Fascinating info-graphic that reveals much about these two movements. Hysterically, 70% of the OWS have jobs, while only 56% of the Tea Party has jobs. The left wing OWS storyline is blown out of the water by the fact that 70% of the members are registered Independent. It seems the Tea Party is clearly a Republican Party tool. The OWS is also willing to fight the establishment, while the Tea Party is content to elect more Republicans into the corrupt system.
“We are the generation that will win the war on the energy problem and in that process, rebuild the unity and confidence of America.” – President Jimmy Carter, 1979
“We have it in our power to act right here, right now. I propose $6 billion in tax cuts and research and developments to encourage innovation, renewable energy, fuel-efficient cars, and energy-efficient homes.” – President Bill Clinton, 1998
“I think that in ten years, we can reduce our dependence so that we no longer have to import oil from the Middle East or Venezuela. I think that’s about a realistic time frame…That’s why I’ve focused on putting resources into solar, wind, biodiesel, geothermal. These have been priorities of mine since I got to the Senate, and it is absolutely critical that we develop a high fuel efficient car that’s built not in Japan and not in South Korea, but built here in the United States of America.” – President Barack Obama, 2008
“We don’t have to wait on OPEC anymore. We don’t have to let them hold us hostage. America’s got the energy. Let’s have American energy independence.”- Rick Perry, CNN Debate, October 18
“We must become independent from foreign sources of oil. This will mean a combination of efforts related to conservation and efficiency measures, developing alternative sources of energy like biodiesel, ethanol, nuclear, and coal gasification, and finding more domestic sources of oil such as in ANWR or the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).” – Mitt Romney
It is too bad that our 255 million cars can’t run on hot air. American presidents have propagated the Big Lie of energy independence for the last three decades. The Democrats have lied about green energy solutions and the Republicans have lied about domestic sources saving the day. These deceitful politicians put the country at risk as they misinform and mislead the non-thinking American public. They have been declaring our energy independence for 30 years, but we import three times as much oil today as we did in the early 1980’s. The CPI has gone up 350% since 1978, but the price of a barrel of oil has risen 800% over the same time frame. Today, I hear the same mindless fabrications from politicians and pundits about our ability to become energy independent. Any critical thinking analysis of the hard facts reveals that the United States will grow increasingly dependent upon other countries to supply our energy needs from a dwindling and harder to access supply of oil and natural gas. The fantasy world of plug in cars, corn driven vehicles and solar energy running our manufacturing plants is a castle in the sky flight of imagination. The linear thinking academic crowd believes a technological miracle will save us, when it is evident technology fails without infinite quantities of cheap oil.
I know the chart below requires some time to grasp, but I’m sure the average American can take five minutes away from watching Jersey Shore, Dancing with the Stars, or the latest update of the Kardashian saga to understand why the propaganda about energy independence is nothing but falsehoods. You have U.S. energy demand by sector on the right and the energy source by fuel on the left. Total U.S. energy use is nearly 100 quadrillion Btu. In physical energy terms, 1 quad represents 172 million barrels of oil (8 to 9 days of U.S. oil use), 50 million tons of coal (enough to generate about 2% of annual U.S. electricity use), or 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas (about 4% of annual U.S. natural gas use).
Please note that 37% of our energy source is petroleum, which supplies 95% of the energy for our transportation sector. That means your car and the millions of 18 wheelers that deliver your food to your grocery stores and electronic gadgets to your Best Buy. You can’t fill up your SUV with coal, natural gas, nuclear energy or sunshine. Without the 7 billion barrels of oil we use every year, our just in time mall centric suburban sprawl society would come to a grinding halt. There is no substitute for cheap plentiful oil anywhere in sight. The government sponsored ethanol boondoggle has already driven food prices higher, while requiring more energy to produce than it generates. Only a government “solution” could raise food prices, reduce gas mileage, and bankrupt hundreds of companies in an effort to reduce our dependence on oil. Natural gas as a transportation fuel supplies 2% of our needs. The cost to retro-fit 160,000 service stations across the country to supply natural gas as a fuel for the non-existent natural gas automobiles would be a fool’s errand and take at least a decade to implement.
The green energy Nazis despise coal and nuclear power, which account for 31% of our energy supply. They want to phase coal out. They aren’t too fond of fracking either, so there goes another 23% of our supply. You might be able to make out that itsy bitsy green circle with the 7% of our supply from renewable energy. And more than half of that energy is supplied by hydro power. Less than 2% of our energy needs are met by solar and wind. For some perspective, we need to use the equivalent of 17 billion barrels of oil per year to run our society and solar and wind supplies the equivalent energy of about 300 million barrels of that total. I think our green energy dreams will come up just a smidgen short of meeting our demands. Nothing can replace oil as the lifeblood of our culture and there is no domestic supply source which will eliminate or even reduce our dependence upon the 10 million barrels per day we import from foreign countries. There are some hard truths that are purposefully ignored by those who want to mislead the public about the grim consequences of peak cheap oil:
World oil production peaked in 2005 has been flat since then, despite a continuous stream of promises from Saudi Arabia that they are on the verge of increasing production. The chart below from the U.S. Energy Information Administration propagates the standard fabrications about energy supplies. Even though worldwide oil production has clearly peaked, the oil industry PR whores and government agencies continue to project substantial production growth in the future. The mainstream media trots out Daniel Yergin whenever it wants to calm the masses, despite his track record of being 100% wrong 100% of the time. The brilliance of his July, 2005 Op-Ed shines through:
“Prices around $60 a barrel, driven by high demand growth, are fueling the fear of imminent shortage — that the world is going to begin running out of oil in five or 10 years. This shortage, it is argued, will be amplified by the substantial and growing demand from two giants: China and India. There will be a large, unprecedented buildup of oil supply in the next few years. Between 2004 and 2010, capacity to produce oil (not actual production) could grow by 16 million barrels a day — from 85 million barrels per day to 101 million barrels a day — a 20 percent increase. Such growth over the next few years would relieve the current pressure on supply and demand.”
Oil production capacity has not grown by one barrel since Yergin wrote this propaganda piece. This is despite the fact that prices have almost doubled, which should have spurred production. The current energy independence false storyline – the Bakken Formation – has gone from production of 10,000 barrels per day in 2003 to 400,000 barrels per day now, while the hundreds of millions invested in developing the Canadian tar sands have increased production by 50% since 2005. Despite these substantial increases in output, worldwide production has remained flat as existing wells deplete at the same rate that new production is brought online.
The facts are there is approximately 1.4 trillion barrels of recoverable oil left in the crust of the earth. We currently suck 32 billion barrels per year out of the earth. This means we have 44 years of oil left, at current consumption levels. But we know demand is growing from the developing world. Taking this fact into consideration, we have between 35 and 40 years worth of recoverable oil left on the planet. That is not a long time. Additionally, the last 1.4 trillion barrels will much more difficult and costly to extract than the first 1.4 trillion barrels. The remaining oil is miles under the ocean floor, trapped in shale and tar sands, and in the arctic. Despite these hard facts, governmental agencies and politicians continue to paint a rosy picture about our energy future. I watched in stunned amazement last week as five bozos on the McLaughlin Group news program unanimously proclaimed the U.S. would become a net exporter of oil in the coming decade. Do these supposedly intelligent people not understand the basic economics of supply, demand and price?
It seems the governmental organizations always paint the future in the most optimistic terms, despite all facts pointing to a contrary outcome. The EIA predicts with a straight face that oil production will rise to 110 million barrels per day, while the price of a barrel of oil remains in the current $100 to $125 per barrel range. Non-OPEC production has been in decline since 2004, but the EIA miraculously predicts a 15% increase in production over the next 25 years. OPEC production has been flat since 2005, but the EIA is confident their 50 year old oil fields will ramp up production by 25% in the next 25 years. Does the EIA consider whether OPEC even wants to increase production? It would appear that constrained supply and higher prices would be quite beneficial to the OPEC countries. And then of course there is the unconventional oil that is supposed to increase from 4 million barrels per day to 13 million barrels per day, a mere 325% increase with no upward impact on prices. These guys would make a BLS government drone blush with the utter ridiculousness of their predictions.
The picture below is an excellent representation of how the easy to access oil and gas of the earth have been tapped. They were close to the surface. The remaining oil and gas is deeper and trapped within shale and sand. The new technology for extracting gas from shale has concerns regarding whether fracking and disposal of waste water can be done safely, especially near highly populated areas. The relationship between fracking and earthquakes could also prove to be problematic. The wells also have rapid decline rates. Add a mile of ocean to the picture below and you have some really expensive to access oil and potential for disaster, as witnessed with the Deep Water Horizon.
The EIA projects natural gas supply to grow by 10% between now and 2035 due to a 300% increase in shale gas supply. It seems the EIA believes the fantasy of 8 Saudi Arabia’s in the Bakken formation of North Dakota and decades of gas within the Marcellus Shale. These fantasies have been peddled by the natural gas industry in order to get support for their fracking efforts. This false storyline is damaging to the long-term planning that should be taking place now to alleviate the energy scarcity that is our future. In 2006 the EIA reported the possibility of 500 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken formation, based on guesswork. The U.S. Geological Survey has since scaled this back ever so slightly to 3.65 billion barrels, which is six months of U.S. consumption. The deceptions peddled regarding Marcellus shale are also colliding with reality. The U.S. Geological Survey recently produced an estimate of Marcellus Shale resources, which will cause the EIA to reduce its estimate of shale gas reserves for the Marcellus Shale by 80%. The price of natural gas is currently $3.54 MMBtu, down from $13 a few years ago. Extracting natural gas from shale has high capital costs of land, drilling and completion. It is not economically feasible below $6 MMBtu.
Based on the known facts and a realistic view of the future, there will be less supply of oil and natural gas as time goes on. We can already see the impact of these facts today. Even though Europe and the U.S. are in recession, the price of oil continues to rise. The developing world continues to demand more oil and the supply is stagnant. Stunts like withdrawing oil from the Strategic Reserve are foolish and politically motivated. Is the world then running out of oil then? No, but any increase in future global oil production will be modestly incremental and production could be thrown off course by any number of possible events, from an Israeli attack on Iran to (another, but successful this time) al Qaida attack on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq oil refinery. Any forecast regarding future oil production and prices isn’t worth the paper it is written on unless consideration to wars, revolutions and terrorism are factored into the equation.
Americans like to think we are the center of the universe. Those who propagate the misinformation about U.S. energy independence are clearly math challenged. The total proven oil reserves in the world total 1.4 trillion barrels and the United States has 22 billion barrels of that total, or 1.6% of the world’s oil. The U.S. burns 7 billion barrels per year, so we have enough oil to survive for three whole years. The U.S. consumes 22% of the world’s oil despite having 4.5% of the world’s population and less than 2% of the world’s oil. Do these facts lead you to the conclusion the United States will be exporting oil in the near future?
When you hear the pundits breathtakingly describe our vast natural gas resources you would think we are the dominant player in this market. Not quite. The United States has 4% of the world’s natural gas reserves. Predictably we consume 22% of the world’s natural gas. Russia controls 25% of the world’s natural gas reserves, with the Middle East countries controlling 40% of the world’s reserves. The pundits can hype our “vast” supplies of natural gas, but the facts clearly reveal it is nothing but hype.
The U.S. is consuming less oil than it was in 2005. U.S. consumption is not the crucial factor in determining the price of oil today and our consumption will matter even less in the future. Emerging market countries, led by China and India, will be the driving force in oil demand in the coming decades. According to the IEA, “Non-OECD [emerging markets] account for 90% of population growth, 70% of the increase in economic output and 90% of energy demand growth over the period from 2010 to 2035.”
This demand is being driven by the growth in vehicles in emerging markets. The U.S. market has reached a saturation point, but China, India and the rest of the world are just beginning their love affairs with the automobile. The accumulation of facts regarding both supply and demand should even convince the most brainless CNBC talking head that the price of oil will continue to rise. The 2008 peak price of $145 per barrel will not hold. The tried and true American method of ignoring problems until they reach crisis proportions will bite us in the ass once again.
The concept of EROI is incomprehensible to the peak oil deniers. When Larry Kudlow or one of the other drill, drill, drill morons proclaims the vast amount of oil in North Dakota shale and in Alberta, Canada tar sands, they completely ignore the concept of EROI. Some estimates conclude there are 5 trillion barrels of oil left in the earth. But, only 1.4 trillion barrels are considered recoverable. This is because the other 3.6 trillion barrels would require the expenditure of more energy to retrieve than they can deliver. Therefore, it is not practical to extract. When oil was originally discovered, it took on average one barrel of oil to find, extract, and process about 100 barrels of oil. That ratio has declined steadily over the last century to about three barrels gained for one barrel used up in the U.S. and about ten for one in Saudi Arabia.
The chart below clearly shows the sources of energy which have the highest energy return for energy invested. I don’t think I’ve heard Obama or the Republican candidates calling for a national investment in hydro-power even though it is hugely efficient. The dreams of the green energy crowd are shattered by the fact that biodiesel, ethanol and solar require as much energy to create as they produce. Tar sands and shale oil aren’t much more energy efficient. It’s too bad Obama and his minions hate dirty coal, because has the best return on energy invested among all the practical sources.
Worse than the peak oil deniers are those who pretend that oil isn’t really that important to our society. They declare that technology will save the day, when in reality technology can’t function without oil. Without plentiful cheap oil our technologically driven civilization crashes. We are addicted to oil. Americans consume petroleum products at a rate of three-and-a-half gallons of oil and more than 250 cubic feet of natural gas per day each. You might be interested in a partial list of products that require petroleum to be produced.
| Solvents | Diesel fuel | Motor Oil | Bearing Grease |
| Ink | Floor Wax | Ballpoint Pens | Football Cleats |
| Upholstery | Sweaters | Boats | Insecticides |
| Bicycle Tires | Sports Car Bodies | Nail Polish | Fishing lures |
| Dresses | Tires | Golf Bags | Perfumes |
| Cassettes | Dishwasher parts | Tool Boxes | Shoe Polish |
| Motorcycle Helmet | Caulking | Petroleum Jelly | Transparent Tape |
| CD Player | Faucet Washers | Antiseptics | Clothesline |
| Curtains | Food Preservatives | Basketballs | Soap |
| Vitamin Capsules | Antihistamines | Purses | Shoes |
| Dashboards | Cortisone | Deodorant | Footballs |
| Putty | Dyes | Panty Hose | Refrigerant |
| Percolators | Life Jackets | Rubbing Alcohol | Linings |
| Skis | TV Cabinets | Shag Rugs | Electrician’s Tape |
| Tool Racks | Car Battery Cases | Epoxy | Paint |
| Mops | Slacks | Insect Repellent | Oil Filters |
| Umbrellas | Yarn | Fertilizers | Hair Coloring |
| Roofing | Toilet Seats | Fishing Rods | Lipstick |
| Denture Adhesive | Linoleum | Ice Cube Trays | Synthetic Rubber |
| Speakers | Plastic Wood | Electric Blankets | Glycerin |
| Tennis Rackets | Rubber Cement | Fishing Boots | Dice |
| Nylon Rope | Candles | Trash Bags | House Paint |
| Water Pipes | Hand Lotion | Roller Skates | Surf Boards |
| Shampoo | Wheels | Paint Rollers | Shower Curtains |
| Guitar Strings | Luggage | Aspirin | Safety Glasses |
| Antifreeze | Football Helmets | Awnings | Eyeglasses |
| Clothes | Toothbrushes | Ice Chests | Footballs |
| Combs | CD’s & DVD’s | Paint Brushes | Detergents |
| Vaporizers | Balloons | Sun Glasses | Tents |
| Heart Valves | Crayons | Parachutes | Telephones |
| Enamel | Pillows | Dishes | Cameras |
| Anesthetics | Artificial Turf | Artificial limbs | Bandages |
| Dentures | Model Cars | Folding Doors | Hair Curlers |
| Cold cream | Movie film | Soft Contact lenses | Drinking Cups |
| Fan Belts | Car Enamel | Shaving Cream | Ammonia |
| Refrigerators | Golf Balls | Toothpaste | Gasoline |
The propaganda blared at the impressionable willfully ignorant American public has worked wonders. The vast majority of Americans have no clue they have entered a world of energy scarcity, a world where the average person is poorer and barely able to afford the basic necessities of life. This is borne out in the vehicles sales statistics reported every month. There have been 10.5 million passenger vehicles sold through the first 10 months of 2011. In addition to the fact they are “purchased” using 95% debt and financed over seven years, the vast majority are low mileage vehicles getting less than 20 mpg. Only 1.8 million small energy efficient vehicles have been sold versus 6.1 million SUVs, pickup trucks and large luxury automobiles. Americans have the freedom to buy any vehicle they choose. They also have the freedom to not think and ignore the facts about the certainty of higher prices at the pump. By choosing a 20 mpg vehicle over a 40 mpg vehicle, they’ve sealed their fate. How could the average soccer mom get by without a Yukon or Excursion to shuttle Biff and Buffy to their games? Have you ever tried to navigate a soccer field parking lot in a hybrid? The horror!
The American public has been lulled back into a sense of security as gas prices have receded from $4.00 a gallon back to $3.40 a gallon. This lull will be short lived. Oil prices have surged by 15% in the last two months, even as the world economy heads into recession. The link between high oil prices and economic growth are undeniable, even though the deceitful pundits on CNBC will tell you otherwise. Ten out of eleven recessions since World War II were associated with oil price spikes. Gail Tverberg sums up the dilemma of energy scarcity for the average American:
“High-priced oil tends to choke economies because high oil prices are associated with high food prices (because oil products are used in food growing and transport), and people’s salaries do not rise to offset this rise in food and oil prices. People have to eat and to commute to their jobs, so they cut back on other expenditures. This leads to recession. Recession leads to lower oil consumption, since people without jobs can’t buy very much of anything, oil products included. In some sense, the reduction in oil extraction is due to reduced demand, because citizens cannot afford the high-priced oil that is available.”
But don’t worry. The rising oil and food prices will only impact the 99% in the U.S. and the poorest dregs across the globe that spend 70% of their income on food. The 1% will be just fine as they will bet on higher oil prices, therefore further enriching themselves while the peasants starve. The market for caviar, champagne, NYC penthouses, and summer mansions in the Hamptons will remain robust.
There is no escape from the ravages of higher priced oil. There is plenty of oil left in the ground. But, the remaining oil is difficult, slow and expensive to extract. Oil prices will rise because they have to. Without higher prices, who would make the huge capital investment required to extract the remaining oil? Once oil prices reach the $120 to $150 per barrel range our economy chokes and heads into recession. We are trapped in an endless feedback loop of doom. The false storyline of renewable energy saving the day is put to rest by Gail Tverberg:
“Renewables such as wind, solar PV, cellulosic ethanol, and biogas could more accurately be called “fossil fuel extenders” because they cannot exist apart from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are required to make wind turbines and other devices, to transport the equipment, to make needed repairs, and to maintain the transport and electrical systems used by these fuels (such as maintaining transmission lines, running-back up power plants, and paving roads). If we lose fossil fuels, we can expect to lose the use of renewables, with a few exceptions, such as trees cut down locally, and burned for heat, and solar thermal used to heat hot water in containers on roofs.”
Predictably, the politicians and intellectual elite do the exact opposite of what needs to be done. We need to prepare our society to become more local. Without cheap plentiful oil our transportation system breaks down. Our 3.9 million miles of road networks will become a monument to stupidity as Obama and Congress want to spend hundreds of billions on road infrastructure that will slowly become obsolete. The crumbling infrastructure is already the result of government failure, as the money that should have been spent maintaining our roads, bridges and water systems was spent on train museums, turtle crossings, teaching South African men how to wash their genitalia, studies on the mating habits of ferrets, and thousands of other worthless Keynesian pork programs. If our society acted in a far sighted manner, we would be creating communities that could sustain themselves with local produce, local merchants, bike paths, walkable destinations, local light rail commuting, and local energy sources. The most logical energy source for the U.S. in an oil scarce scenario is electricity, since we have a substantial supply of coal and natural gas for the foreseeable future and the ability to build small nuclear power plants. The Fukushima disaster is likely to kill nuclear as an option until it is too late. The electrical grid should be the number one priority of our leaders, as it would be our only hope in an oil scarce world. Instead, our leaders will plow borrowed money into ethanol, solar, and shale oil drilling, guaranteeing a disastrous scenario for our country.
The United States is a country built upon the four C’s: Crude, Cars, Credit, and Consumption. They are intertwined and can’t exist without crude as the crucial ingredient. As the amount of crude available declines and the price rises, the other three C’s will breakdown. Our warped consumer driven economy collapses without the input of cheap plentiful oil. Those at the top levels of government realize this fact. It is not a coincidence that the War on Terror is the current cover story to keep our troops in the Middle East. It is not a coincidence the uncooperative rulers (Hussein, Gaddafi) of the countries with the 5th and 9th largest oil reserves on the planet have been dispatched. It is not a coincidence the saber rattling grows louder regarding the Iranian regime, as they sit atop 155 billion barrels of oil, the 4th largest reserves in the world. It should also be noted the troops leaving Iraq immediately began occupying Kuwait, owner of the 6th largest oil reserves on the planet. Oil under the South China Sea and in the arctic is being hotly pursued by the major world players. China and Russia are supporting Iran in their showdown with Israel and the U.S. As the world depletes the remaining oil, conflict and war are inevitable. The term Energy Independence will carry a different meaning than the one spouted by mindless politicians as the oil runs low.
And as things fell apart
Nobody paid much attention
Nothing but Flowers – The Talking Heads
“Evil is not just a theory of paradox, but an actual entity that exists only for itself. From its ether of manifestation that is garlanded in perpetual darkness, it not only influences and seeks the ruination and destruction of everything that resides in our universe, but rushes to embrace its own oblivion as well.
To accomplish this, however, it must hide within the shroud of lies and deceit it spins to manipulate the weak-minded as well as those who choose to ally themselves with it for their own personal gain. For evil must rely on the self-serving interests of the arrogant, the lustful, the power-hungry, the hateful, and the greedy to feed and proliferate. This then becomes the condition of evil’s existence: the baneful ideologies of those who wantonly chose to ignore the needs and rights of others, inducing oppression, fear, pain, and even death throughout the cosmos. And by these means, evil seeks to supplant the balance of the universe with its perverse nature.
And once all that was good has been extinguished by corruption or annihilation, evil will then turn upon and consume what remains: particularly its immoral servants who have assisted its purpose so well … along with itself. And within that terrible instant of unimaginable exploding quantum fury, it will burn brighter than a trillion galaxies to herald its moment of ultimate triumph. But a moment is all that it shall be. And a micro-second later when the last amber burns and flickers out to the demise of dissolving ash, evil will leave its legacy of a totally devoid universe as its everlasting monument to eternal death.”
― Adam Turquine – from sequel to Beyond Mars Crimson Fleet
For those of you who have followed this blog for a while, you may have picked up on the signal that Admin and I generally get along well. We have very little of substance on which we disagree. So we pick on inconsequential subjects, such as his love of that stupid and insipid band Green Day, and throw nerf darts at each other. Fun. No harm, no foul. Until Joe Paterno.
I will not bore the reader on the details of our disageement on Paterno, save for the fact that I defended Paterno, while Admin did not. It was all based on what happened in a locker room incident that happened in 2002 involving Paterno’s former defensive coach Jerry Sandusky. Subsequently, I learned that there was another similar incident in 1998 involving Sandusky, who resigned in 1999, but was allowed access to the Penn State athletic facilities, where he continued to sexually assault little boys. THAT changed my mind. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
Paterno knew about the first and second incident and said “I wish I had done more.” Yes, Joe Pa, you should have.
By Maurice Ogden
Then a twinkle grew in his buckshot eye
and he gave a riddle instead of reply.
“He who serves me best,” said he
“Shall earn the rope on the gallows-tree.”
And he stepped down and laid his hand
on a man who came from another land.
And we breathed again, for anothers grief
at the hangmans hand, was our relief.
And the gallows frame on the courthouse lawn
by tomorrow’s sun would be struck and gone.
So we gave him way and no one spoke
out of respect for his hangmans cloak.
The next day’s sun looked mildly down
on roof and street in our quiet town;
and stark and black in the morning air
the gallows-tree on the courthouse square.
And the hangman stood at his usual stand
with the yellow hemp in his busy hand.
With his buckshot eye and his jaw like a pike,
and his air so knowing and business-like.
And we cried, “Hangman, have you not done,
yesterday with the alien one?”
Then we fell silent and stood amazed.
“Oh, not for him was the gallows raised.”
He laughed a laugh as he looked at us,
“Do you think I’ve gone to all this fuss,
To hang one man? That’s the thing I do.
To stretch the rope when the rope is new.”
Above our silence a voice cried “Shame!”
and into our midst the hangman came;
to that mans place, “Do you hold,” said he,
“With him that was meat for the gallows-tree?”
He laid his hand on that one’s arm
and we shrank back in quick alarm.
We gave him way, and no one spoke,
out of fear of the hangmans cloak.
That night we saw with dread surprise
the hangmans scaffold had grown in size.
Fed by the blood beneath the chute,
the gallows-tree had taken root.
Now as wide, or a little more
than the steps that led to the courthouse door.
As tall as the writing, or nearly as tall,
half way up on the courthouse wall.
The third he took, we had all heard tell,
was a usurer…, an infidel.
And “What” said the hangman, “Have you to do
with the gallows-bound…, and he a Jew?”
And we cried out, “Is this one he
who has served you well and faithfully?”
The hangman smiled, “It’s a clever scheme
to try the strength of the gallows beam.”
The fourth man’s dark accusing song
had scratched our comfort hard and long.
“And what concern,” he gave us back,
“Have you … for the doomed and black?”
The fifth, the sixth, and we cried again,
“Hangman, hangman, is this the man?”
“It’s a trick”, said he, “that we hangman know
for easing the trap when the trap springs slow.”
And so we ceased and asked now more
as the hangman tallied his bloody score.
And sun by sun, and night by night
the gallows grew to monstrous height.
The wings of the scaffold opened wide
until they covered the square from side to side.
And the monster cross beam looking down,
cast its shadow across the town.
Then through the town the hangman came
and called through the empy streets…my name.
I looked at the gallows soaring tall
and thought … there’s no one left at all
for hanging … and so he called to me
to help take down the gallows-tree.
And I went out with right good hope
to the hangmans tree and the hangmans rope.
He smiled at me as I came down
to the courthouse square…through the silent town.
Supple and stretched in his busy hand,
was the yellow twist of hempen strand.
He whistled his tune as he tried the trap
and it sprang down with a ready snap.
Then with a smile of awful command,
He laid his hand upon my hand.
“You tricked me Hangman.” I shouted then,
“That your scaffold was built for other men,
and I’m no henchman of yours.” I cried.
“You lied to me Hangman, foully lied.”
Then a twinkle grew in his buckshot eye,
“Lied to you…tricked you?” He said “Not I…
for I answered straight and told you true.
The scaffold was raised for none but you.”
“For who has served more faithfully?
With your coward’s hope.” said He,
“And where are the others that might have stood
side by your side, in the common good?”
“Dead!” I answered, and amiably
“Murdered,” the Hangman corrected me.
“First the alien … then the Jew.
I did no more than you let me do.”
Beneath the beam that blocked the sky
none before stood so alone as I.
The Hangman then strapped me…with no voice there
to cry “Stay!” … for me in the empty square.
Finally someone did the right thing. Too late for the victims.
CBS/AP)
STATE COLLEGE, Pa. – Joe Paterno, the Penn State football coach who preached success with honor for half a century but whose legend was shattered by a child sex abuse scandal, was fired Wednesday by the school’s board of trustees.
Paterno had offered to retire at season’s end earlier in the day, saying he was “absolutely devastated” by the case, in which his onetime heir apparent, Jerry Sandusky, has been charged with molesting eight boys in 15 years, including at the Penn State football complex.
He had said he hoped the team could finish its season with “dignity and determination.”
One emeritus trustee who was on a conference call with the board Tuesday told CBS News, “The tone of last night’s call was of concern for all the people involved, including the children, the coach and the reputation of the school.”
Paterno had said earlier that said the trustees, who had been considering his fate, should “not spend a single minute discussing my status” and have more important matters to address.
The 84-year-old Paterno has been engulfed by outrage that he did not take more action after a graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, came to him in 2002 and reported seeing Sandusky in the Penn State showers with a 10-year-old boy. Paterno notified the athletic director, Tim Curley, and a vice president, Gary Schultz.
Penn St. scandal dwarfs others in college sports
Curley and Schultz have since been charged with failing to report the incident to the authorities. Paterno hasn’t been accused of legal wrongdoing. But he has been assailed, in what the state police commissioner called a lapse of “moral responsibility,” for not doing more to stop Sandusky.
The U.S. Department of Education said late Wednesday that it was launching an investigation into Penn State’s handling of the abuse.
“This is a tragedy,” Paterno said in a statement. “It is one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more.”
Paterno met with his coaching staff and players in the football building at Penn State for about 10-15 minutes Wednesday in what was described as a very emotional session. Standing at a podium, Paterno told them he was leaving and broke down in tears.
Players gave him a standing ovation when he walked out.
Junior quarterback Stephon Morris said some players also were nearly in tears as Paterno spoke.
“I still can’t believe it,” Morris said. “I’ve never seen Coach Paterno like that in my life.”
Asked what was the main message of Paterno’s talk, Morris said: “Beat Nebraska.”
The decision to retire by the man affectionately known as “Joe Pa” brings to an end one of the most storied coaching careers, not just in college football but in all of sports. Paterno won 409 games, a record for major college football, and is in the middle of his 46th year as coach.
His figure patrolling the sideline — thick-rimmed glasses and windbreaker, tie and khaki pants — was as unmistakable at Penn State as its classic blue and white uniforms and the name Happy Valley, a place where no one came close to Paterno’s stature.
The retirement announcement came three days before Penn State hosts Nebraska in its final home game of the season, a day set aside to honor seniors on the team.
Penn State has bounced back from a mediocre 2010 season to go 8-1 this year, with its only loss to powerhouse Alabama. The Nittany Lions are No. 12 in the AP college football poll.
After 19th-ranked Nebraska, Penn State plays at Ohio State and at No. 16 Wisconsin, both Big Ten rivals. It has a chance to play in the Big Ten championship game Dec. 3, with a Rose Bowl bid on the line.
In the statement, Paterno said: “I grieve for the children and their families, and I pray for their comfort and relief.”
He went on: “I have come to work every day for the last 61 years with one clear goal in mind: To serve the best interests of this university and the young men who have been entrusted to my care. I have the same goal today.”
A day earlier, Paterno had showed up for practice and adoring crowds rallied outside his modest home into the night, chanting his name.
But Paterno, whose football program bore the motto “Success with Honor,” could not withstand the backlash from a scandal that goes well beyond the everyday stories of corruption in college sports.
“If this is true, we were all fooled, along with scores of professionals trained in such things, and we grieve for the victims and their families,” Paterno said in a statement Sunday. “They are in our prayers.”
Sandusky, who retired from Penn State in June 1999, maintained his innocence through his lawyer.
Paterno has defended his decision to take the news to Curley and Schultz. Paterno said it was obvious that the graduate student, since identified as McQueary, was “distraught,” but said he was not told about the “very specific actions” of the sexual assault in the grand jury report.
After Paterno reported the incident to Curley, Sandusky was told to stay away from the school. But critics say Paterno should have done more.
GRAND JURY TESTIMONY OF Mike McQueary:
On March 1, 2002, a Penn State graduate assistant (“graduate assistant:) who was then 28 years old, entered the locker room at the Lasch Football Building on the University Park Campus on a Friday night near the beginning of Spring Break.
The graduate assistant, who was familiar with Sandusky, was going to put some newly purchased sneakers in his locker and get some recruiting tapes to watch. It was about 9:30 p.m. As the graduate assistant entered the locker room doors, he was surprised to find the lights and showers on. He then heard slapping sounds.He believed the sounds to be those of sexual activity. As the graduate assistant put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower. He saw a naked boy, Victim 2, whose age he estimated to be 10 years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. The graduate assistant was shocked but noticed that both Victim 2 and Sandusky saw him. The graduate assistant left immediately, distraught.
The graduate assistant went to his office and called his father, reporting to him what he had seen. His father told the graduate assistant to leave the building and come to his home. The graduate assistant and his father decided that the graduate assistant had to report what he had seen to Coach Joe Paterno (“Paterno”), head football coach of Penn State. The next morning, a Saturday, the graduate assistant telephoned Paterno and went to Paterno’s home, where he reported what he had seen.
Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant’s report at his home on a Saturday morning. Paterno testified that the graduate assistant was very upset. Paterno called Tim Curley (“Curley”), Penn State Athletic Director and Paterno’s immediate superior, to his home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy.
Approximately one and a half weeks later, the graduate assistant was called to a meeting with Penn State Athletic Director Curley and Senior Vice President for Finance and Business Gary Schultz (“Schultz”). The graduate assistant reported to Curley and Schultz that he had witnessed what he believed to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in the Lasch Building showers. Curley and Schultz assured the graduate assistant that they would look into it and determine what further action they would take. Paterno was not present for this meeting.
The graduate assistant heard back from Curley a couple of weeks later. He was told that Sandusky’s keys to the locker room were taken away and that the incident had been reported to The Second Mile. The graduate assistant was never questioned by University Police and no other entity conducted an investigation until he testified in Grand Jury in December, 2010. The Grand Jury finds the graduate assistant’s testimony to be extremely credible.
OK. Pretend you are Joe Paterno on a Saturday morning in 2002 in your house. A 28 year assistant tells you that your best friend and right hand man for 30 years was seen having anal sex with a 10 year old boy in the shower of your locker room. I think a multiple choice test will help you decide what to do:
A. Ask Mike whether he wants some bacon and eggs with orange juice.
B. Say that Jerry was just teaching the boy the proper technique for making an anal block on a blitzing cock.
C. Immediately pick up the phone and call the police because a 28 year old man says he saw an absolutely horrific crime being committed against a child.
D. Ask McQueary whether he would like to be an assistant coach some day if he would just not make any waves about this unfortunate incident.
E. Wait until the next day to meet the Athletic Director, report that Sandusky was seen having sex with a 10 year old boy, wipe your hands of the situation, and prepare for next week’s game with Purdue. You never follow-up to see why no charges or investigation has taken place regarding the most horrific crime known to mankind, but at least Sandusky’s keys to the locker room were taken away so he’ll have to fuck little boys elsewhere.
Poor Joe Pa. He is playing the victim card. The King of Happy Valley doesn’t think he did anything wrong. Ask the mothers of the defenseless little boys whether they think Paterno did anything wrong. Put yourself into their shoes as the parent of one of these boys. What would you say to Joe Paterno? Would you tell him he was innocent until proven guilty? Or would you punch him in the mouth and curse him for thinking of his beloved football team over the lives of little boys?
He was the last victim, that we know of, to come forward.
But in many ways, he was the first.
He was one of the first with enough courage to say something. To stick around for three years while police and a grand jury talked to dozens of people and combed through thousands of documents.
To hang on emotionally.
To take a stand against a Goliath. A legend. A man that some saw as a god.
He was the first to be believed. Authorities even call him Victim One.
The mother of the Clinton County boy is telling her family story. It’s a story that launched a three-year grand jury investigation that resulted in sexual assault charges against former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky, allegedly involving eight boys.
“I’m very proud of him,” the mother said of her son, on the brink of adulthood and at the heart of what some are calling the biggest scandal in college sports.
“He’s a brave kid,” she said. “And his major concern in the whole thing was for anybody else. That was his big thing. He said, ‘I just don’t want this to happen to anybody else.’”
And now he knows that he’s not alone.
Ten years before he came forward, another child, now 24, had also spoken up. He wasn’t believed. Allegations he made against Sandusky about touching during a shared shower at Penn State in 1998 never resulted in charges.
Sandusky, through his attorney, denies all the charges. Attorney Joe Amendola, said Sandusky attributes the allegations to troubled kids who are acting out.
“I’m so upset,” said the mom of the 24-year-old, who authorities are calling Victim Six. “My son is extremely distraught, and now to see how we were betrayed, words cannot tell you. To see that Graham Spanier is putting his unconditional support behind Curley and Shultz when he should be putting his support behind the victims, it just makes them victims all over again.”
She’s talking about the perjury and failure-to-report charges filed against former Penn State athletic director Tim Curley and resigned Vice President of Business and Finance Gary Schultz.
Prosecutors allege the administrators ignored a 2002 report from a graduate assistant — identified by sources as Mike McQueary — that he saw Sandusky having sex with a young boy in a shower.
McQueary, now an assistant coach for the Nittany Lions football team, went to his father first, then to coach Joe Paterno.
“I don’t even have words to talk about the betrayal that I feel,” said the mom of Victim Six. “[McQueary] was a grown man, and he saw a boy being sodomized … He ran and called his daddy?”
As media from around the country descended on Happy Valley on Monday to dig into the allegations and the details of a possible cover-up, the two mothers decided to talk to The Patriot-News.
Both said they don’t want their sons’ stories to get lost in the scandal.
Victim One
Victim One met Sandusky through the Second Mile — a charity for needy children that Sandusky started — and quickly got drawn into his world of big-time college football: gifts, trips, sporting events, and hanging out with a guy who seemed to be loved by everyone.
But his mother said it came at a price.
The Patriot-News will not identify either women or their sons in keeping with our policy not to name victims of sexual assault. The mother of Victim One specifically asked that other media respect her request for no more interviews.
She brought the psychologist who has been helping her son cope with the trauma to the interview.
Almost from day one, psychologist Michael Gillum has met regularly with the boy and counseled him through the protracted police investigation.
A few weeks before her son broke down and confessed to a principal at Central Mountain High School in Clinton County that he was being molested by Jerry Sandusky — a volunteer football coach at his high school — his mother began to suspect something was wrong.
First, it was because her son was acting out. When she grounded him, she said Sandusky demanded he be able to “take care of it.”
“I said, ‘No way, he’s my kid,’” she said.
Then, her son began asking her about an online database for “sex weirdos.”
“You don’t want to just accuse people of that,” the mother said. “I called the school principal and the guidance counselor and said, if nothing else, he’s taking my son out of classes. He’s leaving the school with him. … So I asked them to call him into the office and ask [my son] how he felt.
“They did call him to the office that day and I remember [the principal] was in tears and she said, ‘You need to come here right away.’”
Her son, then 15, broke down and told them what happened.
“They told me to go home and think about what I wanted to do, and I was not happy,” she said. “They said I needed to think about how that would impact my son if I said something like that. I went home and got [my son] and we came to [Children and Youth Services] immediately.”
Officials at Central Mountain High School have said they immediately reported the abuse, and Attorney General Linda Kelly praised them for doing the right thing.
The boy’s story would evolve over the next few weeks as he was interviewed by police. That’s not atypical for sex cases involving teens, Gillum said.
“It’s essentially peeling back the layers of an onion,” Gillum said. “Because it’s so humiliating. It’s so much mental anguish. … They typically want you to know something inappropriate happened, then there was a progression where boundaries were violated.”
But sometimes it takes time for the victim to get it all out.
That’s something Sandusky’s attorney Joe Amendola points to in defense.
He said it appears someone coaxed this victim into embellishing his story because it changed from groping to more graphic sex acts.
Gillum called it a typical defense tactic.
“They will imply … that I must have led the witness,” he said. “But when you’re specialized in children and adolescent child abuse, you’re trained to make sure you wouldn’t compromise the evidence.”
Victim Six
Victim Six cried when he read the 23-page grand jury presentment released Saturday, his mother said. And not for himself.
“He had no idea how bad it was,” she said. “He was lucky. He only had that one contact with him.”
It allegedly happened in May 1998, following a tour of the football locker rooms. Her son and another boy, both 11, shared a shower with Sandusky.
When he got home he said, ‘If you’re wondering why my hair is wet, we took a shower together,’ and ran into his room, his mom recalls.
She called police.
But after a six-week investigation that included the mother confronting Sandusky in her home as police listened in the other room, Sandusky was cleared.
Then-Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there wasn’t enough evidence.
“And you’re going to tell me that Spanier and Paterno weren’t informed of something that was that huge that Ray Gricar was in on it but Spanier was kept in the dark?” she said. “I’m just not that stupid. I’m so upset I just can’t believe it.”
Paterno’s son, Scott, has said that lawyers for Penn State assured him his father was never told about the 1998 report — investigated by university police.
It’s unclear from the presentment if Spanier knew. However, Schultz, who was in charge of the police force, acknowledged knowing about it.
When the mother confronted Sandusky, he said: “I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won’t get it from you. I wish I were dead,” according the presentment from the grand jury.
An investigator for Children and Youth Services broke the news to the mother: It was all a big mistake, the mother said she was told. The police officer who investigated won’t comment. Neither will the former police chief.
“Jerry Sandusky admitted to my face, he admitted it,” the mother said. “He admitted that he lathered up my son they were naked and he bear-hugged him. If they would have done something about it in 1998, and then again in 2002 — there was two chances they dropped the ball and I think they should all be held accountable.”
Her son, she said, can’t stop thinking about Victim One.
“That poor child,” she said. “My heart is like breaking for this boy and his family. And what about all the boys we don’t know about? They could have all been saved.”
The only semblance of comfort their family has had in the last three days is from community support.
“At last, my family and I are believed,” she said. “Because they tried to make my son and the other boy out to be liars.”
Every day was a struggle
Finding the courage to come forward was supposed to be the hardest part.
“We expected you just arrest people who do stuff like that,” Victim One’s mom said. “We didn’t realize it was going to be this difficult and take this long.”
The three-year investigation eventually ended with a grand jury finding that Sandusky had eight victims — two of them had long-term relationships with Sandusky and six involved shared showers in Lasch Building at Penn State, which houses the football program.
“I am upset that it took this long, but I also realize that the more people they find, the less impact it’s going to have on my son … and it’s only going to help everybody else,” the mom said.
Hearing that he wasn’t alone was a challenge of emotions for her son.
“He wasn’t happy that it happened to somebody else,” she said.
But in a way, there was some relief: more chance that he would be believed.
It was very hard to keep their cool, to keep the allegations a secret, and not talk to anyone. But they did it.
When the arrests were announced Saturday, and the family learned that two Penn State officials had known about a prior incident and didn’t report it to police, she flipped out.
“I’m infuriated that people would not report something like that,” she said. “I still can’t believe it. I’m appalled. I’m shocked. I’m stunned. There’s so many words. I’m very mad. They could have prevented this from happening.”
Her son has accused Sandusky of four years of abuse, and it started not long after Curley and Schultz were notified of a abuse report in 2002.
The attorney general has said their inaction allowed Sandusky to molest this boy.
His mom said he knows that.
“He’s very angry,” she said. “I just can’t fathom how anybody could do that. When I read the indictment, I was very shocked that there was so many people that didn’t do anything … and there had to be more people covering it up, I think, for him to get away with it for this long.”
When her son first came forward, every day was a struggle. There was this overwhelming feeling of deception. Sandusky was supposed to be a role model.
“In the beginning, it was extremely upsetting. I was so shocked. It got so bad we didn’t know what to do,” she said. “[He] is really, really afraid of Jerry. He told me numerous times when he started backing away from him, you just can’t tell him no. I said, why not?”
Her son replied, “You just don’t do that.”
“His attorney was saying how these disadvantaged children, you can’t trust them … because they come from low income. I don’t think that has any bearing on anything,” she said. “I was warned that is what this basically would be about, because kids in The Second Mile are basically disadvantaged.”
In the first page of their presentment, grand jurors noted that, too. They accused Sandusky of using the charity to find his victims, “many of whom were vulnerable due to their social situations.”
“Obviously it’s a price that the brave victim pays,” Gillum said.
A few months back, I wrote an article that didn’t go over too well. It was titled, “A Question for all you Communications Majors“. The article was initially meant to focus on how kids are going to college, taking on massive debt and graduating with majors that leave them unable to pay it down given their prospects upon graduation. And for whatever reason, I went off on a tangent about Communications degrees, renamed the article as such and well, that’s history. I wrote it, I own it now. So, after being toasted all over the web for that one (primarily by bloggers who majored in Communications), here’s the actual data that matters. This comprehensive report from the Wall Street Journal shows what the unemployment rate is by major based on 2010 Census data. While I picked on Communications majors for whatever reason, there are several degrees that fare much worse (Communications actually fared relatively well compared to my preconceived notions). Rather than make you sift through the 10 page slide decks at HuffPo and other outlets that picked up this story, here are the screen shots of the data that I thought were interesting – sorted by Highest Unemployment Rate by Major and Highest Salary by Major with a focus on the 75th percentile.
Continue Reading to See the Data and Analysis for Unemployment by Major
This is very simple. Anyone who has read this blog for the last couple years knows how I feel about the Catholic Church and their cover-up of priests fucking little boys. My unequivical position has been and continues to be that anyone within the Catholic Church heirarchy, up to and including the Pope, that knew about children being molested and fucked by predator priests and did not report it to the police is as guilty as the predator and should spend the rest of their lives in the general population of a prison.
Joe Paterno and the President of Penn State University were told that Sandusky molested a young boy in the showers of their lockeroom, 9 years ago. They did not report it to the police. Sandusky then went on to molest and fuck many young boys over the following years. Paterno & the President of Penn State are as guilty as Sandusky and should go to jail. They knowingly chose to protect the “reputation” of Penn State at the expense of innocent children whose lives have been ruined by this monster. They made the wrong fucking choice and they deserve to go to jail.
THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND HERE!!!!!
Powerful football coaches and powerful cardinals and bishops have done the exact same thing. They have protected their power and reputations by allowing innocent boys to have their lives ruined. They deserve to burn in the deepest depths of hell.
By Dan K. Thomasson
[email protected]
Few things are quite as pathetic as a revered hero who stays around too long and suddenly becomes embroiled in a scandal that threatens to undo the saintly image most everyone expected he would take to his grave.
But that is exactly what octogenarian Joe Paterno faces only a few short weeks after becoming the coach with the most victories in college football history.
It turns out that the longtime mastermind of the Pennsylvania State University’s elite gridiron program reportedly knew for nine years or so but did nothing about the degrading sexual activities of one of his most trusted assistants, his former defensive coordinator who was arrested over the weekend on charges of abusing eight boys over 15 years. Jerry Sandusky had been running a foundation to help needy children.
What in the world was Paterno thinking?
I must confess here that I never have been a fan of his. I thought among other things that he didn’t have the grace to give the proper credit for his team’s successes to those who for most of the last years actually have been running things.
But my real antipathy toward him stems from an incident involving my youngest son, who as a budding player was invited to Paterno’s elite summer camp and came back angry and dismayed to report being snubbed when he and other attendees approached the great man to say hello.
If the Pennsylvania Aattorney General’s report can be believed, and there is no reason not to, Paterno was informed in 2002 by a graduate assistant who said he saw the defensive leader, Sandusky, abusing a 10-year-old boy in the locker room.
Paterno informed the athletic director but no one told the proper authorities. It seems obvious the school was more concerned about the potential damage to its program than the welfare of the youngsters. They reportedly just told him not to bring anymore kids around the football program.
That callous disregard can be expected to cost the university big time. Two of the officials, the vice president for finance and the athletic director, allegedly have been charged with perjury and failing to report a crime. Meanwhile, the university’s president foolishly issued a statement supporting the two officials.
Paterno has not been charged, but the impact of this is nearly as bad for him as if he had been, considering the depravity of the situation and his failure to personally take the case to law enforcement officials.
I couldn’t help but compare this to a widely reported case involving a 26-year-old man convicted in Florida the other day of having pornographic images of children on his computer. It was his first arrest, he had no record of any kind, and there was no evidence that he had ever been accused of molesting any one, child or adult. He was given life imprisonment without parole solely on the basis of having downloading the images.
He had turned down an offer to plead guilty in exchange for a 20-year term. So the prosecutor filed more serious charges. His sentence was exactly the same as is expected for a murderer recently convicted in an unbelievably brutal slaying of a yoga-store employee here.
If he had abused or molested a child, the young man would have been given a much lighter sentence. The judge’s startling ruling, based on the argument that anyone downloading these images is guilty of furthering the depraved child porn industry, is being appealed.
In the Penn State case, Sandusky faces a long time in prison if convicted. It may be a life sentence, given that he is 67. He is out on $100,000 bond. I would have made it $1 million.
But the troubling question remains as to the responsibility, morally and legally, of those who aided and abetted his despicable actions by remaining silent.
No mitigating explanation of any kind would be acceptable from any of them. There might be a tendency to excuse Paterno because of his age. But if his mental faculties are good enough to run a major college football program, they’re good enough to know right from wrong.
How sad for the coach who has stayed around too long.
Email Dan K. Thomasson, former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service, at [email protected].
During my life, I have gradually developed a set of things that I believe. As a young person, I received very little in the way of help in developing these beliefs. In general, as a young person I never considered these things to be important. But somewhere along the line, I determined that what I wanted to be was an educated man, and that I wanted to make things, and be successful in business, and to have a happy, healthy, emotionally sound family. As a result, I gradually began to develop things I believe in. Following is a very truncated list of things I believe in. I add and subtract from things I believe in all of the time, and alter it based on things I learn and experience. The reason I have put this list forward is that these beliefs form the basis for my position on most issues. At the moment I am struggling to understand why some people take the positions that they do, as it seems to indicate that their belief set is extremely dissimilar to mine, and so I am confused. I welcome your comments and additions to this list.
I believe:
– in the general decency of the American people
– in the US form of government
– in the resilience of the American people
– in the obligation to conduct business honestly and with integrity
– that if one of my employees has the courage to ask me the question I need to have the courage to respond honestly
– in education
– in education for its own sake
– that the country needs to improve its education in the sciences, math, and engineering
– that governments should not fund college educations in the arts, but should funnel the money into science, math, and engineering
– that the general decency of the American people is being eroded by a growing welfare state
– that each person must be responsible for their own actions
– that each person should be responsible for meeting the costs of their retirement and old age
– in family
– in telling my children and my wife that I love them every day
– in becoming a better person each day
– in acting within the law
– in personal financial responsibility
– in spending less than you earn
– in paying your debts
– in staying debt free, except for financing an education and buying a home
– that building things is a noble pursuit
– in writing my representatives demanding change
– in books
– in reading every day
– in learning something every day
– in peaceful, lawful protest
– in protecting the weak
– in respecting the aged
– in loyalty to one’s family and friends
– in charity
– in being kind to animals
– in leaving a positive future for my children
– that making a profit is a good thing
– in capitalism
– in being polite to those providing me service
– that being rich is not a sin
– that being poor is not a sin
– in buying American-made
– that unions suck
– that everyone should have to pay taxes
– that we pay too much tax
– that the government spends too much
– that we should not be policing the world
– that we should secure our borders
– a man’s word is his bond
– in hard-work
– in no excuses
– in good planning
– in living life so that when I look back I will have no regrets
And this list goes on and on. Thanks for reading.
Another refreshingly honest and straightforward interview with Ron Paul. I loved his answers on Iran and his $1 trillion of spending cuts.
You might think I’m a hypocrite for what I’m about to admit (since I blog about personal finance), but this is reality. In the past, I’ve made some wildly erroneous assumptions about our future ranging from how much we’d be making and spending each year to how our investments would perform. Many of these misconceptions are still somewhat ingrained in my thinking because I took them for granted and it was “conventional wisdom” pounded into our heads for years, and I need to constantly reinforce that THEY ARE NOT TRUE – at least not anymore. It’s a new world that many Americans haven’t yet accepted but after reading some Thomas Friedman economic reality books you will. We’ve based our lives and major spending decisions like homes, cars and lifestyle on faulty assumptions. On the plus side, we always spend less than we make and I’ve been putting away money for the kids’ college accounts for years, retirement, and we enjoy plenty of great life experiences. However, many people with more discipline than us would have amassed a small fortune by now, while we let a lot of money slip away on questionable spending. Here are some critical mistakes in financial assumptions I’ve made over the years and I’d interested in hearing about whether you find yourself in the same boat:
1. My Salary/Compensation Assumptions Were Shit …
Continue Reading: 6 Critical Financial Miscalculations I’ve Made – That You May Be Making as Well
A romp through history
First there was the Spanish silver dollar
In colonial times, they used it as de facto money, as did many other places. Other specie was also commonly accepted. But the Spanish silver dollar was the most widely used coin in the colonies. It maintained a reputation as the most honest coin in the world from the 16th century to the 19th.
The early years also saw commodity money, beaver fur, wampum, fish, corn, rice and, most of all, tobacco.
Of course, as an outpost of the British empire, the official money was the British pound, based on a silver standard. Britain also coined gold, regulating its weight to silver ratio, effectively a bimetallic standard.
England also prohibited the colonies from minting coinage. Exporting of English coins was also prohibited – but that did not stop the colonies from obtaining them from other countries.
Fiat money raises its head
Massachusetts, in 1690, needing money to pay its soldiers for a raid on Quebec gone bad, could not raise the funds from Boston merchants. The quick fix was the issue of £7,000 of paper notes, with a promise to redeem in specie accrued from taxation. A year later, they printed £40,000 ‘for the ‘last time’.
No surprise, then, that the paper currency had depreciated by 40% against real money. The government’s answer was to enact a legal tender law.
The unintended but inevitable consequence was one more iteration of Gresham’s Law – Bad money drives out good.
Specie disappeared from the colony. Prices went up, exports declined.
Proving that no idea cannot be repeated, by 1711, Connecticut and Rhode Island had also issued paper money. In the two decades, about 20% more paper had been issued than the silver coinage, which had all but vanished from circulation.
Governmental response? Fines, confiscation of property (asset forfeiture is not new!) and imprisonment were the answers to people refusing fiat at par.
By 1750, all colonies had issued fiat paper, initiating an inflationary boom, followed by deflationary bust. Parliament had attempted to pull the colonies back to hard money and in 1764 required the retirement of paper. The usual doomsayers expected an “absence of money” and ruination of trade. The return of sound money actually enhanced trade, lower prices, more exports and inflow of specie.
As an amusing aside, Maryland issued new fiat in 1733 and distributed almost half of it to the people, to assure its acceptance. They didn’t have helicopters then but surely established the fallacy. Of course, the depreciation was quick.
Private banking in the colonies
The few that appeared in the early days did not last long, for various reasons. For instance, the Massachusetts Land Bank of 1740 issued irredeemible paper notes, and lending on real estate. Within six months, the public was refusing the fiat and Parliament outlawed it.
One wonders at the persistence of inflationary money. For the indebted, typically wealthy businessmen and land owners, a borrowed paper pound today can be paid back with interest in the same paper of less value tomorrow.
Nothing changes.
Money During the Revolution
When a war needs to be financed and the total money supply of the rebel colonies is but $12,000,000 (est.) the quick answer is more fiat! Thus, the irredeemable Continental was born. Initially promised to be retired in seven years by taxes from the states, the first issue in June, 1775, of $2 million had grown to $6 million by the end of the year. In five years, another $225 million had been added of fiat paper.
“Not worth a Continental” proved correct – by 1781, one silver dollar was worth 168 fiat paper notes.
Even worse, various states had issued their own paper money. A total of 210 million more depreciated dollars swelled the money supply.
When the Continental was not accepted by anyone, the Continental Army supplied itself by ‘paying’ with federal certificates, like it or not. Fortunately, when the dust settled, the state and federal governments rescinded taxing the citizens and all fiat vanished into oblivion.
Not precisely money were the Continental Congress issuance of ‘loan certificates’, some $600 million. Issued to pay for merchant supplies, these certificates became a type of currency but depreciated, one silver dollar worth 24 certificate dollars. Some were liquidated at depreciated rates but most became the federal debt.
This need not have happened, as natural attrition could have taken its course.
But no, Robert Morris, wealthy Philadelphia merchant – who had been Minister of Finance to the Continental Congress – had a plan: make the debt at par value to be repaid, principal and interest. This supported his advocacy for the taxing ability of Congress, a notion the Articles of Confederation had not allowed. A younger Alexander Hamilton had been his aide …
Morris introduced a bill to create the first commercial bank which also effectively would be a privately owned central bank. This scheme was chartered on December 31, 1781 by the Congress of the Confederation.
The Bank of North America
opened on January 7, 1782, not surprisingly headed by Robert Morris.
He deposited gold and silver coin of his own wealth, not enough to meet the charter requirements. Fortunately, and still also ‘treasurer’ of the Confederation, he undertook ‘loans’ from France and the Netherlands, of enough gold and silver to satisfy.
The Bank of North America was also set up as a fractional reserve operation and a monopoly to issue paper money. The first deposit account was the government itself, to which he loaned $1.2 million.
It only took a year of excess issuing of paper money – and depreciation – for people to lose confidence. Outside of Philadephia, their notes depreciated. Complaints of foreign influence and favoritism, and unfair practices added fuel to the fire.
The Bank of New York and Massachusetts Bank in Boston arrived in 1784.
Morris lost the central bank role in 1785 and ultimately became a private commercial bank with a charter from the state of Pennsylvania in 1787 .
A new nation, a new money
Custom is powerful – the term ‘dollar’ borne by the Spanish silver coin became the base unit of American money. The Continental Congress decided this in 1785, although the first American coinage was not struck until 1893.
Having had numerous bad experiences with unsupported fiat paper, the framers opted for a monetary system of intrinsic value. Enshrined in the Constitution:
Also, Section 10 .1 unconditionally prohibited states from coining money … [nor] make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts …
In 1791, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton submitted a Report on the Establishment of a Mint”. A year later, Congress passed the Coinage Act of 1792. This established the composition of gold and silver coins at a fixed ratio of 15-to-1, asserted both were legal tender, with the silver dollar and $10 gold eagle as the basic coinage.
Hamilton thought bimetallism a good idea at the time. Keeping both metals active should have increased the supply of money. Alas, Gresham’s Law prevailed – Mexican silver mining increased enough by 1810 to undervalue gold and gold coins virtually disappeared from American usage from then through 1834.
The fixed ratio in the Constitution had not taken into account market variations of the two metals.
The First Bank of the United States
Even before the ‘Mint Report’, Hamilton, who had always wanted a central bank, produced the “Report on a National Bank”. Congress chartered The First Bank of the United States in February 1791 for twenty years.
Hamilton’s real agenda was to initiate the role of paper money, claiming a scarcity of specie.
Showing that continuity and experience is important, Philadelphian Thomas Willing, who had been president of the Bank of North America, was appointed president of this new enterprise. Hamilton had planned a private institution but with the fig leaf of the government owning 20% of the shares.
The new bank’s notes were redeemable on demand and also acceptable for paying taxes. In practice, the operation was fractional reserve banking. Having issued millions of bank notes, and investing heavily in the government itself, the initial $2 million of capital was outmatched by the over $6 million of notes.
Needless to say, monetary inflation unleashed a 72% rise in prices within five years. Eighteen new banks arose in this period.
Enter a Constitutional crisis. In this corner we have Hamilton and the Federalists; adversaries, the Jeffersonian faction. Ultimately, McCulloch v. Maryland before the Supreme Court was ruled in favor of the Hamilton interpretation, ‘implied powers’.
But where did the money come from? a child of the 21st century might ask. All she’s known is Federal Reserve notes, and unlikely to have ever seen a silver certificate,
The real money, of course, was the gold and silver coins made by the mint. State banks were chartered and, in the fractional-reserve mode, were required to keep a certain amount of gold and silver on hand to redeem their paper notes when customers wanted real money.
By 1811, there were 117 state banks. Their combined reserve ratio had fallen to 0.23 due to expansion of easy credit. The recharter bill in Congress that year failed by one vote in the House and one in the Senate.
By 1815, the number of state banks had about doubled. So had their issue of unsupported paper. When New England banks demanded in 1814 that the other banks redeem their notes, the U.S. Government recognized those banks were insolvent in real money terms and allowed them to waive the contractual requirement.
The War of 1812 had been a factor in bank expansion and loose credit and now, de facto fiat paper, which lasted until early 1817.
The Second Bank of the United States
Third time lucky?
As we have seen, the love of an inflationary policy and subsequent depreciation of fiat recurs repeatedly. At this point in time, 232 banks played that game. Rather than bring them to heel, yet another ‘central bank’, the Second Bank of the United States began operation in January, 1817.
Similar to the predecessor, with one-fifth of the shares of this private bank owned by the federal government, this Second Bank enabled the state banks with immediate issuance of easy credit. Its bank notes were redeemable in specie and the notes were effective legal by way of being accepted by the federal government for the paying of taxes.
In practice, however, irredeemable state bank notes continued to circulate and attempts by the Second Bank to ask for specie was countered by ‘hardship’.
In two-and-a-half years of operation the Second Bank held $2.36 million in specie against an issuance of $19.2 million increase of the national money supply. Repeated fraud at two of its branches and no control of distant state banks, continuing their easy credit inflationary policy, led to the Panic of 1819-21. Unintended consequences of loose money reaped the inevitable crisis: rising unemployment, bank failures, mortgages foreclosed, investment, particularly in the western states all but ceased, and trade diminished.
Property values fell as much as half in some areas. The first urban poverty crisis saw debtor’s prison for some; soup kitchens; an estimated one million jobless; charity drives for clothes, shoes, and food; perhaps one-third of the national population of 9 million disadvantaged. Almost everyone blamed the banks. The southrons criticized protective tariffs. They and those of the western states complained about the Second Bank’s money tighterning.
One popular refrain was the ‘high cost of government’ and people demanded reduced state and federal budgets.
The outcome of economic depression led to the development of a new Democratic Party in the mid 1820s. Elderly Thomas Jefferson was onboard for the agenda of restoring sound money, minimal government-backed economics, paying off the national debt, and ultimately anticipating the ending of fraction-reserve banking. Others included Martin van Buren, old-line Virginians, Thomas Hart Benton of Missouri and Andrew Jackson.
Jackson won the election of 1828 and the first step was to attack the Second Bank, considered the initial source of inflation.
“Old Hickory” had won the presidency with a significant popular vote, a true man of the people. In his annual message to Congress in 1829, he declared his intentions toward the Second Bank. The battle lines were drawn. Nichola Biddle, head of the bank, and his attorneys Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, pushed a confrontation in 1831 to derail Jackson’s re-election campaign.
By insisting on an early re-charter, and getting a passing vote in Congress, followed by Jackson’s veto, their plan failed when Congress would not pass said bill over the veto.
Jackson had told Martin van Buren, “The bank is trying to kill me but I will kill it.”
The 1832 election confirmed Jackson’s position with another strong popular vote. It was the people and their president against the bank.
The Second Bank, having been structured like its predecessor, had the 20% public Treasury deposits there in. In 1833, Jackson removed the government money and spread it around to a number of private banks. His adversaries claimed this would produce inflation. The facts are, however, the record of the Second Bank repeated earlier excesses. Biddle’s Second Bank had already created more than enough inflation: the total money supply had nearly doubled in only a few years.
Although wholesale prices had remained relatively steady, this is explained by rising productivity.
Biddle’s Second Bank, having lost its mojo, ended up in 1836 getting a charter from the state of Pennsylvania.
In his second term, Jackson did fail in the goal of ending fractional-reserve banking. Even more significant, however, is that he paid off the national debt. Remember, the debt of the states after the Revolutionary War had become part of that national debt – and had been growing. The amounts due were withdrawn from the Second Bank and pro-rata distributed to the respective states.
A Generation of Monetary Experimentation
Martin van Buren succeeded Jackson in the presidency, and continued their agenda. He proposed an Independent Treasury early in 1837. although it did not pass until 1840. This sound money plan lasted until the Civil War.
The plan as accepted then made the national Treasury totally independent of the banks – it held specie in its own vaults for payment of trade debts and so on. A legal tender clause mandating specie payment was also included; public opinion against this was bipartisan. People always like easy money … and this was one of the reasons van Buren became a one-term president.
The expansion of the money supply in the 1830s stalled due to several factors. The Bank of England, confronted with inflation and the outflow of gold, raised interest rates, tightening its money supply. The resulting credit crunch impacted on American cotton exports; also, export of silver to China (due to that country’s shift to buying opium – a story for another day) dropped.
With trade affected, the Panic of 1837 ensued but ended by 1838 when Bank of England changed policy. Cotton prices rose again,
Meanwhile, state governments exacerbated the 1838 boom by spendthrift projects – “internal improvements” – due to the distribution of federal money in paying off the national debt.
Not only did they spend the unexpected payout, they borrowed and borrowed for more public works!
No one would be surprised that 1839 ushered in a crisis that lasted four more years of deflation overall. Foolish banks failed, uneconomic state projects died. Polk’s Whig administration, having succeeded Martin van Buren’s, elected to bail out the various states in danger of default.
Default in this era of course, was inability to pay gold and silver on demand from customers losing all confidence in fractional-reserve paper.
The Democratic Party continued to support hard-money principles of the Jacksonian persuasion; the Whigs countered with support for easy credit, especially in states issuing bonds. Banks eagerly bought this government, using it to expand their money supply. This in turn expanded the issue of state bonds, debt! States connived in this quid pro quo by permitting suspension of specie redemption and also legal tender laws accepting bank notes for taxes.
The Whigs were also active in various schemes and were fond of state usury laws, leading to more easy credit. Inflation and speculation grew.
The bimetallism trap
To compound money problems, the gold rush in California and new gold from Russia and Australia upset the gold-silver ratio in 1850. With gold cheaper in the market, silver dollars gained around 4-5 percent of true value and thus virtually vanished into arbitrage land. The only silver coinage left in U.S. Circulation were ‘junk silver’, worn Spanish and Mexican coins.
Congress reacted to the problem in 1853, keeping a Constitutional aspect of bimetallism but with a de facto gold standard and debased silver coinage. The silver quarter-dollar began minting and became popular.
By 1857, Congress outlawed the use of foreign coins. That year also saw a Panic due to the usual suspects, inflating money supply and states waiving specie redeeming.
The Civil War and Beyond
Suppose they gave a war and nobody could afford it? That’s the usual case, examples littered history. Lincoln had precedent for issuing an irredeemable currency, the Greenback. During the War of 1812 period, for two-and-a-half years, state and federal government suspended specie payment.
Banks loved this – they could inflate the money supply like there was no tomorrow.
More significantly, the federal government initiated use of greenbacks by outlaw new issue of state bank notes. And the Treasury offered a $150 million bond issue, expecting the state banks to subscribe and pay in specie – but they did not have the gold. ‘Sauce for the goose’, as it were and the Treasury suspended specie payment on its notes. By February, 1862, the Treasury issued the first Greenbacks. And they were declared legal tender.
From 1861’s federal expense of $66 million to $1.3 billion four years later.
To no one’s surprise, save the government experts, the greenbacks depreciated rapidly. Various interventions were tried, Treasury Secretary Chase even sold $11 million of gold bullion to lower the gold premium of greenbacks. The market barely noticed. Then he attempted a foreign exchange effort to lower the British pound to dollar ratio. Fail.
Like beating a dead horse into glue, the last manuever was to forbid gold futures contracts and regulate brokerage sales of gold and speculation. All Chase’s gold legislation succeeded in doing was to drive the value of the greenback further down, ultimately to forty cents in June, 1864.
Congress repealed this legislative mistake at the end of the month – and Secretary Chase found himself replaced.
During the war years, fiat experimentation even affected coinage. Silver coins left the country for better value elsewhere. The ignominy of a debased bronze penny appeared in 1864 also, all better coins had been exported.
The first federal income tax!
To supplement monetary magic, Lincoln signed on August 5, 1861, the first federal income tax law , the Revenue Act. A flat tax of three percent on annual income over $800 was imposed. The wording was carefully chosen to skirt around the Constitution’s limitation on a direct tax.
Proving that no bad idea cannot be improved, the Revenue Act of 1862 was progressive – three percent at $600 income and five over $10,000. This act also was intended to cease in 1866.
Not content with that, Lincoln also imposed additional sales and excise taxes as well as estate taxes. War is expensive! The income tax was finally repealed in 1872.
***
Part Two will continue with the inflationary games bankers play. And more.
Part I. Why it won’t come easy…
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
–United States Declaration of Independence
There seems to be a division of thinking when it comes to the 1% vs everybody else. Many people seem to think that their extreme advantage of resources, the power inherent in the existing structure, and the technology they have access to will ensure their continued dominance. Others argue that because they are outnumbered 99 to 1 they can only maintain their control if the 99% remain compliant. While I favor the latter view, questions remain: what percent need to resist in order for the existing power structure to be overthrown? How does the average citizen overcome the massive advantages available to the existing authority? Can this be accomplished with peaceful means, or will the conflict escalate into violence? What does history teach us to expect in the resolution of this crisis? If the existing structure is torn down, will it be replaced by something better or something worse?
In part 1 of this series, we will investigate the strength of the existing authority, and the inherent advantages that the authority holds over the average citizen who would consider resistance. In part 2, we will look at the inherent strengths that the average citizen has in resisting the existing authority. In part 3 we will look at some of the various methods and strategies that the resistance can pursue. And in part 4 we will try to draw some conclusions about the path this crisis phase will take and what history teaches us to expect.
This is not authoritative commentary. This is simply my observation and analysis of the challenges and opportunities that exist to the citizens that are contemplating resistance in an effort to restore the existing government to its constitutional origins or to another form entirely. I welcome your commentary, perspective and wisdom in this study.
Let us look at the various ways in which the 1% are able to maintain their power. First of all is momentum. It is human nature to resist major changes. Sure we like to change to the next new iPhone, but when it comes to major aspects of how we perceive our role in everyday life we ignore, deride, ridicule, or directly oppose both the change as well as those who are advocating it. For that reason most of the major changes we have witnessed in our lifetimes are a result of tiny, seemingly insignificant changes that incrementally alter the way things are. Freedom, taxation and legislation have all incrementally mutated from emancipated, transparent and accessible to incarcerated, opaque and ϋber statutory.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/Incarceratedamericansbynumber.gif
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/Incarceratedamericansbypercentage.gif
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/worldincarcerationcomparison.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/Growth-of-US-Federal-Tax-Code-Complexity-1913-2010.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/federalregulationspagesovertime.gif
It takes a major shock to convince people that a change is worthy of the effort required to enact it. Normalcy bias, fear, laziness, and ambivalence all fight to keep things the way they are. Our overall wealth as a society and the extreme amount of “assistance” given over to what has become a large percentage of the population—the disabled, unemployed, and derelict—have insulated us by and large from hardships that have driven other populations around the world to protest, resistance, and violence. Our poor are not starving; they are obese. Our unemployed are not desperate; they are better off with their benefits than with a job. More people are added to the rolls of the disabled every day by the expansion of the definition of disabled, and by the fact that in many cases they can receive more income while doing nothing productive (SNAP, medical, and direct payments) than they could earn with hard work.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/SNAPparticipation-1.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/HistoryofTotalWelfareSpending2.jpg
Because of the distortion created and enforced by the various entitlement programs at the federal, state, and local levels, we have witnessed dramatic increases in the numbers of participants in these programs. In turn we have seen the tax revenues that support these programs that are paid through the work of productive citizens drop as more and more people become net recipients of government funds and fewer and fewer people are net contributors. This trend is clearly unsustainable; however, each new person added to the dole is another person that would have to vote for change that would negatively impact their immediate circumstances. History suggests that very few people will be willing to support actions that would hurt their personal short term circumstances in favor of society’s long term prosperity. The consequence of this dynamic is that there will be no slow, transitional wind down of these programs. Instead these programs and the numbers of people involved will continue to grow until the programs fail catastrophically. For that reason, it is my assessment that the growing pool of beneficiaries will not be a significant part of any anti-establishment movement, protest, or revolution.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/taxreceiptstakehit.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/whopaystaxes.gif
A contributing factor to the momentum of the establishment and the slow response of the average citizen is the lack of hardship and suffering he faces. Very few people in the United States go hungry. Very few people are denied medical care. Very few people lack clean water, sleep without shelter, lack adequate clothing, have no access to education, can afford no entertainment, or have no access to sanitation. We are by global comparison a very rich country, and even the poorest in this country live beyond the means of billions worldwide. In short we all have quite a bit to lose, and that changes the riskiness of choosing to resist.
In my personal situation I have a wife and two children, I own a business that employs 14 people, I have property and investments (not a lot), I have 5 sisters, my mom and pop are living, and I have many close ties in my community. If I choose to resist the government I put all of those people, all of my property, and all of my ties at risk. I also put my life and health at risk. I put my freedom at risk (such as it is). In essence I put everything that is near and dear to me at risk, and that does (and should) enter into my decision to resist or to comply.
With our poorest tamed by the entitlements they would lose if they resist, the burden of resistance then falls upon a group of people with plenty to lose. Their incentive is the awakening to the reality that not resisting may cost them all of the same things; however, the risk equation remains “if I resist I will risk all of my treasured people and possessions” vs. “if I resist I may risk all of my treasured people and possessions.”
Another significant factor in favor of maintaining control by the existing authority is force. The establishment powers, whether behind the scenes (the bankers) or in full view (the politicians) have near complete capture of all the federal (the military, DHS, CIA, FBI, et al), the state (National Guard, SBI, State Troopers, et al) and local (sheriff, city police, et al) agencies. While there is some question floating around the blogosphere about whether or not the members of those agencies will be willing to fire upon civilians history and recent events make it clear that at least the majority will comply with the orders they receive. For the same reason that the average citizen is overwhelmed when thinking of how and when to resist authority, the front line soldier or officer is similarly daunted by thoughts of bucking the chain of command. When you combine that with the very real threat of armed resistance, the possibility of significant violence cannot be ignored.
While any violence on the part of the agents of authority will likely escalate the overall level of resistance in the general population, it is certainly going to discourage any people who are caught up in the festival aspect of the resistance from continuing. The real and present threat of violence and death is a great deterrent; it is not a coincidence that tyrannical governments across the globe and throughout history have made effective use of violence in putting down discontent. While it will cement the resolve of the committed and work to increase the number of people who have suffered significant enough indignity and hardship to risk their lives, a large number of people will be too fearful to support the resistance and will in fact look to establish their own safety by actively helping the establishment root out the resistance.
Along with direct force there are force multipliers like air support, heavy weapons, command and control capabilities, control over the infrastructure, night vision and infrared tracking, satellite surveillance, the network of in place surveillance and traffic cameras, body armor, on-line intercepts of emails, phone taps, the ability to shut down transportation systems, forensic analysis, and training. How does a single citizen cope with the myriad ways in which the governing authority can deploy massive resources and multiply their effectiveness? When he realizes that he must join with others to pool resources and capabilities, how does he find or recruit his team without leaving a trace that will be detected by the government or co-opted to its benefit? It is, to say the least, a daunting challenge.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/govtspendingonpublicsafety.jpg
Non-defense government (federal, state, and local) consumption and gross investment as percentage of GDP, 1929-2008
Anyone who has ever gone on an extended hike in the wilderness has come face to face with the importance and the challenge of logistics. Like a rocket that uses 90% of the fuel to lift the fuel that lifts the rocket into orbit, a hiker must carry more food to offset the extra energy expended by carrying a heavy load of food onto the trail. Furthermore, any tools or materials he needs must be carried along if they cannot be fabricated or acquired along the way, so if the hiker has any desire to do much more than walk (eg. take pictures, drink, sleep, cook, or bandage a cut), he has to carry the means to do so along with him.
For that reason the modern day resistance movement will begin as a largely local phenomenon. People cannot afford to deploy themselves to faraway places and risk their source of income and/or support the additional expense. There will necessarily need to be help in the form of food, medicine, shelter, and materials above and beyond what the average resister will be able to provide, and that lifeline of support is easily constrained or severed by the power in authority.
Conversely the government in all of its forms and agencies has nearly unlimited resources (at least in the short to medium term) in the form of cash, supplies, transportation, and secure storage to support its activities. It rules the air and roads and sea and rails, and it can deploy immense amounts of resources in a short period of time if needed. Furthermore there is no opportunity for any single citizen to limit the reach and ability of the government to deploy those resources. It is simply the case of only being able to stop one grain of sand in a landslide.
The powers that be also have complete authority and control over all of the major channels of communication. They can manipulate, halt, or utilize all TV, radio (broadcast), newspaper, internet, radio (point to point), telephone, snail mail and satellite communications at will. They can monitor, intercept, jam, encrypt or decrypt nearly any message that a modern day citizen can compose. That leaves the resister the option of sending messages that are very difficult to hide and protect, or sending messages that travel at very slow speeds by off the grid methods.
Hand in hand with the ability to communicate is the ability to coordinate. Existing agencies have command and control structures in place that allow orders from leadership to be executed quickly and reliably. Those agencies have extensive practice and established methods for preserving their chain of command and those in the chain are well versed in the execution of the orders they receive. The command structure is redundant and well insulated from the agents in the field of operations, and is virtually immune to any action on the part of the citizen that has chosen to resist.
That citizen in turn is working with other autonomous people and groups (if he is working with anyone at all) who’s participation is completely voluntary. They may agree to carry out the requests he makes, but they may only agree to part of the action. They may decide to change the time table. They may decide to back out without notice. Or they may become otherwise engaged and be limited in the sense of accountability they feel and/or be limited in their ability to communicate their change in direction. It is very easy to take out the leadership since the leadership is also likely to be the operator in the field. There is little or no redundancy, and there is little or no practice in cooperative action. Furthermore the more cooperative and effective the group becomes, the more likely they are to become a target of strategic priority by the forces of the powers in place.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/mediachart.jpg
The last major category of strength this analysis will address is financial. Despite the overwhelming debt, the deficits, and the lack of solvency in the government at the federal, state, and local levels the fact remains that the financial powers can (and will) continue to create money to fund their activities. There are many questions about whether or not this course of action is sustainable or effective; however, there is little doubt that it will continue. The wealth of the United States is tremendous, and even though it is being steadily diluted by the devaluation of the dollar, there remains an enormous amount of wealth yet to dilute. Consider that the total notional wealth of the United States is around $56T. Even maintaining budget deficits that are funded by printing new dollars, it would take around 30 years to consume the wealth through the expansion of the currency.
Now I know that it is a good bit more complicated than that; however, the fact remains that there is massive wealth left that can be consumed. Furthermore it is likely that the existing debt will be defaulted and wiped out. While there are numerous disruptions inherent is such a scenario the government will be free of its encumbrances and will be able to continue to print new money (even if it is called something else or initially backed by other assets). What this means is that for all practical purposes the government will remain unconstrained in its spending while the average citizen will be anything but. More importantly, as the government creates more and more money, the wealth of the citizen will continue to decline further limiting him from saving or deploying his assets towards effective resistance even as the devaluation creates more and more people desperate enough to consider action.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/vibezdj/the%20burning%20platform/TBP%20Articles%20-%20Revolutions/USwealth.jpg
An average citizen faces an enormous, frightening and disheartening challenge if he chooses to resist; however, that has always been true throughout history when the brave and often tragic souls of the past have decided that enough was enough. No government in world history has lasted very long; most have failed in a much shorter span than the United States has lasted. Neither success nor failure is baked in the cake. In the next part, we will look at the inherent strengths that the average citizen has in resisting the existing authority.
