of course, those aren’t even cuts in spending. They are reductions in the projected increases in spending. Politicians must be very secure in the knowledge that Americans are completely ignorant when it comes to anything other than the details of Kim Kardashian’s wedding and who Snooki is banging on Jersey Shore.

 

I’d like to remind the Harvard educated Keynesian economists that Federal government spending is currently chiming in at $3.8 trillion per year. Federal spending was $2.7 trillion in 2007 and $3.0 trillion in 2008. Keynesians believe government spending fills the gap when private companies are contracting. Obama has taken Keynesianism to a new level. Federal spending will total $10.8 trillion in Obama’s 1st three years, versus $8.4 trillion in the previous three years. Even a Harvard economist can figure out this is a 29% increase in Federal spending. What has it accomplished? We are back in recession, unemployment is rising, forty six million Americans are on food stamps, food and energy prices are soaring, and the middle class is being annihilated. The standard Keynesian response is we would have lost 3 million more jobs, we were saved from a 2nd Great Depression and the stimulus was too little. It would have worked if it had just been twice as large.

The 2nd Great Depression was not avoided, it was delayed. Our two decade long delusional credit boom could have been voluntarily abandoned in 2008. The banks at fault could have been liquidated in an orderly bankruptcy with stockholders and bondholders accepting the consequences of their foolishness. Unemployment would have soared to 12%, GDP would have collapsed, and the stock market would have fallen to 5,000. The bad debt would have been flushed from the system. Instead our Wall Street beholden leaders chose to save their banker friends, cover-up the bad debt, shift private debt to taxpayer debt, print trillions of new dollars in an effort to inflate away the debt, and implemented every wacky Keynesian stimulus idea Larry Summers could dream up.  These strokes of genius have failed miserably. Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner and Obama have set in motion a series of events that will ultimately lead to a catastrophic currency collapse. We have entered the 2nd phase of the Greater Depression and there are no monetary or fiscal bullets left in the gun. Further expansion of debt will lead to a hyperinflationary collapse as the remaining confidence in the U.S. dollar is exhausted. We are one failed Treasury auction away from a currency crisis.

John Maynard Keynes argued the solution to the Great Depression was to stimulate the economy through some combination of two approaches: a reduction in interest rates and government investment in infrastructure. Investment by government injects income, which results in more spending in the general economy, which in turn stimulates more production and investment involving still more income and spending and so forth. The initial stimulation starts a cascade of events, whose total increase in economic activity is a multiple of the original investment.

It sounds so good in theory, but it didn’t work in the Depression and it hasn’t worked today. It is a doctrine taught in every business school in America with no actual results to support it. Who needs facts and actual results when a good story believed and perpetuated by non-thinking pundits will do? Every Keynesian play in the playbook has been used since 2008. The American people were told by Obama and his Keynesian trained advisors that if we implemented his $862 billion shovel ready stimulus package, unemployment would peak at 7.9% and would decline to 6.5% by today. The cascade of recovery was going to be jump started by a stimulus package that equaled 27% of the previous year’s entire spending. Obama’s complete package was implemented. The outcome was an eye opener. If you show a Keynesian this chart, their response would be: “Imagine how bad it would have been if we didn’t spend the $862 billion.”

 

John Maynard Obama got everything he asked for in January 2009. He had both houses in Congress and did not need to consult Republicans to pass his Keynesian $862 billion porkulus bill. It seems that $252 billion, or 29% of the package was nothing more than transfer payments. Of course, according to Keynesians, the $252 billion should have had a multiplier effect when it was handed out. I think they were right. Obama was able to multiply the number of people on food stamps in January 2009 from 32 million to the current tally of 45.8 million. The monthly food stamp transfer payment has gone from $3.6 billion to $6.1 billion. Keynesians should be thrilled by this success story.

 [Review & Outlook]

Obama’s Keynesian dream bill included:

  • $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn’t turned a profit in 40 years.
  • $2 billion for child-care subsidies.
  • $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts.
  • $400 million for global-warming research.
  • $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects.
  • $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.
  • $8 billion for renewable energy funding.
  • $6 billion for mass transit that had a low or negative return on investment.
  • $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles.
  • Congress earmarked $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities.
  • The Smithsonian received $150 million.
  • The Department of Education got $66 billion, more than the entire Education Department spent a just 10 years ago. $6 billion of this subsidized university building projects.

Obama declared in December 2008 there were shovel ready projects across the land that would create immediate jobs. Too bad he didn’t tell the American public only $30 billion of the $862 billion mountain of pork was earmarked for highways and bridges. Obama declared his stimulus would create 3.5 million jobs, later changed to “create or save”. There were 144 million Americans employed in January 2009. Today, there are 139 million Americans employed. Obama gives the term “success story” a new meaning. The Keynesians had their chance and now they want a do-over. Sorry, that isn’t how it works in the real world. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, “We won the election. We wrote the bill.” No truer words have ever been spoken.

As we know, that was only the beginning of our Keynesian debt nightmare. Let’s do some critical thinking and assess the results of Obama’s other Keynesian solutions:

  • The Homebuyer Tax Credit cost taxpayers $27 billion or $43,000 per additional house sold. The Keynesians handed 3.9 million people $7,000 to do something they were going to do anyway. They lured first time home buyers into the market. Since the credit expired, median home prices have fallen $15,000 and continue to fall. This wonderful government program has created more underwater homeowners and did nothing to stabilize the housing market or home prices.
  • Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $3 billion. An incremental 125,000 cars were sold at a cost of $24,000 per car. This Keynesian dream program lured more people into debt and warped the used car market by destroying used cars and driving up prices for poor people who couldn’t afford a new car. There were no carryover benefits except for government controlled union car makers.
  • Obama’s HAMP program allocated $11 billion to supposedly allow 4 million homeowners to modify their mortgages, reduce their monthly mortgage payments and avoid foreclosure. HAMP has proven a colossal failure that has done more to harm than help debt-laden homeowners. It has achieved slightly more than 500,000 permanent modifications, 40% of which the Treasury expects to default. Far more borrowers have dropped out of the program than successfully achieved permanent loan modification. These borrowers, along with those who later default, will often be left with larger outstanding debt, worse credit scores, and less home equity.
  • Obama even handed $30 billion to the largest homebuilder corporations in the country, run by billionaires like Bob Toll, by allowing them to carry back their losses and wipe out tax liabilities in prior years. This did wonders for the housing market. It did stimulate bonus payments for the CEOs of these companies.
  • Billions of tax revenue was lost by handing out $1,500 tax credits for people to buy new windows, doors, and appliances they were going to buy anyway. We are still waiting for that multiplier effect.

The usual suspects are now declaring that we can’t make the same mistakes FDR made in 1937 resulting in a dramatic downturn in 1938. As usual, the Keynesian storyline about the Great Depression is false.

Depression Keynesian Fallacy

One thing to remember is that while the depression that started in 1929 may have come to a bottom in 1933, it took a long time to recover. There was a cyclical recovery in 1937, and why was that? Roosevelt had the good luck to have been elected dead flat at the bottom. So it wasn’t his policies that cured the last depression, it was luck and good timing, combined with the fact that they were creating a lot of money after Roosevelt took the dollar off the gold standard. That resulted in a false recovery, from 1933 to 1937, and it went downhill again. – Doug Casey   

 

Keynes′ theory suggested that active government policy could be effective in managing the economy. Rather than seeing unbalanced government budgets as wrong, Keynes advocated what has been called countercyclical fiscal policies, that is, policies that acted against the tide of the business cycle: deficit spending when a nation’s economy suffers from recession or when recovery is long-delayed and unemployment is persistently high—and the suppression of inflation in boom times by either increasing taxes or cutting back on government outlays. He argued that governments should solve problems in the short run rather than waiting for market forces to do it in the long run. Keynes had too much faith in the wisdom of politicians and Federal Reserve bankers. They mastered the art of deficit spending, but fell a little short on paying off the debts during boom times. About $14.6 trillion short so far.

The Great Depression had the same origins as our current Greater Depression. The three Republican administrations of the 1920s practiced laissez-faire economics, starting by cutting top tax rates from 77% to 25% by 1925. Non-intervention into business and banking became government policy. These policies led to overconfidence on the part of investors and a classic credit-induced speculative boom. Gambling in the markets by the wealthy increased. While the haves got richer, millions of have-nots lived below the household poverty line of $2,000 per year. The rip roaring party came to an abrupt end in October 1929, with the Great Stock Market Crash.

Between 1929 and 1932, the market fell 89% from its high. The Keynesian storyline is that Herbert Hoover’s administration did nothing to try and revive the economy. It took Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his New Deal Keynesian policies to save the country. It’s a nice story, but entirely phony. Between 1929 and 1933 the Hoover administration increased real per-capita federal expenditures by 88%, not exactly the austerity measures described in fantasy stories concocted by the mainstream media.  

Bureau of Economic Analysis National Income and Product Accounts Table

Table 1.1.6A. Real Gross Domestic Product, Chained (1937) Dollars [Billions of chained (1937) dollars]
 
 1929 
 1930 
 1931 
 1932 
 1933 
 1934 
 1935 
 1936 
 1937 
 1938 
 1939 
Gross domestic product
87.3
79.8
74.6
64.9
64.0
71.0
77.3
87.4
91.9
88.7
95.9
Personal consumption expenditures
63.1
59.7
57.8
52.6
51.5
55.1
58.5
64.5
66.8
65.8
69.4
Gross private domestic investment
12.2
8.1
5.1
1.5
2.3
4.1
7.6
9.7
12.2
8.0
10.3
Net exports of goods and services
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.1
0.2
-0.5
-0.3
0.1
0.9
1.0
Government consumption expenditures and gross investment
9.2
10.2
10.6
10.2
9.9
11.1
11.5
13.4
12.8
13.8
15.0

 

The Great Depression officially lasted from 1929 until 1940. What is not well known is that real GDP was at the same level in 1936 as it had been in 1929. In no small part because real GDP soared by 37% between 1933 and 1936. The unemployment rate in 1929 was 5%. In 1936, even after real GDP had recovered to pre-depression levels, the unemployment rate was still 15%. It spiked back to 18% in 1938 and stayed above 15% until World War II. Tellingly, in 1936, private domestic investment was 21% below the level of 1929. 

By contrast, government expenditures surged by 46% between 1929 and 1936. With the government creating new agencies and employing people in make-work projects, private industry was crowded out. The extensive governmental economic planning and intervention that began during the Hoover administration swelled drastically under Roosevelt. The bolstering of wage rates and prices, expansion of credit, propping up of weak firms, and increased government spending on public works prolonged the Great Depression.

The facts powerfully contradict the notion endorsed by Krugman and other Keynesian devotees that the supposed 1937-38 Depression within the Great Depression was caused by Roosevelt slashing spending. In fact, real GDP only dropped by 3.5% in 1938 and rebounded by 8.1% in 1939. What actually collapsed in 1938 was private investment, which fell 34%. By contrast, government spending declined by only 4.5% in 1938, proving that Roosevelt did not drastically cut spending. To the extent that he eased up on the accelerator, it was by cutting back on useless jobs programs like those provided by the Works Progress Administration and the Public Works Administration. Austerity did not derail the recovery.

The reason private investment collapsed in 1938 was Roosevelt’s anti-business crusade. He denounced big business as the cause of the Depression. In March 1938, FDR appointed Yale University law professor Thurman Arnold to head the antitrust division of the Justice Department. Arnold soon hired some 300 lawyers to file antitrust lawsuits against businesses. Arnold launched cases against entire industries, with lawsuits against the milk, oil, tobacco, shoe machinery, tires, fertilizer, railroad, pharmaceuticals, school supplies, billboards, fire insurance, liquor, typewriter, and movie industries.

Paul Krugman’s recent veiled yearning for a war or staged crisis to revive the economy through spending to fight the war is another Keynesian fallacy perpetuated by the mainstream media. These mindless non-critical thinking talking heads actually believe World War II ended the Great Depression. Doug Casey obliterates their fantasy:

“People say that World War II cured the Depression, but in fact, it made it worse. As bad as things were in the ‘30s, they were worse during the war in the ‘40s. You couldn’t get shoes. You couldn’t get gasoline. You couldn’t get tires. You couldn’t get just about anything that was being used for the war. The war prolonged and deepened the Depression. The thing that ended the Depression was not the war but the fact that since people could not consume, they were forced to save. That delayed consumption resulted in a huge amount of savings, and that’s what caused the recovery in the late 1940s.

 

The fact that the entire world was left in smoldering ruins after World War II, except for the United States, may have contributed slightly to our recovery from the Great Depression.

According to Murray Rothbard, in his book America’s Great Depression, the artificial meddling in the economy was a disaster prior to the Great Depression, and government efforts to prop up the economy after the crash of 1929 only made things far worse. Government intrusion delayed the market’s correction and made the road to complete recovery more difficult. Today’s myopic politicians, captured monetary authorities and Harvard trained Keynesian economists have learned the wrong lessons from the Great Depression. The upshot will be a second Greater Depression and further impoverishment of the dwindling middle class. The implications of more wasteful government stimulus programs, more quantitative easing and more debt are: further debasement of the currency and ultimately a hyperinflationary collapse. The great economist John Maynard Keynes understood currency debasement:

“There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”

How to Cut Spending While Actually Increasing Spending

“Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become ‘profiteers,’ who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.” – John Maynard Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace

Obama’s plan to revive America will be announced with great fanfare in two weeks. We know for sure he will propose these two brilliant ideas:

  • Extending unemployment compensation again at a total 2012 cost of $65 billion. Because we know that paying people to not work creates millions of jobs. The multiplier effect is off the charts. Why work when you can watch The View and chow down on cheese doodles purchased with your SNAP card for 99 weeks?
  • Extending the payroll tax cut at a total 2012 cost of $100 billion. This was supposed to give a dramatic boost to the economy in FY11. Have you noticed any boost? A Keynesian will argue, “Imagine if we hadn’t done it.” A critical thinker might ask: Is it prudent to increase the unfunded Social Security liability by another $100 billion and hand the bill to future unborn generations, so we can buy a new IPod 2 today?

It is a certainty that Obama will announce an infrastructure bank or some variation to spur investment in our national infrastructure that is crumbling by the day. Top Keynesian, and architect of the Obama stimulus plan, Larry Summers has been blathering about this for months. Even though the first stimulus plan was sold as an infrastructure plan, they mean it this time. As usual, the storyline is false. You can’t drive anywhere in this country and not be inconvenienced by road widening, bridge building, and repaving projects. The Keynesians act like infrastructure projects are highly unusual and need new Federal dollars to jump start the engine. The fact is that every Federal, State and municipal government has a capital fund that is budgeted every year. Most of the projects have multiple year lead times. They require planning and coordination. The reason we have 160,000 structurally deficient or obsolete bridges and thousands of miles of crumbling underground pipes is because politicians decided to spend their budgets on something more useful like train museums, murals, turtle crossings, and studies on the mating habits of ferrets.

The country has lost approximately seven million jobs since 2007. Five million of the jobs were lost in sales industries and manufacturing industries. There are 139 million jobs in America today and only seven million, or 5% of all jobs, in the construction industry. How do Keynesians expect to revive the job market with an infrastructure bank that will benefit, at most, 5% of the U.S. workforce? Let me guess. They will propose billions of new spending on education so they can retrain sales clerks from Wal-Mart into architects for designing 160,000 new bridges.

Barack Obama will stand in front of the American people and lie. He is a born again cost cutter, who will propose new spending. As anyone with a calculator can figure out, the two guaranteed proposals from his upcoming speech will increase spending by $165 billion in 2012. If you go back to the handy dandy chart from the CBO showing the “horrific spending cuts” from the recent debt ceiling deal you will see  these “cuts” total $122 billion between 2012 and 2014. Barack will wipe out all of the supposed savings through mid 2015 with his new Keynesian plan. But don’t worry. His plan will have huge spending cuts in 2017 after his hoped for 2nd term is finished. Keynesians always promise to cut spending once their current emergency ends.     

The Keynesians had their chance. They controlled the Presidency and both houses of Congress. A Keynesian runs the Federal Reserve. They implemented everything they proposed. The $862 billion porkulus program, the $700 billion TARP program, home buyer tax credits, energy efficiency credits, loan modification programs, zero interest rates, QE1 and QE2. They increased social welfare transfers for Social Security, Unemployment Compensation, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, and Veterans by $600 billion since 2007, a 35% increase in four years. No one has foiled their plans. The Tea Party didn’t really exist until 2010. They didn’t lose the House until November 2010. They cannot blame the Tea Party extremists, but they do.

The Keynesians have successfully increased Federal spending by $1.1 trillion, or 41% since 2007, and are running deficits exceeding 10% of GDP, but they call the Tea Party extremists. Domestic investment is still 9% below 2008 levels as the Federal government has crowded out the small businesses that create the jobs in this country. And now the Keynesians declare we need more stimulus, more programs, more debt, more quantitative easing and lower interest rates. It just wasn’t enough the first time. You have to give the Keynesians credit. Despite the utter absolute failure of every scheme they have implemented, they will worship their models and theories until they successfully collapse our economic system. Then they’ll blame the Tea Party terrorists who foiled their plans.

None of the Keynesian solutions worked during this crisis, just as they didn’t work during the Great Depression. The solution was simple, yet painful. The banking system needed to be saved, not the banks. The bad debt needed to be purged from the system. Wall Street criminals needed to be prosecuted. Bondholders and stockholders needed bear the losses from their foolish investments. Saving and investment in the country needed to be encouraged, while borrowing and consuming needed to be discouraged. Our leaders have failed to lead. The American people have failed to accept the consequences of their actions. And now we are going to pay a heavy price as Ludwig von Mises predicted:

“There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit (debt) expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit (debt) expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.”

 

GOD – FOR & AGAINST

We know what Muck thinks. I’m For, but I do think George Carlin’s rant is really funny.

What do you think?

20 Opinions For And Against God

Sunday, August 21, 2011 3:09

God

In Favour Of God

I believe in God, only I spell it “Nature”.
> Frank Lloyd Wright

God is the great mysterious motivator of what we call nature and it has been said often by philosophers, that nature is the will of God. And, I prefer to say that nature is the only body of God that we shall ever see. If we wish to know the truth concerning anything, we’ll find it in the nature of that thing.
> Frank Lloyd Wright in Truth Against the World

When we say God is a spirit, we know what we mean, as well as we do when we say that the pyramids of Egypt are matter. Let us be content, therefore, to believe him to be a spirit, that is, an essence that we know nothing of, in which originally and necessarily reside all energy, all power, all capacity, all activity, all wisdom, all goodness.
> John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson

God is not a limited individual who sits alone up in the clouds on a golden throne. God is pure Consciousness that dwells within everything. Understanding this truth, learn to accept and love everyone equally.
> Amma

God, the supreme being, is neither circumscribed by space, nor touched by time; he cannot be found in a particular direction, and his essence cannot change. The secret conversation is thus entirely spiritual; it is a direct encounter between God and the soul, abstracted from all material constraints.
> Avicenna as quoted in 366 Readings From Islam

God alone is real, nothing matters but love for God.
> Meher Baba

When with bold telescopes I survey the old and newly discovered stars and planets, when with excellent microscopes I discern the unimitable subtility of nature’s curious workmanship; and when, in a word, by the help of anatomical knives, and the light of chemical furnaces, I study the book of nature, I find myself oftentimes reduced to exclaim with the Psalmist, ‘How manifold are Thy works, O Lord! In wisdom hast Thou made them all!
> Sir Robert Boyle

An outlook through this peephole [that manned space flight had opened] at the vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science.
> Wernher Von Braun

To say that I am made in the image of God is to say that Love is the reason for my existence, for God is love. Love is my true identity. Selflessness is my true self. Love is my true character. Love is my name.
> Thomas Merton in Seeds of Contemplation

I believe in a spiritual world — not as anything separate from this world — but as its innermost truth. With the breath we draw we must always feel this truth, that we are living in God.
> Rabindranath Tagore

Super cluster of blue white stars
The Opposition To God

Not only is there no God, but try getting a plumber on weekends.
> Woody Allen in Getting Even

God was a clever idea … The human race came up with a winner there.
> J. G. Ballard as quoted in ‘The benign catastrophist’

To the lexicographer, God is simply the word that comes next to go-cart
> Samuel Butler

Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing and all-wise, but somehow, just can’t handle money!
> George Carlin

I don’t believe in God because I don’t believe in Mother Goose.
> Clarence Darrow

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
> Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion

God says do what you wish, but make the wrong choice and you will be tortured for eternity in hell. That, sir, is not free will. It would be akin to a man telling his girlfriend, ‘Do what you wish, but if you choose to leave me, I will track you down and blow your brains out.’ When a man says this we call him a psychopath and cry out for his imprisonment/execution. When a god says the same, we call him loving and build churches in his honor.
> Chuck Easttom computer programmer

I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only His nonexistence could excuse Him.
> Einstein in Letter to Edgar Meyer

God is dead. Marx is dead. And I don’t feel so well myself.
> Eugène Ionesco as quoted in Jewish American Literature

God is cruel, sometimes he makes you live.
> Stephen King in Desperation

Is Capitalism Doomed? The Cliche of Our Time

Whenever something significant occurs in financial markets, or even a major industrial event, people invariably start asking about whether capitalism is doomed.  I remember after the BP oil spill in the gulf, one of my old highschool buddies (who’s a great guy, but his ultra-liberal ideals give us some good debating topics) put a thread on Facebook saying “Capitalism must end” or something to that effect.  Since he lives in California and he’s one of those artsy types, there were all kinds of high-fives and people railing against America and how Cuba got it right and all this nonsense.  I weighed in with how preposterous this notion was and how ironic that he and his hippy friends were venting on none other than…FACEBOOK – a venture that exists purely because of lure of riches that has expanded to its current state by American conventions – an American student at an American university, computer programming, at-risk capital, the internet, mobile technology and all kinds of other contributing factors that exist SOLELY BECAUSE OF CAPITALISM.  The irony was lost on these people of course.  By simple virtue of being born in America, they’ve already started off life on 3rd base yet they curse the opportunistic environment they find themselves in.

Well, following the recent debt debate, the S&P downgrade leaving 4 AAA Companies with a higher credit rating than the US, the recent market slides and an imploding Euro region, Nouriel Roubini penned a piece asking whether Capitalism is Doomed.  While the headline and his mention of Marx being “partly right” drew plenty of controversy last week, his thesis remains pretty much aligned with his usual message – we need to deleverage, divert stimulus to infrastructure, enact more progressive taxation measures and regulate more effectively.

While progressives and “revolutionaries” rejoice at the spectre of crumbling capitalistic support, it’s silly to “blame” capitalism for problems in the world or their current circumstances.

Continue Reading: Is Capitalism Doomed? The Cliche of Our Time

RECESSION 2011

John Mauldin is cautious guy. He hedges his bets and his comments. He says we are in a recession or going into a recession shortly. He backs it up with unequivical facts. He is warning you to get out of the stock market. There is a long way to go on the downside. Ignore his warning at your own peril. He is not a chicken little. He is usually overly optimistic.

The Recession of 2011?

By John Mauldin

August 20, 2011

The data this week was just ugly. Even the uptick in the leading economic indicators, seized upon by so many talking heads, must have a large asterisk beside it. This week we look at the increasing probability that we are headed for recession, and the follow-on implications. Then I take a perilous and speculative journey into the realm of the political, commenting on Texas (and my) Governor Rick Perry’s rather interesting comments about the Fed and Ben Bernanke. There is a lot to cover, and lots of charts, so we will jump right in. But please read at the end about two events coming up in the next few months that you might be very interested in attending.

The Recession of 2011?

It was relatively easy for me to forecast the recessions of 2001 and late 2007 over a year in advance. We had an inverted yield curve for 90 days at levels that have ALWAYS heralded a recession in the US. Plus there were numerous other less accurate (in terms of consistency) indicators that were “flashing red.” (For new readers, an inverted yield curve is where long-term rates go below short-term rates, a [thankfully] rare condition.)

And since stocks drop on average more than 40% in a recession, suggesting that you get out of the stock market was not such a challenging call. Although, when Nouriel Roubini and I were on Larry Kudlow’s show in August of 2006, we got beaten up for our bearish views. And you know what? The stock market then proceeded to go up another 20% in the next six months. Ouch. That interview is still on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AUoB7x2mxE. Timing can be a real, um, problem. There is no exact way to time markets or recessions.

My view then was based on the inverted yield curve (as an article of faith) and, not much later in 2006, my growing alarm as I realized the extent of the folly of the subprime debt debacle and how severe a crisis it would become. I changed my assessment from a mild recession to a serious one in early 2007 as my research revealed more and more fault lines and the damning interconnection of the global banking system (which has NOT been fixed, only made worse since then). I should note that my early views were rather Pollyannaish, as I thought (originally) that losses to US banks would only be in the $400 billion range. I keep telling people that I am an optimist.

With the Fed artificially holding down rates on the short end of the curve, we are not going to get an inverted yield curve this time, so we have to look for other indicators to come up with a forecast for the US economy. We grew at less than 1% in the first half of the year. That is close to stall speed. And that was with a full dose of QE2! So now, let’s look at a series of charts that cause me to be very concerned about the near-term health of the economy. Then we turn to Europe and problems compounding there.

The Streettalk/Mauldin Economic Output Index

Last year I was having a discussion with Lance Roberts of Streettalk Advisors in Houston about how to build an indicator that might give us a clue as to the direction of the economy. Most indicators use one or two data points and thus can be suspect.

For instance, the Philly Fed Economic Index went from 3.2 in July to -30.7 in August, helping to tank the market. Almost every subcomponent (new orders, employment, etc.) was not just down but negative. This was truly a shocker. You can see the gory details at http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2011/bos0811.cfm.

The Empire Index (New York) went from -3.8 to -7.7. The Empire Index suggests that the August ISM manufacturing number will be 49, or in a state of negative growth. The Philly Index suggests a very dismal 42, which if true would suggest we are already in recession. But these are regional indexes.

Now, just for fun, let’s look at a combined index that David Rosenberg created from the Philly Index plus the Michigan Consumer Confidence Index. (Those of us old enough can remember Jack Nicholson playing the Joker in Batman back in 1989. When Batman escaped with the help of something from his tool kit, Nicholson said, “Where does he get all those wonderful toys?” When I read Rosie’s newsletter, I have the same reaction. “Where does he get all those wonderful charts?” He swears he makes them himself. I stand in awe.)

Notice that with Rosie’s combined index where it is today, we are either at the beginning of a recession or already in one. And the Philly Fed Index is consistent with a 90% chance of a recession.

And that is again consistent with the following chart from Rich Yamarone, which I used last month but that bears looking at again. Rich is chief economist at Bloomberg. (By the way, for Conversation subscribers, I just recorded a powerhouse session with Rich, which will be available as soon as we can get it transcribed.)

Is There a Recession in Our Future?

I previously wrote, in late July:

“And the last chart is one I had not seen before, and is interesting. Rich notes that if year-over-year GDP growth dips below 2%, a recession always follows. It is now at 2.3%.”

Oops. Last week David Rosenberg updated that chart. This from Rosie:

If Rich is right, then the next revisions to second-quarter GDP will be down from an already abysmal 1.3%. And the growth in the second half is not going to be all that good for jobs and consumer spending

But these are charts of single data points. You can quibble that the Philly Fed could be influenced by something local or that the 1.6% number might be different this time. So Lance Roberts of Streettalk Advisors (with me looking over his shoulder) created an index that combines a number of economic indexes in an effort to build an index that is not subject to single (or double) indicators. The Streettalk/Mauldin Economic Output Index is composed of a weighted average of the following indexes:

Chicago Fed National Activity Index
Chicago PMI
The Streettalk ISM Composite Index
Richmond Fed Manufacturing Survey
Philly Fed Survey
Dallas Fed Survey
Kansas City Fed Survey
The National Federation of Independent Business Survey
Leading economic indicators

Note that there are six regional and national indicators, plus the NFIB survey, which is national. Lance’s index is not driven by one region or index or survey. When the combined indicator falls below 30, it has always indicated either that we are in a recession or about to be in one. The chart is overlaid, below, against GDP and LEI (leading economic indicators) – both tend to have a fairly high correlation to our Economic Output Composite Index. And LEI is currently supported by the yield spread and money supply (more on that below).

A few quick notes before the chart. First, note the increases in the index with the onset of QE1 and QE2 and the sharp drops when QE ends. The red at the end of the chart is the recent drop, and it takes us into recession territory. Recessions are indicated by gray bands

Note: I will be speaking at the Streettalk conference on October 14 in Houston, and tickets are currently on sale at www.streettalklive.com. David Rosenberg will also be speaking. They put on a very good conference at a reasonable price.

Now, a comment on the uptick in the leading economic indicators this week. Even the ECRI noted that it was because two of the financial components added to the positive numbers. One was the sharp rise in M2 money supply. But a lot of that is because people are going to cash, which is not all that positive from a macro viewpoint. The other is the steepness of the yield curve, which is being manipulated at the short end. Without their positive contributions, the index would be down 0.5%, down three of the last four months, and in a pattern that led to a recession in late 2007. Coincidence?

One last chart from Batman, I mean Rosie. Here he gives us the latest data from Larry Meyer’s Macroeconomic Advisers, where they track the real GDP index (inflation-adjusted). It is also in recession territory.

Housing is terrible. Existing-home sales were bad. The inventory for homes for sale grew, even as mortgage rates are at all-time lows. A 30-year mortgage is at 4.15%. It is possible we could see a 30-year mortgage with a “3” handle if we slip into recession. I could go on and on about the negative data, and may do so in future letters, but I will resist writing another book tonight, as we have a few other topics to cover.

The Bright Side of Europe’s Dysfunctionality

To say that the government of Europe is dysfunctional is an no-brainer. The bright side is that it makes the US government look slightly better, and that’s not saying a lot. This past week Nicholas Sarkozy asked Angela Merkel out, so they could decide what to do about the euro crisis. What they said was, we need yet another eurozone governing body overseeing fiscal debt and promises by governments not to run large deficits – like that has ever worked. And they unequivocally said “non” and “nein” to the idea of eurobonds, which everyone else says is vital if the euro is to survive. Oh, and we will harmonize our tax structures within five years. As if that solves the crisis today. Note to Nick and Angela: the problem is not tax structures, it is debt that cannot be repaid.

Lars Frisell is the chief economist for the Swedish group that regulates that nation’s banking system. Yesterday he was quoted as saying:

“It won’t take much for the interbank market to collapse. It’s not that serious at the moment, but it feels like it could very easily become that way and that everything will freeze.” (hat tip, Art Cashin)

My friend Porter Stansberry wrote today:

“In Europe, the problem is a bit different … and slightly more technical. Most of the debt in Europe is held by the big banks, not the sovereigns. Look at just two French banks, for example. Credit Agricole and BNP Paribas have combined deposits of a little more than 1 trillion euro. But they hold assets of 2.5 trillion euro. Those assets equal France’s entire GDP.

“And those are only two of France’s banks. Right now, the tangible capital ratios of these banks have fallen to levels that suggest they are probably bankrupt – like UniCredit in Italy and Deutsche Bank in Germany. BNP’s tangible equity ratio is 2.85%. Credit Agricole’s tangible equity ratio is 1.41%. (UniCredit’s is 4.42%, and Deutsche Bank’s is 1.92%).

“These banks have long been instruments of state policy in Europe. They’ve funded all kinds of government projects and favored industries. Making loans is far more popular with politicians than demanding repayment for loans. As a result, these banks are left with nothing in the kitty to repay their depositors. If there’s a run on these banks (and there will be), how will they come up with money that’s owed?”

I totally agree (although Porter is wrong about US debt). If there is a sovereign debt credit crisis in Europe, it is entirely possible that 80% of Europe’s banks will be technically insolvent, depending on the level of the crisis. Frisell could be eerily prescient. We gave them subprime; they may pay us back with their own crisis and in spades, as Dad used to say.

I really need to do a whole letter on Europe again soon. The next real crisis in Europe that is not bought off with yet more debt will push the world into recession. It is that serious. That is why the ECB keeps ignoring its charter and taking on bank debt and buying sovereign debt they know will be marked down.

The entire world economy now swings on the German voters and whether they will take on all of Europe’s debt, risking their own AAA status and putting themselves at serious risk. Supposedly, Finland wants collateral from Greece if it contributes its portion of a guarantee. Think every other country will not want some of that action? I simply do not have the space to go into it tonight, but this is VERY serious. Maybe next week. And just as I was getting ready to hit the send button, economy.com sent me an email entitled “Article: Europe’s Leaders Know the Way but Lack the Will, by Tu Packard. Summary: The stability facility lacks credibility.”

That more than sums it up. Dysfunctional indeed.

We now need to turn to Governor Perry, our newest candidate for president.

The “Treasonous” Fed

I have been asked many times what I think about Governor Perry getting into the presidential race. Over six months ago he told me personally there was no way he would run, and he was serious when he said it. I believed him. But what I think happened in the interim is that he looked at the field of candidates and said, “I can play in that league.” And as long as he can keep from making any more gaffs like he did with his Fed comments, he can indeed play in the current field. He has the charm of being plainspoken and blunt, and that might just play well this year. Whether the country is ready for another Texan is a different question.

(Sidebar: my personal bet is that there are at least two and possibly three other potential candidates who would be taken seriously if they got into the race. They, too, have got to be saying, “Is this all I’m up against? I can play in this league. In fact, I might just be the MVP.” The lure of the presidency is a powerful one. My bet is we have not seen the final field of candidates. And it is not impossible that a challenger emerges on the Democratic side as well. Obama’s poll numbers, even among Democrats, are not good. This is a very interesting political year and as wide open as I can remember.)

But however injudicious Perry’s actual remarks were, he is right to call into question Fed actions. Why do I as your humble analyst get that right and politicians don’t? Let me be clear. I want a VERY independent Fed. I do not want Congress or the President dictating Fed policy. I do not like Senators holding up Fed nominations for political gain, whether it was Dodd fighting Bush over his nominees or current GOP senators fighting Obama over his. That is simply wrong in every way. But I think Fed actions are fair game for comment and disagreement. And I agree with Perry that QE2 was not helpful. It was not very wise policy – but that is a long way from “treasonous.” Let’s see if the electorate gives him a “mulligan” on that comment.

Think about this. The Fed announced this week that it would extend low rates until 2013. They are practically pushing people into higher-risk assets in a search for yield, at PRECISELY the time we may be slipping into recession, which will put those assets at their highest risk. I think this could end in tears and land those who are close to retirement in even worse shape.

Note to Governor Perry: If you want to learn how to properly criticize the Fed and the US government, go read the last ten speeches of another Texan, Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher (who should be the next Fed chair!). Let’s take a look at a few paragraphs from his latest speech, this week (again, hat tip Art Cashin).

“I have spoken to this many times in public. Those with the capacity to hire American workers―small businesses as well as large, publicly traded or private―are immobilized. Not because they lack entrepreneurial zeal or do not wish to grow; not because they can’t access cheap and available credit. Rather, they simply cannot budget or manage for the uncertainty of fiscal and regulatory policy. In an environment where they are already uncertain of potential growth in demand for their goods and services and have yet to see a significant pickup in top-line revenue, there is palpable angst surrounding the cost of doing business. According to my business contacts, the opera buffa of the debt ceiling negotiations compounded this uncertainty, leaving business decision makers frozen in their tracks.

{Mauldin note: Opera buffa (Italian; plural, opere buffe) is a genre of opera. It was first used as an informal description of Italian comic operas variously classified by their authors as ‘commedia in musica.’ Us Texans have our literary abilities.}

“I would suggest that unless you were on another planet, no consumer with access to a television, radio or the Internet could have escaped hearing their president, senators and their congressperson telling them the sky was falling. With the leadership of the nation―Republicans and Democrats alike―and every talking head in the media making clear hour after hour, day after day in the run-up to Aug. 2 that a financial disaster was lurking around the corner, it does not take much imagination to envision consumers deciding to forego or delay some discretionary expenditure they had planned.

“Instead, they might well be inclined to hunker down to weather the perfect storm they were being warned was rapidly approaching. Watching the drama as it unfolded, I could imagine consumers turning to each other in millions of households, saying: ‘Honey, we need to cancel that trip we were planning and that gizmo or service we wanted to buy. We better save more and spend less.’ Small wonder that, following the somewhat encouraging retail activity reported in July, the Michigan survey measure of consumer sentiment released just recently had a distinctly sour tone.

“Importantly, from a business operator’s perspective, nothing was clarified, except that there will be undefined change in taxes, spending and subsidies and other fiscal incentives or disincentives. The message was simply that some combination of revenue enhancement and spending growth cutbacks will take place. The particulars are left to one’s imagination and the outcome of deliberations among 12 members of the Legislature.

“Now, put yourself in the shoes of a business operator. On the revenue side, you have yet to see a robust recovery in demand; growing your top-line revenue is vexing. You have been driving profits or just maintaining your margins through cost reduction and achieving maximum operating efficiency. You have money in your pocket or a banker increasingly willing to give you credit if and when you decide to expand.

“But you have no idea where the government will be cutting back on spending, what measures will be taken on the taxation front and how all this will affect your cost structure or customer base. Your most likely reaction is to cross your arms, plant your feet and say: ‘Show me. I am not going to hire new workers or build a new plant until I have been shown what will come out of this agreement.’

“Moreover, you might now say to yourself, ‘I understand from the Federal Reserve that I don’t have to worry about the cost of borrowing for another two years. Given that I don’t know how I am going to be hit by whatever new initiatives the Congress will come up with, but I do know that credit will remain cheap through the next election, what incentive do I have to invest and expand now? Why shouldn’t I wait until the sky is clear?’”

You can read the whole speech at http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2011/fs110817.cfm. In addition to his reasoning for his latest dissent at the Fed, Fisher also goes into detail about the Texas job-growth machine, which is what Perry will be touting.

Again from Art Cashin:

Bullard, of the St. Louis Fed, said “Policy should be set by the state of the economy, not according to the calendar,” pointing to the Fed’s decision to stand pat until mid-2013.

Next came the Philly Fed’s Plosser, who said, “There is a price to be paid” for monetary policy and that the Fed’s decision was “inappropriate policy at an inappropriate time.”

Now that, Rick, is how to take the Fed to task.

Some Final Thoughts

If we are headed into recession, and I think we are, then the stock market has a long way to go to reach its next bottom, as do many risk assets. Income is going to be king, as well as cash (and cash is a position, as I often remind readers).

If we go into recession, we’ll know several things. Recessions are by definition deflationary. Yields on bonds will go down, much further than the market thinks today. And while the Fed may decide to invoke QE3 to fight a deflation scare, the problem is not one of liquidity; it is a debt problem.

It is not unusual for a recession to last a year, which means it could well take us into next summer and election season. And while the NBER (the people who are the “official” recession scorecard keepers) will tell us when the recession started, about nine months after it has, it is unlikely they will give an all-clear before the election.

There is little stomach for more fiscal stimulus. The drive is to cut spending. Fed policy is impotent. Unemployment will rise yet again and tax receipts will fall and expenses related to unemployment benefits will rise, putting further pressure on the deficit. Already, 40 million of our citizens are on food stamps. Wal-Mart notes that shoppers come into their stores late at night on the last day of the month and wait until midnight, when their new allotment of food stamps is activated.

It is hard to see at this moment what pulls us out, other than the blood, sweat, and tears of American entrepreneurs. Fisher is right; the US government should create certainty, create policies to foster new business, and get out of the way.

So, I guess I am going out on a limb, without any help from an inverted yield curve, and saying that we will be in recession within 12 months, if we are not already in one. This will be unlike any recession we have seen, as there is not much that can be done, other than to just get through it as best we can. Sit down and think about your own situation and prepare.

And frankly, for those of us who are entrepreneurs, this will offer some very interesting opportunities. I am not one for digging a hole and crawling in it. Stay aware of what can be done and create your own solutions!

Source: JohnMauldin.com (http://s.tt/134MA)

THIS BEAR MARKET IS JUST STARTING TO ROAR

Nice factual reasoned analysis from Comstock Partners on why this bear market has a long way to go. People tend to focus on the day to day fluctuations of the market rather than stepping back and looking at the big picture. The world runs in long term cycles. The stock market also operates in long term cycles going from undervaluation to overvaluation and back. The markets experience alternating secular bull and bear markets that generally last for 15 to 20 years at a time. Investors get fooled by the cyclical bear and bull markets that las one or two years within a secular trend.

We had a secular bear market that lasted from 1966 to 1982. We then had a secular bull market that lasted from 1982 to 2000. We are now 11 years into a secular bear market, with stock prices lower than they were in 1998. We have at least five years left. Valuations are still extremely high. We have just completed a cyclical bull market from the March 2009 lows. The artificial stimulus is wearing off and the economy is headed into the tank. Corporate profits will crash and the stock market will drop at least 30% from here.

Ignore CNBC and concentate on valuations and the long term cycles. 

 

Bear Market Far From Over

What is currently happening in the market and the economy was predictable and is following the sequence we have long expected.  Households accumulated enormous debts in the past decade, leading to the credit crisis and recession of 2007-2009.  The government stepped in with massive monetary ease and fiscal expansion that produced only a weak recovery and a vast increase in government debt.  The market erroneously assumed that the recovery would follow the pattern of typical post-war expansions and rallied strongly from the early 2009 bottom to the recent highs. 

A similar pattern developed in Europe where sovereign debt of the weaker EU members has become a serious problem that EU leaders have been unable to solve.  Now we are undergoing the aftershocks of the crisis.

As we have repeatedly stated, crisis recoveries are characterized by short sub-par recoveries and numerous recessions as household debt burdens dampen consumer spending for long periods.   We did see the short sub-par recovery and now it seems to be ending at a time when the Fed has already used its best weapons and fiscal policy is due to become more restrictive.  First half GDP was revised down sharply.  Housing has continued to weaken.  Consumer spending has been sluggish.  Initial jobless claims for the latest period jumped back over 400,000.  The ECRI leading index has declined to 127.9 from its April peak of 131.1.

Even more shocking was the plunge in the August Philly Fed Index to minus 30.7 from 3.2 in July.  The drop was the weakest since October 2008.  In addition, the August University of Michigan Consumer Confidence Index dropped to 54.9, lower than any level during the recession and the lowest in 31 years.  These are the types of readings seen only in recessions.  Although the Fed only recently lowered its economic outlook for the second half of this year and 2012 these projections already seem outdated.  Today the New York Fed lowered its outlook while numerous brokerage firms and banks have belatedly been scrambling to cut their forecasts as well.

If anything the situation looks even worse in Europe.  Germany reported second quarter GDP growth of 0.1% and growth in France was zero.  Moreover European banks with exposure to PIIGS debt have been turning to the ECB for emergency loans.  Today the ECB reported that one bank (not named) has borrowed 500 million Euros a day for seven days. 

The remaining areas of the world cannot stop global GDP growth from shrinking.  Japan is in a recession.  China is still tightening to dampen inflation.  China as well as the other emerging nations are export-driven economies that depend heavily on American and European consumers. 

We, therefore, believe that the market has now entered a major downtrend.  It is a mistake to dismiss the slide we’ve seen to date as mindless and devoid of fundamentals as many strategists maintain.  These are not just scary headlines—-they are scary fundamentals.  As usual, there will undoubtedly be some more sharp rallies that will be interpreted as new bull markets.  In our view, however, the bear market has only begun, and has a long way to go.

Hear all about it! Hear all about it!

Just a Saturday funny for my buds on TBP..
___________________________________________________________

A Harley Biker is riding by the zoo in Washington, DC when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion’s cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the collar of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents.

The biker jumps off his Harley, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch.

Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly. A reporter has watched the whole event.

The reporter addressing the Harley rider says, ‘Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I’ve seen a man do in my whole life.’

The Harley rider replies, ‘Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger and acted as I felt right.’

The reporter says, ‘Well, I’ll make sure this won’t go unnoticed. I’m a journalist, you know, and tomorrow’s paper will have this story on the front page… So, what do you do for a living and what political affiliation do you have?’

The biker replies, I’m a ex-U.S. Marine and a Republican

The journalist leaves.

The following morning the biker buys the paper to see if it indeed brings news of his actions, and reads, on the front page:

U.S. MARINE ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH

…and THAT pretty much sums up the media’s approach to the news these days…

WORLDWIDE PONZI SCHEME UNRAVELLING

I guess Obama, Pelosi, Kerry, Krugman, and Reid will blame the Tea Party extremists for the 2nd stock market crash in the last two weeks. Americans want sound bites. They want simple concepts because thinking makes their heads hurt. If you are an ignorant American, than you should stop reading now and go back to watching The View. The unravelling of the worldwide financial ponzi scheme has many tentacles and many interconnected pieces, but it all goes back to DEBT and the inability to service that debt with the cash flows being generated by governments, consumers and businesses. Here are the facts:

  • Nixon closed the gold window in 1971 and unleashed a never ending torrent of fiat paper into the world.
  • Politicians throughout the world, since the late 1960s, have made promises of social welfare benefits to voters in order to get elected. They didn’t worry about demographics or using complicated  mathematical concepts like multiplication and addition to figure out that the promises could never be fulfilled.
  • The Federal Reserve enabled politicians to create as much debt as they wanted by methodically devaluing the USD by 90% since 1971.

 

  • The Federal Reserve has created bubble after bubble (internet, housing, stocks) by purposely keeping interest rates below the true market rate. They have failed to regulate the banks and allowed them to leverage 30 or 40 to 1. Their own balance sheet is leveraged 55 to 1 today.
  • The most critical error in this whole impending disaster was the decision to listen to the Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary Paulson and the Princeton Keynesian economics professor Bernanke and bailout Wall Street on the backs of Main Street. We were lied to by the monied interests. The economy went into the tank anyway. The banks were saved and have paid themselves $70 billion in bonuses since they were saved.
  • The Too Big To Fail Banks were not too big to fail. They should have been liquidated in an orderly manner. Their stockholders and bond holders should have been wiped out. The debt would have been written off. We would have had a one or two year deep recession.
  • Instead, most of the original bad debt still sits on the books of these banks. Trillions more sit on the books of the Federal Reserve. Trillions more were added to the taxpayers’ books. The trillions of Keynesian stimulus did nothing to revive the economy.
  • Shifting private debt to public debt solved nothing. Extending terms of the debt solved nothing. Taking on more debt to pay the existing debt solved nothing.
  • The world is coming to the realization that no one can pay off the debt. Consumers aren’t going to pay those mortgages or those credit cards. The Greeks, Spaniards, Italians, Portugese, and Irish are not going to pay back Germany. The US is not going to pay you the Social Security and Medicare they promised you. The European banks are not going to pay back the Wall Street banks. The Fderal Reserve is never going to pay off the $2.8 trillion of debt on its balance sheet.

A ponzi scheme unravels when people realize that it is a scam and demand their money back. Except there is no money to give back. We have reached that point. The entire worldwide economic system is nothing but a Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme times 100 trillion.

The Federal Reserve will pretend to ride to the rescue. Politicians will hold press conferences and announce agreements. The MSM will pronounce that all is well. Don’t believe it. We are entering the Greater Depression, which will make the 1st one look like a walk in the park.

FOURTH TURNING PART 2

Renters Are Deluding Themselves – Here’s Why

It’s en vogue now to be “anti-homeownership” given the recent crash in home prices and all the shenanigans the mortgage companies, banks and Wall street firms pulled over the past several years.  People tend to use the recency effect and confirmation bias to formulate their opinions which dictate important lifestyle and financial decisions. Before you jump all over me for this thesis, let me clarify a few things:

a) Many people CAN’T own – that’s a fact of life.  If owning a home isn’t an option for you for numerous reasons ranging from finances to career, then making a choice between renting and owning isn’t something that mandates weighing the options.
b) Many people SHOULDN’T own – perhaps during the days of easy credit or even today, you have the funds to buy a home, but there might be some factors that would make this a poor choice.  Perhaps you need to relocate every couple years due to your line of work, perhaps you’re in the middle of a divorce or child custody battle or perhaps your income is quite variable.  It might make sense for you to rent until there’s more stability in your financial situation.
c) Many people COULD own, but don’t.  That’s the target audience.

Long-time renters often cite all the negatives of home ownership, and there are some to be sure.  But many of these oft-cited reasons have a valid counterargument OR these old paradigms are no longer accurate:

Continue Reading Renters Are Deluding Themselves – Here’s Why

I’m Borrowing $50,000 From My 401(k) – Here’s Why

There are tons of articles out there waring about the dire consequences of borrowing from your 401(k) – you know, not earning money on the withdrawn amount, double taxation, early withdrawal penalties and having to repay immediately if separate from the company…I’m going to lay out why my particular situation and outline why none of these “risks” matter and my transaction will work out beautifully.  So, be prepared for some unconventional wisdom!

First off, many people are either misinformed or irresponsible and would have been better off having NOT borrowed from their 401(k).  But financial pundits like to compartmentalize ALL situations into a single bucket and paint something as “good” or “bad”.  Generic cookie-cutter advice is often wrong and doesn’t apply to individual cases.  My scenario is different and as you’ll see, I’m VASTLY better off borrowing from my 401(K) than not.

Read more about Why I’m Borrowing $50,000 from My 401K(k)

LLPOH’s Short Short Story: Death by Regulation

I have just read that in early August American workers finished working for the following three things: federal taxes, state and local taxes, and for the cost of regulation. In other words, people work approximately 7.5 months this year to pay for these things, and so only work 4.5 months a year for themselves. I knew that workers cover their federal taxes sometime in April (Tax-Free Day), and the rest of their taxes a month or two later, but I had never thought of how much work goes into paying for regulation.

I have always considered that regulations were largely a business expense – i.e. it costs the business to cover EPA/safety/employment regulations, but I really never considered how that actually flows down to the individual. But of course it does, and so in the end it is the working people of the country that pay for the regulations. It is tax by stealth.

The scariest part of the story was that the author said that because money was drying up (i.e. tightening of the budget outlays at all levels – federal, state, and local) that the politicians will be turning to additional regulation in order to achieve their political and financial goals. In other words, instead of direct taxes, they will be indirectly taxing citizens via regulation and the transfer of cost onto business. The author indicated that politicians will be forcing businesses and individuals to spend money via regulation as opposed to the government collecting it and re-directing it. Laws may be changed to transfer work onto employers/individuals that were previously undertaken by government agencies. In addition, there will of course be new regulations and reporting requirements. It seems politicians believe laws and regulation directed at business do not generate the outpouring of dissent as do tax increases on the general public.

I do not know precisely how this will unfold. It may be things such as 1) mandating that business take responsibility for the upkeep of the roads in front of their businesses, 2) requiring that businesses “self-audit” their taxes, 3) requiring that they employ a certain number of safety or EPA inspectors per 100 employees who then have to send the government reports each month, 4) requiring that they employ doctors or nurses to care for their employees, 5) requiring that businesses deliver their own rubbish to dumpsites, etc. etc. etc.

This scenario seems to me not only to be plausible, but entirely likely, and I have no doubt whatsoever we will see it occur. I have not as yet seen an escalation of regulation/reporting, but it is only a matter of time before it happens.

We desperately need to not only overcome the debt burden that has encompassed the country, but to also overcome the political mindset that all of the costs and regulation are needed. Transferring cost onto business, and thence onto the public, is not a solution to the overspending problem. It is sleight of hand and does nothing to address the real issue of overspending. We must demand politicians stop looking for ways to mask the overspending, and must insist they look to eliminate the spending entirely.
The prospect of increased regulation and business expense feels me with dread. The last thing small business people need is increased regulation. It is enormously difficult to run a successful small business, and each time regulation increases it further adds to the burden. If governments do indeed continue down the regulatory path, it is only a matter of time before starting up and running a small business will become unviable.

BERNANKE PLEDGES TO SCREW YOUR GRANDMOTHER FOR AT LEAST TWO MORE YEARS

“A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank.” – Ron Paul

  

I wonder what goes through Ben Bernanke’s mind as he sits in his gold plated boardroom in the majestic Marriner Eccles building in Washington DC and decides to screw grandmothers in order to further enrich Wall Street bankers. He just pledged to keep interest rates at zero percent for two more years. Ben is a supposedly book smart man. Does he have no guilt or shame for what he has wrought? How does he sleep at night knowing he has created bloody revolutions around the globe due to his inflationary zero interest policy? People are dying because he has decided that an elite group of Wall Street bankers who recklessly brought down the worldwide financial system in 2008 deserve to be kept alive and enriched at the expense of the many.

He uses words like transitory to describe inflation. Even as the price of gold reveals his lies he continues to promote policies that will lead to the demise of the USD and our economic system. There is only one way to counter his lies – truth. With a corporate fascist government run by the few for the benefit of the few, telling the truth is treason as stated by Ron Paul:

“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.”

The storyline being sold to you by Bernanke, his Wall Street masters, and their captured puppets in Washington DC is that deflation is the great bogeyman they must slay. They make these statements from their ivory jewel encrusted towers as the real people in the real world deal with reality. The reality since Ben Bernanke announced his QE2 policy in August 2010 is:

  • Unleaded gas prices are up 45%.
  • Heating oil prices are up 46%.
  • Corn prices are up 71%.
  • Soybean prices are up 26%.
  • Rice prices are up 13%.
  • Pork prices are up 31%.
  • Beef prices are up 25%.
  • Coffee prices are up 38%.
  • Sugar prices are up 48%.
  • Cotton prices are up 13%.
  • Gold prices are up 42%.
  • Silver prices are up 115%.
  • Copper prices are up 23%.

These are the facts and they fly in the face of the lies being spouted by Bernanke and his Federal Reserve cronies. Words like transitory, quantitative easing, extended period, and liquidity are used by Professor Bernanke to obscure what he is doing to the average American. He lives in a world of theories and models, while the rest of us live in the real world, where theories kill and impoverish millions. There are 40 million Americans over the age of 65 today. You might even know a few of them. There will be 10,000 people per day joining their ranks for the next nineteen years as the Baby Boomers retire en masse. The vast majority of these senior citizens are risk averse. Some disturbing facts reveal the true picture for seniors today:

  • Most senior citizens do not have a traditional pension plan because they have been going out of style over the past 30 years.  In 1980, some 39% of private-sector workers had a pension that guaranteed a steady payout during retirement. Today that number stands closer to 15%, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute in Washington, D.C. 
  • 35% of Americans already over the age of 65 rely almost entirely on Social Security payments alone. 
  • Approximately 3 out of 4 Americans start claiming Social Security benefits the moment they are eligible at age 62.  Most are doing this out of necessity. This probably has something to do with the fact that the median retirement savings of households over the age of 65 is less than $45,000.   
  • The median household net worth of all Americans fell from $97,000 in 2005 to $70,000 in 2009. The median household net worth of households over 65 years old fell from $200,000 in 2005 to approximately $150,000 in 2009. Two thirds of seniors’ net worth is the equity in their primary residence, meaning they have $50,000 or less of financial assets (cash, stocks, bonds). 
  • 20% of all the households in the United States have zero or negative net worth.  

This data sets the scene for the crime of the century committed by Ben Bernanke and his co-conspirators on the Federal Reserve Board. The easiest way to understand how Ben has screwed seniors and savers to pay off his Wall Street and K Street benefactors is to use a real life example.

A seventy five year old widow living in her paid off row home, bought in 1955, gets by on her annual social security income of $17,000 and the income generated from the $125,000 in retirement savings left from her husband’s forty years working as a truck driver. She is a child of the Depression, financially unsophisticated and risk averse. This describes most senior citizens. The widow and her late husband were only comfortable investing their money in CDs and money market funds. In 2007, before the Wall Street created financial collapse, savers and risk averse senior citizens could earn 5% in a money market fund, 5.5% in a 2 year CD and 6% in a 5 year CD. The widow could supplement her meager social security income with an additional $6,000 of interest income. This money was used to pay the ever increasing real estate taxes, medical insurance premiums, upkeep on the old house, and necessities like food, fuel, insurance and heating.

Fast forward four years to 2011. Savers and seniors are getting average interest rates on 6-month CDs this week of 0.58% nationwide, according to Bankrate.com. Rates on one-year CDs fell this week to 0.86%, while 5- year CDs fetched 2.04%. Money market funds are paying a pitiful 0.16% on average. The widow that was able to generate a risk free $6,000 only four years ago has only been able to generate less than $500 per year for the last three years. In addition, the government manipulated CPI, as calculated by the drones at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, was used to deny senior citizens an increase in their Social Security payments for the last two years. Meanwhile, the prices of food, fuel, clothing, insurance, medical care, and local taxes have been skyrocketing due to Federal Reserve created inflation. Do you think the number of Americans on food stamps surging from 26.3 million in 2007 to 45.8 million today has anything to do with Bernanke’s zero interest rate, inflationary policies?

This is not a theoretical hypothesis. Ben Bernanke has purposely sacrificed the savers and seniors in this country at the satanic altar of his Wall Street high priests of debt. According to the BEA data on personal income, in the 3rd quarter of 2008 savers and seniors were able to earn $1.42 trillion of interest income. By the 3rd quarter of 2010 these same people were only able to earn $984 billion of interest income due to Ben Bernanke’s zero interest rate policy. Make no mistake about it, the $436 billion difference was taken out of the pockets of senior citizens and Americans trying to save for their futures and deposited into the accounts of the mega-Wall Street banks that destroyed our financial system with their reckless greed induced debt toga party. The beneficiaries of zero interest rates, QE1, QE2, and all future QEs are Wall Street bankers and heavily indebted entities – namely our profligate Federal Government, who make drunken sailors, seem fiscally responsible. The victims of zero interest rates and quantitative easing are savers and risk averse senior citizens as their income has plummeted and inflation has ravaged their everyday existence. Meanwhile, the Wall Street fat cats have paid themselves over $70 billion in bonuses since 2008.

The fantasy world of moderate inflation is a myth created by the Federal Reserve in conjunction with the government bureaucrats in Washington DC. These people have tortured the CPI calculation worse than a Muslim being water boarded at Guantanamo Bay. Alan Greenspan, bubble blower extraordinaire, began the process of systematically screwing grandmothers in the 1980s. As a way to hide and obscure the true level of inflation caused by running endless deficits supporting a welfare/warfare empire, Greenspan and Clinton implemented devious adjustments to the CPI in order to screw senior citizens and allow Big Government to get bigger while stealthily impoverishing the middle class. One man has pulled back the curtain on the Wizards of Inflation to reveal the truth. John Williams at www.shadowstats.com publishes the true rate of inflation as measured in 1980, prior to the fraudulent manipulation of the CPI. The reality is that inflation has not dropped below 5% since 1987 and currently exceeds 10%.

  

John Williams described the Greenspan/Clinton conspiracy to defraud Americans:

“The Greenspan argument was that when steak got too expensive, the consumer would substitute hamburger for the steak, and that the inflation measure should reflect the costs tied to buying hamburger versus steak, instead of steak versus steak. Of course, replacing hamburger for steak in the calculations would reduce the inflation rate, but it represented the rate of inflation in terms of maintaining a declining standard of living. Cost of living was being replaced by the cost of survival. The old system told you how much you had to increase your income in order to keep buying steak. The new system promised you hamburger, and then dog food, perhaps, after that. Over a period of several years, straight arithmetic weighting of the CPI components was shifted to a geometric weighting. The Greenspan benefit of a geometric weighting was that it automatically gave a lower weighting to CPI components that were rising in price, and a higher weighting to those items dropping in price.” 

Now we hear the latest bipartisan plan to “save” Social Security is to alter the CPI again and further defraud Americans by pretending inflation does not exist. Why address a problem when you can obfuscate, misinform and lie? Anyone with critical thinking skills can clearly see that since 2007 real inflation for our widow has ranged between 5% and 10%, while her subsistence level income has been slashed by 26% due to Ben Bernanke’s zero interest rate policy. The good news is our widow will have the peace of mind knowing the price of steak and hamburger hasn’t really risen as she decides on whether to dine on dog food or cat food tonight.

 

“Government spending is always a “tax” burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing.” – Ron Paul

 

The Road to Impoverishment & Authoritarianism

There is a direct connection between Federal Reserve policies and the impoverishment of the middle class and seniors. The average American does not appreciate the disastrous consequences of deficit spending and currency devaluation by the Federal Reserve. Ron Paul has been sounding the warning for over a decade, but no one has been listening:

“The greatest threat facing America today is the disastrous fiscal policies of our own government, marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency devaluation. It is this one-two punch– Congress spending more than it can tax or borrow, and the Fed printing money to make up the difference– that threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars.”

It is no longer a threat. It is reality. The chart below tells the story.

The Federal Funds rate was 6.5% when George W. Bush assumed the presidency in 2000. The economy was booming, unemployment was 4.2%, the country was running fiscal surpluses, and the National Debt stood at $5.7 trillion. Alan Greenspan was the Federal Reserve Chairman and had been in that position since 1987. The Federal Funds Rate averaged 5.25% from 1990 through 2000 as the country grew strongly and America came the closest to full employment in its history. In 2001 Greenspan set in motion the creation of a tsunami of debt that swept over the entire country in 2008. The short shallow 2001 recession convinced Greenspan to reduce rates to 1% and keep them below 3% until the middle of 2005. He did this with the full support of his right hand man at the Fed – Ben Bernanke.

“The failure of Chairman Greenspan and other FOMC members to address the fiscal and monetary problems of the United States during his almost two decades at the Fed has left the United States on a trajectory for economic stagnation, hyperinflation, and the attendant political and social costs of such policies.”Chris Whalen Inflated – How Money & Debt Built the American Dream 

Greenspan kept interest rates excessively low three years into an economic recovery, creating the largest bubble in world history. He handed the inflation baton to Bernanke in February 2006 and Ben has been sprinting at top speed for the last five years printing money faster than a Japanese bullet train. With a true rate of inflation running between 5% and 10% during the 2000 through 2011 time frame, market driven interest rates should have been in that same range. But Alan and Ben have kept the Federal Funds rate at an average level of 2.25% over this period. The result has been a consumer debt bubble, housing bubble and now a government debt bubble. Instead of accepting the consequences of excessive liquidity, excessive debt and mal-investment by the Wall Street banks and liquidating the toxic poison from our economic system with the resulting economic depression and losses borne by the stockholders and bondholders of the criminal Wall Street enterprises, Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner chose to sacrifice the American taxpayer, savers, and seniors to keep their Wall Street masters in their NYC penthouses and Hamptons estates.

The shrieking liberal left blames capitalism and demands more social welfare benefits for their entitled constituents. The fact is we have not had true capitalism in this country since 1913.

“Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven’t had capitalism. A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank.” – Ron Paul

 

The Day the Dollar Died – August 15, 1971

“With the exception only of the period of the gold standard, practically all governments of history have used their exclusive power to issue money to defraud and plunder the people.” – F.A. von Hayak 

“The road paved with inflation and debt is also the road to authoritarianism.” – Chris Whalen Inflated – How Money & Debt Built the American Dream 

On August 15, 1971, exactly forty years ago this week, Richard Nixon closed the gold window and removed the last vestiges of restraint on politicians and central bankers. Politicians were free to make promises that couldn’t be kept to buy votes and central bankers were free to print fiat dollars and create inflation to support an ever growing warfare/welfare state. On that date the non-manipulated CPI was 40.8. Today, forty years later, the highly manipulated CPI is 225.7, a 553% increase. In reality, true inflation has risen more than 700% since August 1971. Some other facts put this relentless inflation into perspective:

  • GDP has ascended from $1.1 trillion to $15.0 trillion today, a 1,364% increase in forty years.
  • The National Debt has risen from $400 billion to $14.5 trillion, a 3,625% increase in forty years.
  • Total wage income has grown from $588 billion to $6.627 trillion today, a 1,127% increase in forty years.
  • Consumer credit outstanding has accumulated from $141 billion to $2.446 trillion today, a 1,735% increase in forty years.
  • War spending has increased from $95 billion to $966 billion today, a 1,017% increase in forty years. The U.S. was in the midst of the Vietnam War in 1971.
  • Social welfare transfers from the Federal government for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, and Unemployment increased from $87 billion to $2.305 trillion today, a 2,649% increase in forty years.

These facts prove how twisted and warped our economic system and society have become. Real wages are lower than they were in 1971 as families were forced to put two parents into the workforce forcing children to be raised by strangers, with the resultant social consequences. The corporate media, financial industrial complex and housing industrial complex convinced Americans they had to keep up with the Joneses with new luxury automobiles, extravagant McMansions, and the expensive accoutrements that went along with these representations of fake wealth. The financial plundering of the country by the peddlers of debt on Wall Street could not have happened without the easy money, no regulation policies of the Federal Reserve for the last decade. The National Debt is increasing at a rate of 10% per year while GDP is increasing at a rate of less than 2% per year. Anyone with even the most basic math skills can see this train is going to go off the tracks. Our spending on social welfare benefits has grown at a rate twice as high as our GDP growth for the last forty years and the establishment in Washington has no resolve to address these un-payable promises. The liberals squealed like stuck pigs over the horrific non-cuts in the recent joke debt ceiling compromise. The neo-cons who control the Republican agenda think $1 trillion per year for their war machine is far too little and endangers our very existence. Consumers refuse to accept the reality of their precarious existence balanced on the edge of their 13 credit cards.

Americans of all parties, ages, races, persuasions, education and beliefs have shirked their civic and moral responsibility to future generations. The rampant greed on Wall Street, corruption in Washington DC, shallowness of the American people and cowardice of all in not accepting responsibility for their actions will lead to the end of this country as we know it. There is no courage among the political class in Washington DC to truly take the steps required to save this country from the most predictable cataclysm in history. The politicians and citizens they represent have decided to delegate their civic responsibility to Ben Bernanke. He has tripled the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet by acquiring the toxic mortgage “assets” of the Wall Street banks and buying $600 billion of U.S. Treasuries. The Federal Funds Rate is .07%. His announcement of zero interest rates for two more years proves he has run out of theories and ammo. Jim Rickards, in 2010, pointed out the danger in Bernanke’s reckless policies:

“Fed Chairman Bernanke wakes up every morning and tries to trash the dollar with quantitative easing, zero interest rates and swap lines with the central banks. But it has not been working. The Fed has never taken it to the next step and asked what happens when quantitative easing does not work.”

The utter failure of QE2, hollow Congressional spending “cuts” that will keep the National Debt on track towards $23 trillion by 2021, S&P downgrade and recent plunge in the stock market are the first cracks in the façade of the great American Empire. We have entered a period of institutional crisis and this fiscal spiral will lead us further into the clutches of a more centralized authoritarian form of government unless the people stand up to the junta of mercantilist oligarchs that control this country. Do we want to relinquish our remaining freedoms and liberties for the cloak of corporate fascist authoritarian central planning disguised as safety and security? The Romans chose security over freedom. The time has come to make a choice about what we will become. Ben Franklin stated the obvious two centuries ago:

 Those who would give up Essential Liberty
to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

– Ben Franklin

 

CRISIS OF THE ELITES

Interesting that you have to go to papers like the Asian Times for solid analysis of our ongoing crisis. I wonder if Friedman has read The Fourth Turning. He details how this worldwide crisis is playing out. As with every Fourth Turning, the existing social order and the elites that have been in control will be swept away. It will be bloody, violent and unexpected for the linear thinkers of the world. They didn’t see this crisis coming and they think they can manage their way through it. They are so wrong.

 

The evolution of crisis

By George Friedman

Classical political economists like Adam Smith or David Ricardo never used the term ”economy” by itself. They always used the term ”political economy.” For classical economists, it was impossible to understand politics without economics or economics without politics. The two fields are certainly different but they are also intimately linked.

The use of the term ”economy” by itself did not begin until the late 19th century. Smith understood that while an efficient market would emerge from individual choices, those choices were framed by the political system in which they were made, just as the political system was shaped by economic realities. For classical economists, the political and economic systems were intertwined, each dependent on the other for its existence.

The current economic crisis is best understood as a crisis of political economy. Moreover, it has to be understood as a global crisis enveloping the United States, Europe and China that has different details but one overriding theme: the relationship between the political order and economic life. On a global scale, or at least for most of the world’s major economies, there is a crisis of political economy. Let’s consider how it evolved.

Origin of the crisis
As we all know, the origin of the current financial crisis was the subprime mortgage meltdown in the United States. To be more precise, it originated in a financial system generating paper assets whose value depended on the price of housing. It assumed that the price of homes would always rise and, at the very least, if the price fluctuated the value of the paper could still be determined. Neither proved to be true. The price of housing declined and, worse, the value of the paper assets became indeterminate. This placed the entire American financial system in a state of gridlock and the crisis spilled over into Europe, where many financial institutions had purchased the paper as well.

From the standpoint of economics, this was essentially a financial crisis: who made or lost money and how much. From the standpoint of political economy it raised a different question: the legitimacy of the financial elite. Think of a national system as a series of subsystems – political, economic, military and so on. Then think of the economic system as being divisible into subsystems – various corporate verticals with their own elites, with one of the verticals being the financial system. Obviously, this oversimplifies the situation, but I’m doing that to make a point.

One of the systems, the financial system, failed, and this failure was due to decisions made by the financial elite. This created a massive political problem centered not so much on confidence in any particular financial instrument but on the competence and honesty of the financial elite itself. A sense emerged that the financial elite was either stupid or dishonest or both. The idea was that the financial elite had violated all principles of fiduciary, social and moral responsibility in seeking its own personal gain at the expense of society as a whole.

Fair or not, this perception created a massive political crisis. This was the true systemic crisis, compared to which the crisis of the financial institutions was trivial. The question was whether the political system was capable not merely of fixing the crisis but also of holding the perpetrators responsible. Alternatively, if the financial crisis did not involve criminality, how could the political system not have created laws to render such actions criminal? Was the political elite in collusion with the financial elite?

There was a crisis of confidence in the financial system and a crisis of confidence in the political system. The US government’s actions in September 2008 were designed first to deal with the failures of the financial system. Many expected this would be followed by dealing with the failures of the financial elite, but this is perceived not to have happened. Indeed, the perception is that having spent large sums of money to stabilize the financial system, the political elite allowed the financial elite to manage the system to its benefit.

This generated the second crisis – the crisis of the political elite. The Tea Party movement emerged in part as critics of the political elite, focusing on the measures taken to stabilize the system and arguing that it had created a new financial crisis, this time in excessive sovereign debt.

The Tea Party’s perception was extreme, but the idea was that the political elite had solved the financial problem both by generating massive debt and by accumulating excessive state power. Its argument was that the political elite used the financial crisis to dramatically increase the power of the state (health care reform was the poster child for this) while mismanaging the financial system through excessive sovereign debt.

The crisis in Europe
The sovereign debt question also created both a financial crisis and then a political crisis in Europe. While the American financial crisis certainly affected Europe, the European political crisis was deepened by the resulting recession. There had long been a minority in Europe who felt that the European Union had been constructed either to support the financial elite at the expense of the broader population or to strengthen Northern Europe, particularly France and Germany, at the expense of the periphery – or both. What had been a minority view was strengthened by the recession.

The European crisis paralleled the American crisis in that financial institutions were bailed out. But the deeper crisis was that Europe did not act as a single unit to deal with all European banks but instead worked on a national basis, with each nation focused on its own banks and the European Central Bank seeming to favor Northern Europe in general and Germany in particular. This became the theme particularly when the recession generated disproportionate crises in peripheral countries like Greece.

There are two narratives to the story. One is the German version, which has become the common explanation. It holds that Greece wound up in a sovereign debt crisis because of the irresponsibility of the Greek government in maintaining social welfare programs in excess of what it could fund, and now the Greeks were expecting others, particularly the Germans, to bail them out.

The Greek narrative, which is less noted, was that the Germans rigged the European Union in their favor. Germany is the world’s third-largest exporter, after China and the United States (and closing rapidly on the number two spot). By forming a free trade zone, the Germans created captive markets for their goods. During the prosperity of the first 20 years or so, this was hidden beneath general growth. But once a crisis hit, the inability of Greece to devalue its money – which, as the euro, was controlled by the European Central Bank – and the ability of Germany to continue exporting without any ability of Greece to control those exports exacerbated Greece’s recession, leading to a sovereign debt crisis. Moreover, the regulations generated by Brussels so enhanced the German position that Greece was helpless.

Which narrative is true is not the point. The point is that Europe is facing two political crises generated by economics. One crisis is similar to the American one, which is the belief that Europe’s political elite protected the financial elite. The other is a distinctly European one, a regional crisis in which parts of Europe have come to distrust each other rather vocally. This could become an existential crisis for the European Union.

The crisis in China
The American and European crises struck hard at China, which, as the world’s largest export economy, is a hostage to external demand, particularly from the United States and Europe. When the United States and Europe went into recession, the Chinese government faced an unemployment crisis. If factories closed, workers would be unemployed, and unemployment in China could lead to massive social instability.

The Chinese government had two responses. The first was to keep factories going by encouraging price reductions to the point where profit margins on exports evaporated. The second was to provide unprecedented amounts of credit to enterprises facing default on debts in order to keep them in business.

The strategy worked, of course, but only at the cost of substantial inflation. This led to a second crisis, where workers faced the contraction of already small incomes. The response was to increase incomes, which in turn increased the cost of goods exported once again, making China’s wage rates less competitive, for example, than Mexico’s.

China had previously encouraged entrepreneurs. This was easy when Europe and the United States were booming. Now, the rational move by entrepreneurs was to go offshore or lay off workers, or both. The Chinese government couldn’t afford this, so it began to intrude more and more into the economy. The political elite sought to stabilize the situation – and their own positions – by increasing controls on the financial and other corporate elites.

In different ways, that is what happened in all three places – the United States, Europe and China – at least as first steps. In the United States, the first impulse was to regulate the financial sector, stimulate the economy and increase control over sectors of the economy. In Europe, where there were already substantial controls over the economy, the political elite started to parse how those controls would work and who would benefit more. In China, where the political elite always retained implicit power over the economy, that power was increased. In all three cases, the first impulse was to use political controls.

In all three, this generated resistance. In the United States, the Tea Party was simply the most active and effective manifestation of that resistance. It went beyond them. In Europe, the resistance came from anti-Europeanists (and anti-immigration forces that blamed the European Union’s open border policies for uncontrolled immigration). It also came from political elites of countries like Ireland who were confronting the political elites of other countries. In China, the resistance has come from those being hurt by inflation, both consumers and business interests whose exports are less competitive and profitable.

Not every significant economy is caught in this crisis. Russia went through this crisis years ago and had already tilted toward the political elite’s control over the economy. Brazil and India have not experienced the extremes of China, but then they haven’t had the extreme growth rates of China. But when the United States, Europe and China go into a crisis of this sort, it can reasonably be said that the center of gravity of the world’s economy and most of its military power is in crisis. It is not a trivial moment.

Crisis does not mean collapse. The United States has substantial political legitimacy to draw on. Europe has less but its constituent nations are strong. China’s Communist Party is a formidable entity but it is no longer dealing with a financial crisis. It is dealing with a political crisis over the manner in which the political elite has managed the financial crisis. It is this political crisis that is most dangerous, because as the political elite weakens it loses the ability to manage and control other elites.

It is vital to understand that this is not an ideological challenge. Left-wingers opposing globalization and right-wingers opposing immigration are engaged in the same process – challenging the legitimacy of the elites. Nor is it simply a class issue. The challenge emanates from many areas. The challengers are not yet the majority, but they are not so far away from it as to be discounted. The real problem is that, while the challenge to the elites goes on, the profound differences in the challengers make an alternative political elite difficult to imagine.

The crisis of legitimacy
This, then, is the third crisis that can emerge: that the elites become delegitimized and all that there is to replace them is a deeply divided and hostile force, united in hostility to the elites but without any coherent ideology of its own. In the United States this would lead to paralysis. In Europe it would lead to a devolution to the nation-state. In China it would lead to regional fragmentation and conflict.

These are all extreme outcomes and there are many arrestors. But we cannot understand what is going on without understanding two things. The first is that the political economic crisis, if not global, is at least widespread, and uprisings elsewhere have their own roots but are linked in some ways to this crisis. The second is that the crisis is an economic problem that has triggered a political problem, which in turn is making the economic problem worse.

The followers of Adam Smith may believe in an autonomous economic sphere disengaged from politics, but Adam Smith was far more subtle. That’s why he called his greatest book the Wealth of Nations. It was about wealth, but it was also about nations. It was a work of political economy that teaches us a great deal about the moment we are in.

HOLY SHIT!!! – JUST WHAT WE NEEDED

Really? Do we really need this shit now? For Christ sakes, can’t they wait until our 14 other crisises are semi-resolved? I’m starting to get really annoyed with these Fourth Turnings. They never let up. 

 

North, South Korea Trade Artillery Salvos

North Korea and South Korea traded artillery fire near the countries’ disputed sea border that was the scene of a deadly shelling in November.

North Korea fired a second round into the waters near Yeonpyeong Island yesterday after three South Korean shells were fired into the sea around 2 p.m. local time, Yonhap news reported. Residents of the island heard the salvos, Yonhap’s Korean language service said.

South Korea was responding to an initial salvo from the North an hour earlier, said a defense ministry official who declined to be identified, citing government policy. The defense official said the military wasn’t aware of any drills in the area.

The incident came a month after both nations said they would try to revive multilateral talks on the North’s nuclear- weapons program, signaling an easing of tension between the two rivals that has been an irritant to U.S.-China ties over the past year. The so-called Northern Limit Line dividing the two nations on their western border in the Yellow Sea has been a source of repeated conflict since the 1950-1953 civil war ended in a cease-fire.

“North Korea appears to be provoking the South in a calculated manner to highlight the need for a peace treaty to replace the armistice agreement after the war,” said Kim Yong Hyun, a professor at Dongguk University in Seoul. “I doubt the North will go so far as to risk breaking down the dialogue.”

Four South Koreans died in November when the North shelled Yeonpyeong island in retaliation for South Korea firing rounds into the disputed waters during a training exercise. Relations soured earlier in the year over the sinking of a South Korean warship in March, killing 46 sailors.

Trade, Aid

The two incidents spurred the U.S. to put pressure on China, North Korea’s main source of trade and financial aid, to rein in Kim Jong Il’s government. China accounted for 83 percent of North Korea’s $4.2 billion of international commerce in 2010, the Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency said in May. China made up 79 percent of trade in 2009 and 53 percent in 2005, according to the Seoul-based organization.

The cost of credit-default swaps insuring South Korean government debt from default rose four basis points after the reports of the shelling to 129.5 basis points as of 4:50 p.m. in Singapore, according to Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc prices. One month non-deliverable won forwards touched 1,086 won per dollar from 1,082.5 after the report, before stabilizing within an hour, said Joo Hyung Park, a currency dealer at Korea Exchange Bank. (004940)

Improving Ties

The shelling “could make a small dent on sentiment,” said Chang In Whan, president of Seoul-based KTB Asset Management Co., which oversees the equivalent of $7.6 billion. “I’m not too worried because the timing wasn’t that sensitive. Tensions over North Korea have been easing recently.”

South Korea’s chief nuclear envoy, Wi Sung Lac, said on July 22 that his two-hour discussion with his North Korean counterpart, Ri Yong Ho, at a regional security forum on the Indonesian island of Bali was “very constructive.” The U.S. then invited North Korean officials to New York for further negotiations.

The six-party talks involving the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Russia and Japan have been stalled since 2008.

South Korea has been closely monitoring the North Korean military near the western border since the November attack and there was nothing to suggest that drills were being carried out, the defense official said. The South’s military alert level hasn’t been raised, he said.

Maritime Border

The maritime border between the two countries snakes around the Ongjin peninsula, creating a buffer for five island groups that South Korea kept under the armistice. That agreement doesn’t mention a sea border, which isn’t on United Nations maps drawn up at the time. North Korea says it doesn’t recognize the border, which hems in its ships and excludes it from fertile crabbing and fishing grounds.

The three-nautical-mile (3.5-statute-mile) territorial limit used to devise the line was standard then. Today almost all countries, including both Koreas, use a 12-mile rule, and the islands are within 12 miles of the North Korean mainland. The farthest is about 100 miles (160 kilometers) from the closest major South Korean port at Incheon.

The JoongAng Ilbo newspaper reported yesterday that North Korean spies with orders to assassinate South Korean Defense Minister Kim Kwan Jin have entered the country. South Korean and U.S. intelligence officials are working to find them, the report said, citing unidentified South Korean officials.

Kim said after the November artillery bombardment by the North that in the event of further attacks his country would “mobilize all combat capabilities available to severely punish the enemy,” including airstrikes.

THE BEST LOOKING HORSE IN THE GLUE FACTORY

“Believe me, the next step is a currency crisis because there will be a rejection of the dollar, the rejection of the dollar is a big, big event, and then your personal liberties are going to be severely threatened.” Ron Paul

As usual the MSM did its usual superficial dog and pony show for the American public on Saturday and Sunday. The overall tone on every show (not journalism) was to calm the audience. Every station had a “downgrade special” to explain why you shouldn’t panic over the downgrade of the United States. As we can see, it didn’t work. Worldwide markets went berserk. The reactions of the various players in this saga have been very enlightening to say the least.

As I watched, listened and read the views of hundreds of people over the last few days, I recalled a statement by David Walker in the documentary I.O.U.S.A. This documentary was made in late 2007 before the financial crisis hit. The documentary follows Walker, the former head of the GAO, and Bob Bixby, head of the Concord Coalition, on their Fiscal Wake Up tour.

In the film, Walker tells the audience: “We suffer from a fiscal cancer. If we don’t treat it there will be catastrophic consequences.” He argued the greatest threat to America was not a terrorist squatting in a cave in Afghanistan, but the US debt mountain. He was nervous about the increasing dependence on countries such as China, which are the biggest holders of US Treasury bonds. Bixby explained: “If you knew a levee was unsound and people were moving into that area, would you do nothing? Of course not.” These men were sounding the alarm when our National Debt was $9 trillion. Evidently, no one in Washington DC went to see the movie. They’ve added $5.5 trillion of debt to our Mount Everest of obligations.

After listening to the shills, shysters, propagandists, and paid representatives of the vested interests over the last few days, Mr. Walker’s response to someone pointing out Europe and other countries were in worse shape than the U.S. came to mind:

“What good does it do to be the best-looking horse in the glue factory?”

At the end of the documentary there was a prestigious panel of thought leaders discussing ideas to alter the country from its unsustainable fiscal path. I was shocked when Warren Buffett basically stated there was nothing to worry about:

“I’m going to be the token Pollyanna here. There is no question that our children will live better than we did. But it’s just like my investments. I try to buy shares in companies that are so wonderful, an idiot could run them, and sooner or later one will. Our country is a bit like that.”

Buffett has since turned into a Wall Street/Washington apologist, talking his book. He declared this weekend the US deserves a quadruple A rating. He has tried to protect his investments in GE, Goldman Sachs, Moodys and Wells Fargo by declaring their businesses as sound and their balance sheets clean. He is now just a standard issue sellout spewing whatever will protect his vast fortune. Truth is now optional in Buffett World.

The Oracle of Omaha has continuously bad mouthed gold and pumped up the economic prospects for the U.S. He trashed gold in his March 2011 report to shareholders:

“Gold is a way of going long on fear, and it has been a pretty good way of going long on fear from time to time. But you really have to hope people become more afraid in a year or two years than they are now. And if they become more afraid you make money, if they become less afraid you lose money, but the gold itself doesn’t produce anything.”

I guess the leadership of this country has created a bit of fear in the market, as gold has risen from $1,400 to $1,750 and Warren’s beloved financial holdings have tanked, along with the stock price of Berkshire Hathaway (down 23% since March). There seems to be an inverse relationship between the barbarous relic and lying old men shilling for the vested interests.

Vested Interests

When you watch the corporate mainstream media, or read a corporate run newspaper, or go to a corporate owned internet site you are going to get a view that is skewed to the perspective of the corporate owners. What all Americans must understand is everyone they see on TV or read in the mainstream press are part of the status quo. These people have all gotten rich under the current social and economic structure. Buffett, Kudlow, Cramer, Bartiromo, Senators, investment managers, Bill Gross, Lloyd Blankfein, Jamie Dimon, Jeff Immelt, and every person paraded on TV have a vested interest in propping up the existing structure. They are talking their book and their own best interests. Even though history has proven time and again the existing social order gets swept away like debris in a tsunami wave, the vested interests try to cling to their power, influence and wealth. Those benefitting from the existing economic structure will lie, obfuscate, misdirect, and use propaganda and misinformation to retain their positions.

The establishment will seek to blame others, fear monger and avoid responsibility for their actions. Ron Paul plainly explains why the US was downgraded:

“We were downgraded because of years of reckless spending, not because concerned Americans demanded we get our finances in order. The Washington establishment has spent us into near default and now a downgrade, and here they are again trying to escape responsibility for their negligence in handling the economy.”

The standard talking points you have heard or will hear from the vested interests include:

  • Stocks are undervalued based on forward PE ratios.
  • Ignore the volatility in the market because stocks always go up in the long run.
  • Buy the f$%ing dip.
  • America is not going into recession.
  • The market is dropping because the Tea Party held the country hostage.
  • The S&P downgrade is meaningless because they rated toxic subprime mortgages AAA in 2005 – 2007.
  • The market is dropping because the debt ceiling deal will crush the economy with the horrific austerity measures.
  • The S&P downgrade is meaningless because Treasury rates declined after the downgrade.
  • Foreigners will continue to buy our debt because they have no other options.
  • Foreigners will continue to invest in the U.S. because Europe, Japan and China are in worse shape than the U.S.
  • America is still the greatest economy on the planet and the safest place to invest.

Each of these storylines is being used on a daily basis by the vested interests as they try to pull the wool over the eyes of average Americans. A smattering of truth is interspersed with lies to convince the non-thinking public their existing delusional beliefs are still valid. The storylines are false.

Here are some basic truths the vested interests don’t want you to understand:

  • As of two weeks ago the stock market was 40% overvalued based upon normalized S&P earnings and was priced to deliver 3% annual returns over the next decade. The S&P 500 has lost 17%, meaning it is only 23% overvalued. Truthful analysts John Hussman, Jeremy Grantham and Robert Shiller were all in agreement about the market being 40% overvalued. This decline is not a buying opportunity.
  • The S&P 500 was trading at 1,119 on April 2, 1998. The S&P 500 closed at 1,119 yesterday. In March 2000 the S&P 500 traded at 1,527. By my calculation, the stock market is 27% below its peak eleven years ago. As you can see, stocks always go up in the long run. It is just depends on your definition of long.
  • The talking heads on CNBC told you to buy the dip from October 2007 through until March 2009. The result was a 50% loss of your wealth.
  • The government will report the onset of recession six months after it has already begun. People who live in the real world (not NYC or Washington DC) know the country has been in recession for the last seven months. The CNBC pundits don’t want to admit we are in a recession because they know the stock market drops 40% during recessions on average and don’t want you to sell before they do.
  • The stock market held up remarkably well during the debt ceiling fight. It did not begin to plunge until Obama signed the toothless joke of a bill that doesn’t “cut” one dime of spending. The markets realized  the politicians in Washington DC will never cut spending. The National Debt will rise from $14.5 trillion to $20 trillion by 2015 and to $25 trillion by 2021, even with the supposed austere spending “cuts”.

 

  • The left wing media and the frothing at the mouth leaders of the Democratic Party have conducted focus groups and concluded that blaming the extreme, terrorist Tea Party for the stock market crash and the S&P downgrade plays well to their hate mongering ignorant base. They have rolled out their rabid dogs, Joe “gaffe machine” Biden, Howard “AYAHHHHHH!!!” Dean and John “ketchup” Kerry, to eviscerate the Tea Party terrorists.

  • The mainstream liberal media would like you to believe the Tea Party is an actual cohesive group that wants to throw grandmothers and the poverty stricken under the bus. The neo-cons in the Republican Party and their mouthpieces on Fox News have tried to co-opt the Tea Party movement for their purposes. There is no one Tea Party. It is a movement born of frustration with an out of control government. Ron Paul represented the Tea Party before it even existed and is the intellectual leader of the movement. His is the only honest truthful voice in this debate:

“As many frustrated Americans who have joined the Tea Party realize, we cannot stand against big government at home while supporting it abroad. We cannot talk about fiscal responsibility while spending trillions on occupying and bullying the rest of the world. We cannot talk about the budget deficit and spiraling domestic spending without looking at the costs of maintaining an American empire of more than 700 military bases in more than 120 foreign countries. We cannot pat ourselves on the back for cutting a few thousand dollars from a nature preserve or an inner-city swimming pool at home while turning a blind eye to a Pentagon budget that nearly equals those of the rest of the world combined.”

  • S&P’s opinion about any debt should be taken with a grain of salt. They, along with Warren Buffet’s friends at Moodys, were bought and sold by the Wall Street criminal element. Anyone with a smattering of math skill and an ounce of critical thinking would have concluded the U.S. was a bad credit three years ago. A Goldman Sachs trader had this opinion of the brain dead analysts at Moodys: “Guys who can’t get a job on Wall Street get a job at Moody’s.” Michael Lewis, in his book The Big Short, summarized the view of the rating agencies:

“Wall Street bond trading desks, staffed by people making seven figures a year, set out to coax from the brain-dead guys making high five figures the highest possible ratings for the worst possible loans. They performed the task with Ivy League thoroughness and efficiency.”

  • The most laughable storyline spouted by the Democrats and their lapdogs on MSNBC is the extreme austerity measures forced on the country by the Tea Party has caused the stock market to collapse. The plan “cuts” $22 billion in 2012 and $42 billion in 2013. Over this time frame, the Federal government will spend $7.4 TRILLION. The horrific spending “cuts” amount to .86% of spending over the next two years. Meanwhile, we will add at least $3 trillion to the National Debt over this same time frame. Of course, we could listen to Paulie “Spend More” Krugman and add $6 trillion to the national debt with another stimulus package. When a Keynesian solution fails miserably, just declare it would have worked if it was twice the size.
  • Barack Obama, the James Buchanan of our times, gave one of the worst Presidential speeches in the history of our country yesterday. In full hubristic fury he declared the United States of America would ALWAYS be a AAA country. The American Exceptionalism dogma is so very amusing. We are chosen by God to lead the world. Barack should have paid closer attention in history class. The Roman, Dutch, Spanish and British Empires all fell due to their hubris, fiscal mismanagement and overseas military exploits. The American Empire has fallen and can’t get up.

And now we come to the $100 trillion question. The establishment/vested interests/status quo declares the United States as the safest place in the world for investors. They frantically point out that people are pouring money into our Treasuries and interest rates are declining. They hysterically blurt out that Europe has much bigger problems than the U.S. and China’s real estate bubble will implode in the near future. These are the same people who told you the internet had created a new paradigm and NASDAQ PE ratios of 150 in 2000 were reasonable. The NASDAQ soared to 5,000 in early 2000. Today it trades at 2,358, down 53% eleven years later. These are the same people who told you they aren’t making more land and home prices in 2005 were reasonable. They told you home prices had never fallen nationally in our history, so don’t worry. Prices are down 35% and still falling today.

Medicare and Medicaid spending rose 10% in the second quarter of 2011 from a year earlier to a combined annual rate of almost $992 billion, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). The two programs are likely to crack $1 trillion before the end of the year. Medicare’s unfunded liability alone amounts to $353,350 per U.S. household. The National Debt will reach 100% of GDP in the next four months as we relentlessly add $4 billion per day to our Mount Everest of debt. Federal spending in 2007 was $2.7 trillion. Today, they are spending $3.8 trillion of your money. The country does not have a revenue problem. We have a spending addiction and the addict needs treatment. Doctor Ron Paul has our prognosis:

“When the federal government spends more each year than it collects in tax revenues, it has three choices: It can raise taxes, print money, or borrow money. While these actions may benefit politicians, all three options are bad for average Americans.”

The politicians and bankers who control the developed world have made the choice to print money and create more debt as their solution to an un-payable debt problem. Europe, Japan, the U.S., and virtually every country in the world want to devalue their way out of a debt problem created over the last forty years. It has become a race to the bottom, with no winners. Every country can’t devalue their currency simultaneously without blowing up the entire worldwide monetary system. But, it appears they are going to try. The United States will never actually default on its debts. Ben Bernanke will attempt to default slowly by paying back the interest and principal to foreigners in ever more worthless fiat dollars. This will work until the foreigners decide to pull the plug. For now interest rates are low and the U.S. is the best looking horse in the glue factory. But we all know what happens to all the horses in the glue factory – even Mr. Ed.

 “It is true that liberty is not free, nor is it easy. But tyranny – even varying degrees of it – is much more difficult, and much more expensive. The time has come to rein in the federal government, put it on a crash diet, and let the people keep their money and their liberty.” – Ron Paul