Obama's historic win revives the black-Jewish civil rights alliance
Shlomo Shamir
Nov 06, 2008
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1034853.html
The historic alliance between blacks and Jews, which was forged during the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s, laid the groundwork for the spirit and social climate that led to the election of the first black president of the United States. That is the main message of members of the black and Jewish communities who commented yesterday on Barack Obama's victory.
The feeling among leaders and community activists was that the election's result was a kind of belated political benefit of the African- and Jewish-American partnership, in an effort to promote social values, particularly civil rights and tolerance.
"No other sector of American society provided a stronger and more consistent reservoir of support in the struggle of African-Americans than the Jewish community," said Marc Schneier, an Orthodox rabbi who 20 years ago established the Foundation for Ethical Understanding. Schneier is the author of the book "Shared Dreams" documenting the relationship between Martin Luther King and the Jewish community (with a preface by King).
"The historic partnership between the two communities is what led to the significant changes in the areas of equality and tolerance in American society, the results of which we saw Tuesday," he said.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
Time's Halperin Scolds Press for 'Extreme Pro-Obama Bias'
Time's Halperin Scolds Press for 'Extreme Pro-Obama Bias'
Warner Todd Huston
Nov 23, 2008
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/11/23/
times-halperin-scolds-press-extreme-pro-obama-bias
The Politico reported on November 22 that Time Magazine's Mark Halperin scolded the media for it's sycophantic treatment of Barack Obama during this election cycle calling the favorable treatment "the most disgusting failure" of the press he's seen for years. "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage," Halperin said at a Politico/USC conference held on Friday.
It's all pretty amusing, though, to see Mark Helprin complain that his fellow journalists didn't do a good job reporting on Obama's record because back in March, NewsBusters reported on how Halperin himself was claiming that Obama represented a "centrist" politician despite the fact that Obama has the most liberal voting record in the Senate! What happened to being tough on The One then?
[..]
In essence, to the charge of pro-Obama bias, the media is shrugging its collective shoulders and saying, "Yeah, well so what?" And we should all realize that the media has no intentions at all to mend its ways.
Warner Todd Huston
Nov 23, 2008
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/11/23/
times-halperin-scolds-press-extreme-pro-obama-bias
The Politico reported on November 22 that Time Magazine's Mark Halperin scolded the media for it's sycophantic treatment of Barack Obama during this election cycle calling the favorable treatment "the most disgusting failure" of the press he's seen for years. "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage," Halperin said at a Politico/USC conference held on Friday.
It's all pretty amusing, though, to see Mark Helprin complain that his fellow journalists didn't do a good job reporting on Obama's record because back in March, NewsBusters reported on how Halperin himself was claiming that Obama represented a "centrist" politician despite the fact that Obama has the most liberal voting record in the Senate! What happened to being tough on The One then?
[..]
In essence, to the charge of pro-Obama bias, the media is shrugging its collective shoulders and saying, "Yeah, well so what?" And we should all realize that the media has no intentions at all to mend its ways.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
A Visual Guide to the Financial Crisis
A Visual Guide to the Financial Crisis
WallStats.com
Nov 13, 2008
http://blog.mint.com/blog/finance-core/
a-visual-guide-to-the-financial-crisis/
Almost overnight, the talking heads went from perpetuating the euphoria of investors to rushing to pronounce the economy dead. Last year, when lenders started dropping like flies as foreclosures rose and margins were called, the problems of Wall Street became more and more apparent, and lending guidelines were tightened to the point that many individuals were stuck in their time-bomb loans, and thus began a vicious cycle. But what led to this? Here is a visual guide to help you understand the events leading up to the bailout.
Click here for the Source Article
WallStats.com
Nov 13, 2008
http://blog.mint.com/blog/finance-core/
a-visual-guide-to-the-financial-crisis/
Almost overnight, the talking heads went from perpetuating the euphoria of investors to rushing to pronounce the economy dead. Last year, when lenders started dropping like flies as foreclosures rose and margins were called, the problems of Wall Street became more and more apparent, and lending guidelines were tightened to the point that many individuals were stuck in their time-bomb loans, and thus began a vicious cycle. But what led to this? Here is a visual guide to help you understand the events leading up to the bailout.
Click here for the Source Article
Friday, November 14, 2008
Why Gold Might Soar Over the Next Four Weeks
Why Gold Might Soar Over the Next Four Weeks
Patrick A. Heller
Oct 28, 2008
http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/
Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=5514
Whether or not you acknowledge past efforts by the U.S. government with other governments, central banks and private trading partners to suppress the gold spot price, events coming to pass in the next four weeks could create overwhelming pressure causing much higher gold prices.
Last Friday, the Taiwan government announced that it had completely liquidated its holdings of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae bonds. If a long-time ally of the United States is willing to admit that it is bailing out of dollar-denominated debt, will other nations continue to show restraint?
Last Friday and Saturday, leaders from 43 Asian and European nations met in Beijing to discuss the global financial crisis. The United States was specifically excluded from this meeting.
These events are just appetizers on what is coming up in the next few weeks:
- Oct. 28: Comex November gold and silver options expire.
- Oct. 28-29: The Federal Open Market Committee meets to discuss, among other subjects, the possible 0.5 percent reduction in benchmark interest rates.
- Oct. 29: Last trading day for COMEX and Chicago Board of Trade gold and silver futures contracts.
- Nov. 4: The U.S. elections will be held and end the need for politicians seeking re-election to try to look good for the voters.
- Nov. 6: European Central Bank meeting at which one of the subjects will be cutting benchmark interest rates.
- By Nov. 10: Adrian Douglas's Market Force Analysis" indicates that the temporary bear market rally in the value of the U.S. dollar will come to an end.
- Nov. 15: The G-8 summit meeting in New York City will discuss plans to reform the international financial and monetary system. There is a strong likelihood that one of the major topics will be the replacement of the U.S. dollar as the major international currency.
- Nov. 20: December gold options expire. Currently, there are about 70 percent more outstanding call options (which gives the owner the right to buy gold at the contract price) than there are put options (which give the seller the right to sell gold at the contract price). If the price of gold starts to rise to any degree, owners of call options might be able to demand physical gold for their contracts at below-market prices. Thus, any modest rise in gold prices could lead to an extreme supply squeeze and rocketing prices.
Other continuing pressures for higher precious metals prices include:
- The TOCOM, the Tokyo Commodities Exchange, provides daily reports of trading positions for major traders. Goldman Sachs and six other firms had huge short gold positions in early 2006. Goldman Sachs and these others have been continuously reducing their short positions. Late last week, Goldman Sachs TOCOM gold position turned into a net long of 370 contracts. The other large short sellers as a group are in their lowest short position in the past 30 months. These companies now have less incentive to want to hold down gold prices.
- There is a significant effort underway by would-be gold and silver buyers, dismayed by the current high premiums for physical gold and silver to purchase December COMEX contracts and ask for physical delivery of the 100-ounce gold and 1,000-ounce silver ingots. Since the COMEX only has a tiny coverage of physical metal for its outstanding contracts, there is a growing risk that the COMEX gold and silver contracts may default. If this occurs, the COMEX allows contracts to be settled for cash rather than gold or silver. If defaults occur, the spot prices for physical gold and silver will soar instantly.
- AIG, America's largest insurance company and beneficiary of over $100 billion in government liquidity over the past six weeks, is still at great risk of financial collapse. From a high of $63.68 per share within the past year, the stock settled at $1.35 on Oct. 27. AIG is widely regarded as holding the largest number of gold and silver derivatives (especially silver) of any company in the world. If it fails, the counterparties on these derivatives contracts could be forced to quickly acquire large quantities of gold and silver to minimize their financial losses.
It would only take one or a few of these events to get out of control for the prices of gold and silver to explode.
The U.S. government and its partners are pulling as many strings as it can to try to hold down prices. A large number of 400-ounce gold bars have been appearing on the market with markings that indicate that they may either be coming from the U.S. Treasury or International Monetary Fund reserves. The IMF is not yet authorized to sell any gold, but apparently can lease gold without restriction. If it becomes public knowledge that the U.S. or the IMF is sneaking gold onto the market to help hold down prices, the news will actually have the opposite effect because it would represent an admission that the U.S. dollar deserves to be worth much less than it is today.
For other news and articles on NumisMaster.com, Click Here.
Patrick A. Heller
Oct 28, 2008
http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/
Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=5514
Whether or not you acknowledge past efforts by the U.S. government with other governments, central banks and private trading partners to suppress the gold spot price, events coming to pass in the next four weeks could create overwhelming pressure causing much higher gold prices.
Last Friday, the Taiwan government announced that it had completely liquidated its holdings of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae bonds. If a long-time ally of the United States is willing to admit that it is bailing out of dollar-denominated debt, will other nations continue to show restraint?
Last Friday and Saturday, leaders from 43 Asian and European nations met in Beijing to discuss the global financial crisis. The United States was specifically excluded from this meeting.
These events are just appetizers on what is coming up in the next few weeks:
- Oct. 28: Comex November gold and silver options expire.
- Oct. 28-29: The Federal Open Market Committee meets to discuss, among other subjects, the possible 0.5 percent reduction in benchmark interest rates.
- Oct. 29: Last trading day for COMEX and Chicago Board of Trade gold and silver futures contracts.
- Nov. 4: The U.S. elections will be held and end the need for politicians seeking re-election to try to look good for the voters.
- Nov. 6: European Central Bank meeting at which one of the subjects will be cutting benchmark interest rates.
- By Nov. 10: Adrian Douglas's Market Force Analysis" indicates that the temporary bear market rally in the value of the U.S. dollar will come to an end.
- Nov. 15: The G-8 summit meeting in New York City will discuss plans to reform the international financial and monetary system. There is a strong likelihood that one of the major topics will be the replacement of the U.S. dollar as the major international currency.
- Nov. 20: December gold options expire. Currently, there are about 70 percent more outstanding call options (which gives the owner the right to buy gold at the contract price) than there are put options (which give the seller the right to sell gold at the contract price). If the price of gold starts to rise to any degree, owners of call options might be able to demand physical gold for their contracts at below-market prices. Thus, any modest rise in gold prices could lead to an extreme supply squeeze and rocketing prices.
Other continuing pressures for higher precious metals prices include:
- The TOCOM, the Tokyo Commodities Exchange, provides daily reports of trading positions for major traders. Goldman Sachs and six other firms had huge short gold positions in early 2006. Goldman Sachs and these others have been continuously reducing their short positions. Late last week, Goldman Sachs TOCOM gold position turned into a net long of 370 contracts. The other large short sellers as a group are in their lowest short position in the past 30 months. These companies now have less incentive to want to hold down gold prices.
- There is a significant effort underway by would-be gold and silver buyers, dismayed by the current high premiums for physical gold and silver to purchase December COMEX contracts and ask for physical delivery of the 100-ounce gold and 1,000-ounce silver ingots. Since the COMEX only has a tiny coverage of physical metal for its outstanding contracts, there is a growing risk that the COMEX gold and silver contracts may default. If this occurs, the COMEX allows contracts to be settled for cash rather than gold or silver. If defaults occur, the spot prices for physical gold and silver will soar instantly.
- AIG, America's largest insurance company and beneficiary of over $100 billion in government liquidity over the past six weeks, is still at great risk of financial collapse. From a high of $63.68 per share within the past year, the stock settled at $1.35 on Oct. 27. AIG is widely regarded as holding the largest number of gold and silver derivatives (especially silver) of any company in the world. If it fails, the counterparties on these derivatives contracts could be forced to quickly acquire large quantities of gold and silver to minimize their financial losses.
It would only take one or a few of these events to get out of control for the prices of gold and silver to explode.
The U.S. government and its partners are pulling as many strings as it can to try to hold down prices. A large number of 400-ounce gold bars have been appearing on the market with markings that indicate that they may either be coming from the U.S. Treasury or International Monetary Fund reserves. The IMF is not yet authorized to sell any gold, but apparently can lease gold without restriction. If it becomes public knowledge that the U.S. or the IMF is sneaking gold onto the market to help hold down prices, the news will actually have the opposite effect because it would represent an admission that the U.S. dollar deserves to be worth much less than it is today.
For other news and articles on NumisMaster.com, Click Here.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Surviving the “Contained Depression”
Surviving the “Contained Depression”
Paul Kedrosky
Nov 11, 2008
http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/
2008/11/11/surviving_the_c.html
Interesting David Levy piece in the current issue of Institutional Investor. Here is the money ‘graf(s):
Without the government’s containment the economy would indeed ace another Great Depression, but fortunately, nothing so dire will occur. The government will prevent a collapse of the financial system and partially buffer the damage to the economy, containing the depression. The government will succeed not because it is wise about economic affairs or because it won’t make mistakes. Rather, it will have no choice but to keep patching holes in the financial sector, and its sheer size and presence guarantee a sizable fiscal stabilization. The government has virtually unlimited power to intervene to protect the basic functioning of the financial system, and in an emergency can spend whatever is necessary. Although government solutions will not fix the fundamental problems that will cause the depression, they will limit the financial fallout. By the end of the contained depression, the government will likely have committed trillions between rescue operations and running huge deficits. And although some may complain about the price tag, it will be a bargain for enabling us to avoid another Great Depression.
Levy thinks we will be out the other side in late 2009 or early 2010, albeit out in a tepid way.
Paul Kedrosky
Nov 11, 2008
http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/
2008/11/11/surviving_the_c.html
Interesting David Levy piece in the current issue of Institutional Investor. Here is the money ‘graf(s):
Without the government’s containment the economy would indeed ace another Great Depression, but fortunately, nothing so dire will occur. The government will prevent a collapse of the financial system and partially buffer the damage to the economy, containing the depression. The government will succeed not because it is wise about economic affairs or because it won’t make mistakes. Rather, it will have no choice but to keep patching holes in the financial sector, and its sheer size and presence guarantee a sizable fiscal stabilization. The government has virtually unlimited power to intervene to protect the basic functioning of the financial system, and in an emergency can spend whatever is necessary. Although government solutions will not fix the fundamental problems that will cause the depression, they will limit the financial fallout. By the end of the contained depression, the government will likely have committed trillions between rescue operations and running huge deficits. And although some may complain about the price tag, it will be a bargain for enabling us to avoid another Great Depression.
Levy thinks we will be out the other side in late 2009 or early 2010, albeit out in a tepid way.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship
Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship
The Revealer
Nov 10, 2008
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread410524/pg1
Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.
"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."
Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado about building a new civil service corps. Among other things, he called for expanding the nation's foreign service and doubling the size of the Peace Corps "to renew our diplomacy."
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force.
Click here to view Source Article
The Revealer
Nov 10, 2008
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread410524/pg1
Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.
"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."
Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado about building a new civil service corps. Among other things, he called for expanding the nation's foreign service and doubling the size of the Peace Corps "to renew our diplomacy."
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force.
Click here to view Source Article
Sunday, November 9, 2008
I'm changing as fast as I can!
I'm changing as fast as I can!
Patrice Lewis
Nov 08, 2008
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80410
Well, on the bright side, there were no riots in the streets following Tuesday's election. This is good.
On the other hand, Obama got elected president. We also have a Democrat majority in the Senate. Therefore, we must prepare to "change." This is bad.
I truly believe we are heading into one of the most divisive times in our nation's history, and it won't have anything to do with skin color. (How tired I am of hearing that argument.) It will have everything to do with socialism vs. free-market economics. Dependence vs. independence.
During a recent history lesson with my homeschooled daughters, we discussed some of the highlights of ancient Greek civilization and its contributions to our current culture. I told the girls about Hippocrates and the Hippocratic oath, a portion of which can be summed up as "First, do no harm."
Maybe this could apply to the Obama administration. First, do not harm us.
Unfortunately, new presidents merely take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and we all know how well that oath is fulfilled. So a plea to "do no harm" will undoubtedly fall on deaf ears.
By implication, we can assume that the "changes" that will be forced upon us in the next four years will harm us. More than ever before, now is the time to cultivate personal independence – or as much as you can in our fettered condition. The less you need the government, the more you weaken it. The more dependent you are on government, the more power it has.
It was Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas (1939-1975) who said, "The right to be left alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom." Keep that in mind as you consider the following suggestions.
(1) Prepare to hunker down. Interpret this as you will.
(2) If you have any, hide your money – otherwise it will be spread around. The best way to spread your own wealth on your own terms is to hire people to work for you. But of course, you knew that already.
(3) Take your kids out of public school. Schools are going to become nothing but Marxist pressure cookers. They're already socialist indoctrination centers. Have you any idea what they're teaching in kindergarten these days, much less high school? Better find out.
(4) If you're Joe the Plumber, hide. Quickly. Otherwise your life for the next four years will be a living hell. Obama supporters have demonstrated they like to retaliate, so you're not safe.
(5) Buy guns and ammunition. Especially ammunition. The tools necessary for self-defense and to keep our government under at least a modicum of control are going to quickly become unavailable. Perhaps not banned outright – that would cause riots – but the taxes on these tools of self-reliance will be raised so high that the effect will be the same.
(6) Don't surrender to guilt. Opposing the new world order coming your way is not selfish. The "best interests of all" are code words for state slavery. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" is the death of liberty and the definition of Marxism. Duh.
(7) Stockpile some resources, because it's only a matter of time before our terrorist enemies (who are delighted with the outcome of the election) will launch something nasty our way. Terrorists love weak or untried rulers because they prefer to strike vulnerable targets. We just bared our throats.
(8) Move. Whatever your political affiliation, it's always best to live in a place with like-minded people. (Idaho might be worth considering.) Just make sure the place you move to has people whose concepts of liberty agree with yours.
(9) Start looking for other news sources, because it's very likely that your favorite conservative radio talk-show host will go out of business once the (ahem) "Fairness" Doctrine gets re-implemented.
(10) Buy light bulbs. There is no possible way our new green president will lift the absurd imminent ban on incandescent light bulbs. Unless you want your home to look like the inside of a train station lavatory in 2012, you'd better stock up on incandescents while you can. (Obviously lights bulbs are a metaphor for all the "for your own good" changes that will be shoved upon us.)
(11) Go to church. All the morals and values that we once cherished in this country – traditional marriage, sanctity of life, family values – are going to become so condemned that churches will be our only sanctuaries.
(12) Strengthen your family, your community, your state. Obama has said that an economy is built from the bottom up. In that he is entirely wrong (poor people don't hire – only rich people do that). But liberty most certainly IS built from the bottom up. Start by strengthening yourself. Next, your family. Support your neighbors. Build your community. Get involved with your state. The days of sitting on your hands must be over.
(13) Find another job. Or preferably, several. Don't give up your current job, of course, but as the economy continues to nosedive, it is best to cultivate your marketable skills and diversify your income sources. The more income irons you have in the fire, the better.
(14) Never never never never trust that the upcoming administration will do anything in your best interest. If the government offers you something that seems too good to be true, assume that it is. Education, medical care, housing and other benefits are never free – they cost something down the line. And the cost is always freedom. Take warning.
Obviously this list barely scratches the surface. If you use your head, you can think of many more. But better hurry up. Change is coming, like it or not.
But the thing about "change" is that it can work both ways. The ordinary Joe Plumbers of this country can change, too – and it may not be in the direction the government will like.
Tough patooties.
Patrice Lewis
Nov 08, 2008
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80410
Well, on the bright side, there were no riots in the streets following Tuesday's election. This is good.
On the other hand, Obama got elected president. We also have a Democrat majority in the Senate. Therefore, we must prepare to "change." This is bad.
I truly believe we are heading into one of the most divisive times in our nation's history, and it won't have anything to do with skin color. (How tired I am of hearing that argument.) It will have everything to do with socialism vs. free-market economics. Dependence vs. independence.
During a recent history lesson with my homeschooled daughters, we discussed some of the highlights of ancient Greek civilization and its contributions to our current culture. I told the girls about Hippocrates and the Hippocratic oath, a portion of which can be summed up as "First, do no harm."
Maybe this could apply to the Obama administration. First, do not harm us.
Unfortunately, new presidents merely take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and we all know how well that oath is fulfilled. So a plea to "do no harm" will undoubtedly fall on deaf ears.
By implication, we can assume that the "changes" that will be forced upon us in the next four years will harm us. More than ever before, now is the time to cultivate personal independence – or as much as you can in our fettered condition. The less you need the government, the more you weaken it. The more dependent you are on government, the more power it has.
It was Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas (1939-1975) who said, "The right to be left alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom." Keep that in mind as you consider the following suggestions.
(1) Prepare to hunker down. Interpret this as you will.
(2) If you have any, hide your money – otherwise it will be spread around. The best way to spread your own wealth on your own terms is to hire people to work for you. But of course, you knew that already.
(3) Take your kids out of public school. Schools are going to become nothing but Marxist pressure cookers. They're already socialist indoctrination centers. Have you any idea what they're teaching in kindergarten these days, much less high school? Better find out.
(4) If you're Joe the Plumber, hide. Quickly. Otherwise your life for the next four years will be a living hell. Obama supporters have demonstrated they like to retaliate, so you're not safe.
(5) Buy guns and ammunition. Especially ammunition. The tools necessary for self-defense and to keep our government under at least a modicum of control are going to quickly become unavailable. Perhaps not banned outright – that would cause riots – but the taxes on these tools of self-reliance will be raised so high that the effect will be the same.
(6) Don't surrender to guilt. Opposing the new world order coming your way is not selfish. The "best interests of all" are code words for state slavery. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" is the death of liberty and the definition of Marxism. Duh.
(7) Stockpile some resources, because it's only a matter of time before our terrorist enemies (who are delighted with the outcome of the election) will launch something nasty our way. Terrorists love weak or untried rulers because they prefer to strike vulnerable targets. We just bared our throats.
(8) Move. Whatever your political affiliation, it's always best to live in a place with like-minded people. (Idaho might be worth considering.) Just make sure the place you move to has people whose concepts of liberty agree with yours.
(9) Start looking for other news sources, because it's very likely that your favorite conservative radio talk-show host will go out of business once the (ahem) "Fairness" Doctrine gets re-implemented.
(10) Buy light bulbs. There is no possible way our new green president will lift the absurd imminent ban on incandescent light bulbs. Unless you want your home to look like the inside of a train station lavatory in 2012, you'd better stock up on incandescents while you can. (Obviously lights bulbs are a metaphor for all the "for your own good" changes that will be shoved upon us.)
(11) Go to church. All the morals and values that we once cherished in this country – traditional marriage, sanctity of life, family values – are going to become so condemned that churches will be our only sanctuaries.
(12) Strengthen your family, your community, your state. Obama has said that an economy is built from the bottom up. In that he is entirely wrong (poor people don't hire – only rich people do that). But liberty most certainly IS built from the bottom up. Start by strengthening yourself. Next, your family. Support your neighbors. Build your community. Get involved with your state. The days of sitting on your hands must be over.
(13) Find another job. Or preferably, several. Don't give up your current job, of course, but as the economy continues to nosedive, it is best to cultivate your marketable skills and diversify your income sources. The more income irons you have in the fire, the better.
(14) Never never never never trust that the upcoming administration will do anything in your best interest. If the government offers you something that seems too good to be true, assume that it is. Education, medical care, housing and other benefits are never free – they cost something down the line. And the cost is always freedom. Take warning.
Obviously this list barely scratches the surface. If you use your head, you can think of many more. But better hurry up. Change is coming, like it or not.
But the thing about "change" is that it can work both ways. The ordinary Joe Plumbers of this country can change, too – and it may not be in the direction the government will like.
Tough patooties.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Yes we can draft your ass
Yes we can -- draft your ass
JD Tuccille
Nov 06, 2008
http://www.tuccille.com/blog/2008/11/
yes-we-can-draft-your-ass.html
You know, I warn, and I warn, and I warn, and I warn, but nobody listens. Don't know what I'm talking about? Read on ...
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, President-Elect Obama's choice for chief of staff in his incoming administration, is co-author of a book, The Plan, that calls for, among other things, compulsory service for all Americans ages 18 to 25. The following excerpt is from pages 61-62 of the 2006 book:
It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service. ...
Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs.
Emanuel and co-author Bruce Reed insist "this is not a draft," but go on to write of young men and women, "the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service." They also warn, "[s]ome Republicans will squeal about individual freedom," ruling out any likelihood that they would let people opt out of universal citizen service.
As chief of staff, Emanuel will not be in a position to directly introduce public policy, but his enthusiasm for compulsory service, combined with Barack Obama's own plan to require high school students to perform 50 hours of government-approved service, suggest an unfortunate direction for the new administration.
JD Tuccille
Nov 06, 2008
http://www.tuccille.com/blog/2008/11/
yes-we-can-draft-your-ass.html
You know, I warn, and I warn, and I warn, and I warn, but nobody listens. Don't know what I'm talking about? Read on ...
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, President-Elect Obama's choice for chief of staff in his incoming administration, is co-author of a book, The Plan, that calls for, among other things, compulsory service for all Americans ages 18 to 25. The following excerpt is from pages 61-62 of the 2006 book:
It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service. ...
Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs.
Emanuel and co-author Bruce Reed insist "this is not a draft," but go on to write of young men and women, "the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service." They also warn, "[s]ome Republicans will squeal about individual freedom," ruling out any likelihood that they would let people opt out of universal citizen service.
As chief of staff, Emanuel will not be in a position to directly introduce public policy, but his enthusiasm for compulsory service, combined with Barack Obama's own plan to require high school students to perform 50 hours of government-approved service, suggest an unfortunate direction for the new administration.
Friday, November 7, 2008
We Will Watch Obama Like A Hawk
We Will Watch Obama Like A Hawk
Bob Chapman
Nov 05, 2008
http://www.theinternationalforecaster.com/
International_Forecaster_Weekly/
We_Will_Watch_Obama_Like_A_Hawk
Congratulations, America. You are now officially the Obamanation. Not that you had any other realistic choices. And the only other viable alternative, McCain, was no better than Obama. He will now be forced to do as he is told under threat of exposure, and will have no independent latitude to make decisions concerning anything which the Illuminati care about. Biden will be his handler just as Cheney was, and continues to be, Caligula's handler. In fact, that's why Biden, a fervent and hardened Illuminist, was chosen as VP.
The October Surprise also explains why Palin was chosen as VP for McCain. McCain and Palin were never seriously in contention due to the coming October Surprise, so this gave the Illuminists a chance to cater to the Christian Right without any worries about Palin ever becoming President in the event that McCain could no longer serve in that capacity. Once again, the naive and fawning Christian Right got all excited over being patronized in yet another false-flag overture to Christians. The Palin nomination was intended as a plug for incumbent traitors in Congress who had electorates filled with Christian voters. The idea was to energize these Christian voters so as to help these incumbents get reelected. In this manner, the evil Illuminists attempted to keep the best government officials that money could buy in office, while the government officials who were up for reelection attempted to keep their established system of embedded graft and corruption going. Apparently, despite all that has happened, the Christian Right still can't recognize a wolf in sheep's clothing, nor are they able to perceive when they are being led down a garden path. With that kind of gullible leadership, Christianity is doomed in the US. In time, we will become just like Europe, unless God intervenes with an Exodus-like series of miracles to spark a Christian revival, because that is what it will probably take to wake up our sleeping Christian leaders.
Dr Martin Luther King, whose thoughts and philosophy were the antithesis of those held by the Illuminati, ended up being assassinated by them, while by contrast, Mr. Obama, an elitist bootlicker who surrounds himself with upper tier Illuminist advisors like Brzezinski, Buffett, Volcker, Rubin and Anderson, and who kow-tows to the same evil Illuminist scum who are financing his Jimmy-Carter-like campaign out of obscurity, ended up being elected President of the United States. This shows you, in no uncertain terms, how corrupt the system really is.
We judge people by the content of their character as Dr. King suggested, and based on Mr. Obama's campaign associations alone, we would have to conclude that his character is not a good one. His support of Fannie and Freddie in the face of their obvious bankruptcy, and his number one spot as the target of Fannie and Freddie campaign contribution largesse, puts the icing on the cake, as does his support of Mr. Odinga, whose attempted coup in Kenya has resulted in the destruction of 800 Christian churches and the murders of hundreds of Christian Kenyans, events which were totally suppressed by the fane-stream media. He is not Dr. King. In fact, he is the precise opposite of Dr. King, who preferred peace over militancy.
Worse yet, we note that the current group of Illuminati are the most virulent racists of all time. They make Hitler look like a civil rights leader. What may be happening here is that these fiends are trying to associate what will be the worst economic, social and political times ever suffered by Americans, which these elitists have malevolently and intentionally orchestrated to bring America to its knees and to pave the way for world government, with a black Presidency. In one brilliant master stroke, they will take all the misery they have created to push us into a corporatist, fascist police state, and place it on the head of a black President. In addition, they will make sure that his Presidency is a disaster and that it does not succeed. Obama will be in over his head, and due to his compromised position regarding his citizenship, he will do whatever they tell him to do, and none of it will work. That is because it is not supposed to work. They want to bring you to your knees so you will bow down to the new self-proclaimed masters of the universe as the old Goldilocks Matrix is discarded and the new corporatist, fascist police state is substituted in its place. Note how well this association of national disaster with a black Presidency will play into the rhetoric of white supremacists.
Like Pavlov's dogs, the sheople are conditioned to come bleating to the voting polls on Election Day to cast their vote for reprobate A, or for reprobate B. They think they are making a choice, but for most part, in the important campaigns like President of the US and many other major state and federal elective positions, the choice has already been made for them. Pick Illuminist Skull and Bones candidate A, or pick Illuminist Skull and Bones candidate B, ala Bush against Kerry. Either way, we win. Candidate A will promote items "a" through "m" of our agenda, and candidate B will promote items "n" through "z" of our agenda.
Politicians blab away, talking about what is on their party's agenda, and then they are told what to do by those in our shadow government who run the whole agenda, which is of course divided between the two parties. We promise Mr. Obama that we will never listen to what he says, but will we watch what he does like a hawk. We will burn away all the Illuminist lies and webs of deceit which are woven around his actions to obscure and to obfuscate their true nature and purpose. We will give him a chance like anyone else and we will be his supporter if he is honest and forthright. But we will be his worst nightmare if he tries to get "cute" with the American people. We will expose what he is doing and lay it bare to the American public. If he is not being honest we will see right through it, and then tell you, our subscribers, how things really are. This is what we have done over the course of the past ten Presidential Administrations preceding Obama's coming Administration, and is what we will continue to do. Remember, Mr. Obama, we have been doing this for over 50 years and we know their agenda and how they operate far better than you do. We can also assure you that they are not telling you everything they plan to do. You could not take the shock. You might even be enraged. They will tell you what is coming on an as-needed basis.
Obama will now put the finishing touches on the destruction of America which was started in earnest under the previous trilogy of traitors, or triad of trouble, which commenced with the Administration of Bohemian Bush, Sr., continued with vigor under Slick Willie Clinton, and then was nearly completed during the epically catastrophic Caligula administration, which we note is still not finished with its skullduggery, and won't be until Caligula leaves office, if ever.
The above are just a few of the possible scenarios, which the Illuminists could force on us in order to implement martial law and a feudal, Orwellian police state. Who knows what could happen as long as these Illuminist sociopaths are running our shadow government? Never underestimate the cleverness of these megalomaniacal, satanic trillionaires, whose intelligence is powered by supernatural forces of evil and darkness. Next comes another major war to distract us from the destruction of our economy, and to destroy our military so we have no defense against foreign troops or against both foreign and domestic mercenaries. We also note that Obama has promised a new national draft so that your children get to be cannon fodder for the fun and profit of the US military-industrial complex and so they also get to become the objects of persecution and terrorist retribution overseas as they are forced to stick their noses into everyone else's business where they do not belong.
Even if they end the war in Iraq and divvy it up with big oil while retaining a mercenary force, rest assured that they will move on to the next war or escalation in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, in the Balkans, or on the Russian border. Who knows with these maniacs? This is the end of our society as we know it. This is the Fall of the House of Usher.
The prices of gold and silver futures have been suppressed to such an extent by the Illuminists within the Treasury Department that there is a stampede out of gold and silver futures, an event that could lead to default. As you all know physical gold and silver are in short supply and we are seeing higher premiums. At the same time the rigged futures market is just the opposite. All throughout history good money, gold, has driven out bad, fiat, and that is why the gold and silver futures market will either collapse because no one will play anymore, or they will default as a result of inability to deliver.
Gold is a 2-edged sword. Gold and silver go up with inflation and hyperinflation and gold also goes up or holds its own in deflation in a flight to quality.
We have been in the credit crisis for 15 months and the US and world economies are headed at breakneck speed into deep recession. We have stagflation, inflation and stagnation and it is going to get considerably worse as we head toward eventual deflation. Personal consumption expenditures are falling, as is GDP, which in the third quarter finally entered the minus column. We have a rigged rally in the dollar as consumption falls and government expenditures climb. Long before this is over the part of GDP consisting of personal consumption will fall from 70% to 72% to the long-term mean of 64.5% and that alone will cripple the economy. Although we see it going into the 50s as depression takes hold a few years from now. Our government and Wall Street are orchestrating a less severe recession to keep you spending and to keep you in the rigged stock market. As a result you are talked into a bailout package for banks and Wall Street. It doesn’t work and over 80% of Americans are against the package because they know what is going on. They are listening to alternative radio and reading what is on the Internet. In spite of that a purchased or compromised Congress give the corrupt Illuminists what they wanted. It must also be remembered the administration told congressmen that if we didn’t have such legislation that they’d impose Martial law. That is what corporate fascist government is all about.
We are already in a severe recession. All of our government’s statistics are bogus. The bailout was for the most part for money center banks, the big financial conglomerates and transnational corporations. Those funds went to the insiders, not to smaller institutions. They were for the crime syndicate, the corrupt Illuminist mafia. The next step after the election is the monetization of money and credit and horrible hyperinflation. Soon the dollar short covering will be history. Libor has already fallen and is back in its normal place. Credit derivatives and credit default swaps has produced a demand for dollars for settlement payouts. That will soon end as well. Fifteen months ago these derivatives began to fail and that systemic failure is ongoing. It will end in the complete collapse of the dollar.
This is the same barbaric horde that just sent the commodity market down almost 60%. They are now waiting to take it back up again to plunder the public once more. They bashed commodities and gold and silver because the rush for real assets had to be destroyed even though it was temporary. As a result there was a rush into physical gold and silver products, a resultant shortage developed. The elitists saw that and not wanting more physical gold in the publics’ hands the mints in Johannesburg, Canada, the US and Mexico shut down. Do you really think that was coincidence? They do not want gold and silver attractive because they are going to hyper inflate. At least for the next two to three years inflation is going to rage. Money and credit are still expanding at 12-1/2% and inflation is 12-1/2%. What deflationists do not seem to grasp is that the elitists will keep the system running because they do not want a crash until they can get a major war underway, as a distraction; another way of adding wealth, and for getting a tighter grasp on power and to further exercise population control. The question is when will the viability of America debt be questioned? Will the failure to deliver US treasuries break the market and not nonparticipation? We do not know but it is surely possible. This is why we have not for some time recommended US Treasuries, but instead Swiss franc Treasuries for those who prefer a partial cash position. It is very simple. The more debt the US government creates and the more money and credit the Fed creates the more the value of the dollar depreciates. Worse yet, the collateral being presented for the exchange of Treasuries is essentially worthless. We also believe Treasuries are being created and not being reported in order to satisfy the perceived flight to quality. Remember, these people do not tell the truth about anything and they believe as the Illuminated ones that they can do anything they please. That is why we continue to tell you to be out of US government and debt paper as well as the stock market. The only exceptions are gold, silver and oil and gas stocks. Cash out your retirement plans if you can and move them into gold and silver related assets. We can promise you two things, hyperinflation and eventual Treasury default. Why do you think on 11/15 major nations are meeting to form a new monetary unit? It will take several months. But it is about to happen. The dollar as a reserve currency and as a store of value is finished and many other currencies will follow. Remember 64.5% of world central bank reserves are in US dollars. No country is going to survive this unscathed. There will be a trigger as there always is. It probably will be an economic event or a string of events that begins the dollar collapse. There are things going on we know nothing about, but which we will soon find out about.
We have another couple of bubbles coming. There is a pension bomb that is in process and the credit card bubble-bomb. Lenders wrote off about $21 billion in bad credit card loans in the first half of 2008, and they haven’t even scratched the surface yet. Companies are laying off millions of workers and it is currently conservatively estimated that by the end of 2009 they’ll lose another $55 billion. Currently losses are 5.5% of debt outstanding and probably will easily exceed 8%.
As lenders rethink their lending rules our credit-hooked nation is rethinking their credit habits. It is about time lenders smartened up and stopped being greedy and it is about time Americans started paying for gas, food and other items with cash. You should only be using credit cards for emergencies and you should pay off your debit every month.
In 2005 mortgage extractions were $595 billion, in 2007 they fell to $470 billion and the second quarter of 2008 saw $9.5 billion. At that rate we’ll see a 90% drop from 2005.
Total loans from commercial banks grew by $89 billion yoy to December. Of that $61 billion was credit card debt. That means banks only lent $28 billion to business or to individuals. These numbers show you how stressed consumers are, amid accelerating job loss, low wages and high inflation, home price deflation, the effects of illegal immigration and the losses in equity in stocks, never mind having their retirement accounts clobbered. Credit card debt is up – it has risen more in the recent 10 weeks than it has in the previous 10 months. The increase is annualized at 48.3%. American Express delinquencies on credit payments rose to 4.1% in the third quarter, up from 2.5% yoy, their pool of uncollectible loans to a high of 6.7%. If it weren’t so sad the following would be laughable. The second largest credit card merchant vendor is McDonalds. This is a sign of very serious distress. This level of credit card usage is unsustainable.
All this comes as stock market losses worldwide reduced global wealth by $16 trillion. A good part of which was in retirement accounts. This coming year government will admit to unemployment of more than 9%. That puts U6 at 14% and long-term at 17% using government figures. The duration of current unemployment is nine months or 38 weeks. That will be at least 14 months at the end of 2009. Unless unemployment benefits are expended an additional six months they’ll be lots of people in serious financial trouble. That means less consumption, which will feed recession. Incidentally, that will widen the budget deficit. Unemployed don’t pay taxes and that means less revenue.
We see a 2009 budget deficit of $1.2 trillion plus, as the recession deepens. The only thing keeping the end of 2009 out of depression will be massive injections of money and credit and that will cause the dollar to fall and inflation, gold and silver to rise. With all this in the mix we see would-be newsletter writers, economists and analysts predicting already slow recovery by the end of 2009. In order to be politically acceptable they didn’t recognize recession until a few months ago, a year and one-half behind the curve. This in spite of massive welfare during the year.
Bob Chapman
Nov 05, 2008
http://www.theinternationalforecaster.com/
International_Forecaster_Weekly/
We_Will_Watch_Obama_Like_A_Hawk
Congratulations, America. You are now officially the Obamanation. Not that you had any other realistic choices. And the only other viable alternative, McCain, was no better than Obama. He will now be forced to do as he is told under threat of exposure, and will have no independent latitude to make decisions concerning anything which the Illuminati care about. Biden will be his handler just as Cheney was, and continues to be, Caligula's handler. In fact, that's why Biden, a fervent and hardened Illuminist, was chosen as VP.
The October Surprise also explains why Palin was chosen as VP for McCain. McCain and Palin were never seriously in contention due to the coming October Surprise, so this gave the Illuminists a chance to cater to the Christian Right without any worries about Palin ever becoming President in the event that McCain could no longer serve in that capacity. Once again, the naive and fawning Christian Right got all excited over being patronized in yet another false-flag overture to Christians. The Palin nomination was intended as a plug for incumbent traitors in Congress who had electorates filled with Christian voters. The idea was to energize these Christian voters so as to help these incumbents get reelected. In this manner, the evil Illuminists attempted to keep the best government officials that money could buy in office, while the government officials who were up for reelection attempted to keep their established system of embedded graft and corruption going. Apparently, despite all that has happened, the Christian Right still can't recognize a wolf in sheep's clothing, nor are they able to perceive when they are being led down a garden path. With that kind of gullible leadership, Christianity is doomed in the US. In time, we will become just like Europe, unless God intervenes with an Exodus-like series of miracles to spark a Christian revival, because that is what it will probably take to wake up our sleeping Christian leaders.
Dr Martin Luther King, whose thoughts and philosophy were the antithesis of those held by the Illuminati, ended up being assassinated by them, while by contrast, Mr. Obama, an elitist bootlicker who surrounds himself with upper tier Illuminist advisors like Brzezinski, Buffett, Volcker, Rubin and Anderson, and who kow-tows to the same evil Illuminist scum who are financing his Jimmy-Carter-like campaign out of obscurity, ended up being elected President of the United States. This shows you, in no uncertain terms, how corrupt the system really is.
We judge people by the content of their character as Dr. King suggested, and based on Mr. Obama's campaign associations alone, we would have to conclude that his character is not a good one. His support of Fannie and Freddie in the face of their obvious bankruptcy, and his number one spot as the target of Fannie and Freddie campaign contribution largesse, puts the icing on the cake, as does his support of Mr. Odinga, whose attempted coup in Kenya has resulted in the destruction of 800 Christian churches and the murders of hundreds of Christian Kenyans, events which were totally suppressed by the fane-stream media. He is not Dr. King. In fact, he is the precise opposite of Dr. King, who preferred peace over militancy.
Worse yet, we note that the current group of Illuminati are the most virulent racists of all time. They make Hitler look like a civil rights leader. What may be happening here is that these fiends are trying to associate what will be the worst economic, social and political times ever suffered by Americans, which these elitists have malevolently and intentionally orchestrated to bring America to its knees and to pave the way for world government, with a black Presidency. In one brilliant master stroke, they will take all the misery they have created to push us into a corporatist, fascist police state, and place it on the head of a black President. In addition, they will make sure that his Presidency is a disaster and that it does not succeed. Obama will be in over his head, and due to his compromised position regarding his citizenship, he will do whatever they tell him to do, and none of it will work. That is because it is not supposed to work. They want to bring you to your knees so you will bow down to the new self-proclaimed masters of the universe as the old Goldilocks Matrix is discarded and the new corporatist, fascist police state is substituted in its place. Note how well this association of national disaster with a black Presidency will play into the rhetoric of white supremacists.
Like Pavlov's dogs, the sheople are conditioned to come bleating to the voting polls on Election Day to cast their vote for reprobate A, or for reprobate B. They think they are making a choice, but for most part, in the important campaigns like President of the US and many other major state and federal elective positions, the choice has already been made for them. Pick Illuminist Skull and Bones candidate A, or pick Illuminist Skull and Bones candidate B, ala Bush against Kerry. Either way, we win. Candidate A will promote items "a" through "m" of our agenda, and candidate B will promote items "n" through "z" of our agenda.
Politicians blab away, talking about what is on their party's agenda, and then they are told what to do by those in our shadow government who run the whole agenda, which is of course divided between the two parties. We promise Mr. Obama that we will never listen to what he says, but will we watch what he does like a hawk. We will burn away all the Illuminist lies and webs of deceit which are woven around his actions to obscure and to obfuscate their true nature and purpose. We will give him a chance like anyone else and we will be his supporter if he is honest and forthright. But we will be his worst nightmare if he tries to get "cute" with the American people. We will expose what he is doing and lay it bare to the American public. If he is not being honest we will see right through it, and then tell you, our subscribers, how things really are. This is what we have done over the course of the past ten Presidential Administrations preceding Obama's coming Administration, and is what we will continue to do. Remember, Mr. Obama, we have been doing this for over 50 years and we know their agenda and how they operate far better than you do. We can also assure you that they are not telling you everything they plan to do. You could not take the shock. You might even be enraged. They will tell you what is coming on an as-needed basis.
Obama will now put the finishing touches on the destruction of America which was started in earnest under the previous trilogy of traitors, or triad of trouble, which commenced with the Administration of Bohemian Bush, Sr., continued with vigor under Slick Willie Clinton, and then was nearly completed during the epically catastrophic Caligula administration, which we note is still not finished with its skullduggery, and won't be until Caligula leaves office, if ever.
The above are just a few of the possible scenarios, which the Illuminists could force on us in order to implement martial law and a feudal, Orwellian police state. Who knows what could happen as long as these Illuminist sociopaths are running our shadow government? Never underestimate the cleverness of these megalomaniacal, satanic trillionaires, whose intelligence is powered by supernatural forces of evil and darkness. Next comes another major war to distract us from the destruction of our economy, and to destroy our military so we have no defense against foreign troops or against both foreign and domestic mercenaries. We also note that Obama has promised a new national draft so that your children get to be cannon fodder for the fun and profit of the US military-industrial complex and so they also get to become the objects of persecution and terrorist retribution overseas as they are forced to stick their noses into everyone else's business where they do not belong.
Even if they end the war in Iraq and divvy it up with big oil while retaining a mercenary force, rest assured that they will move on to the next war or escalation in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, in the Balkans, or on the Russian border. Who knows with these maniacs? This is the end of our society as we know it. This is the Fall of the House of Usher.
The prices of gold and silver futures have been suppressed to such an extent by the Illuminists within the Treasury Department that there is a stampede out of gold and silver futures, an event that could lead to default. As you all know physical gold and silver are in short supply and we are seeing higher premiums. At the same time the rigged futures market is just the opposite. All throughout history good money, gold, has driven out bad, fiat, and that is why the gold and silver futures market will either collapse because no one will play anymore, or they will default as a result of inability to deliver.
Gold is a 2-edged sword. Gold and silver go up with inflation and hyperinflation and gold also goes up or holds its own in deflation in a flight to quality.
We have been in the credit crisis for 15 months and the US and world economies are headed at breakneck speed into deep recession. We have stagflation, inflation and stagnation and it is going to get considerably worse as we head toward eventual deflation. Personal consumption expenditures are falling, as is GDP, which in the third quarter finally entered the minus column. We have a rigged rally in the dollar as consumption falls and government expenditures climb. Long before this is over the part of GDP consisting of personal consumption will fall from 70% to 72% to the long-term mean of 64.5% and that alone will cripple the economy. Although we see it going into the 50s as depression takes hold a few years from now. Our government and Wall Street are orchestrating a less severe recession to keep you spending and to keep you in the rigged stock market. As a result you are talked into a bailout package for banks and Wall Street. It doesn’t work and over 80% of Americans are against the package because they know what is going on. They are listening to alternative radio and reading what is on the Internet. In spite of that a purchased or compromised Congress give the corrupt Illuminists what they wanted. It must also be remembered the administration told congressmen that if we didn’t have such legislation that they’d impose Martial law. That is what corporate fascist government is all about.
We are already in a severe recession. All of our government’s statistics are bogus. The bailout was for the most part for money center banks, the big financial conglomerates and transnational corporations. Those funds went to the insiders, not to smaller institutions. They were for the crime syndicate, the corrupt Illuminist mafia. The next step after the election is the monetization of money and credit and horrible hyperinflation. Soon the dollar short covering will be history. Libor has already fallen and is back in its normal place. Credit derivatives and credit default swaps has produced a demand for dollars for settlement payouts. That will soon end as well. Fifteen months ago these derivatives began to fail and that systemic failure is ongoing. It will end in the complete collapse of the dollar.
This is the same barbaric horde that just sent the commodity market down almost 60%. They are now waiting to take it back up again to plunder the public once more. They bashed commodities and gold and silver because the rush for real assets had to be destroyed even though it was temporary. As a result there was a rush into physical gold and silver products, a resultant shortage developed. The elitists saw that and not wanting more physical gold in the publics’ hands the mints in Johannesburg, Canada, the US and Mexico shut down. Do you really think that was coincidence? They do not want gold and silver attractive because they are going to hyper inflate. At least for the next two to three years inflation is going to rage. Money and credit are still expanding at 12-1/2% and inflation is 12-1/2%. What deflationists do not seem to grasp is that the elitists will keep the system running because they do not want a crash until they can get a major war underway, as a distraction; another way of adding wealth, and for getting a tighter grasp on power and to further exercise population control. The question is when will the viability of America debt be questioned? Will the failure to deliver US treasuries break the market and not nonparticipation? We do not know but it is surely possible. This is why we have not for some time recommended US Treasuries, but instead Swiss franc Treasuries for those who prefer a partial cash position. It is very simple. The more debt the US government creates and the more money and credit the Fed creates the more the value of the dollar depreciates. Worse yet, the collateral being presented for the exchange of Treasuries is essentially worthless. We also believe Treasuries are being created and not being reported in order to satisfy the perceived flight to quality. Remember, these people do not tell the truth about anything and they believe as the Illuminated ones that they can do anything they please. That is why we continue to tell you to be out of US government and debt paper as well as the stock market. The only exceptions are gold, silver and oil and gas stocks. Cash out your retirement plans if you can and move them into gold and silver related assets. We can promise you two things, hyperinflation and eventual Treasury default. Why do you think on 11/15 major nations are meeting to form a new monetary unit? It will take several months. But it is about to happen. The dollar as a reserve currency and as a store of value is finished and many other currencies will follow. Remember 64.5% of world central bank reserves are in US dollars. No country is going to survive this unscathed. There will be a trigger as there always is. It probably will be an economic event or a string of events that begins the dollar collapse. There are things going on we know nothing about, but which we will soon find out about.
We have another couple of bubbles coming. There is a pension bomb that is in process and the credit card bubble-bomb. Lenders wrote off about $21 billion in bad credit card loans in the first half of 2008, and they haven’t even scratched the surface yet. Companies are laying off millions of workers and it is currently conservatively estimated that by the end of 2009 they’ll lose another $55 billion. Currently losses are 5.5% of debt outstanding and probably will easily exceed 8%.
As lenders rethink their lending rules our credit-hooked nation is rethinking their credit habits. It is about time lenders smartened up and stopped being greedy and it is about time Americans started paying for gas, food and other items with cash. You should only be using credit cards for emergencies and you should pay off your debit every month.
In 2005 mortgage extractions were $595 billion, in 2007 they fell to $470 billion and the second quarter of 2008 saw $9.5 billion. At that rate we’ll see a 90% drop from 2005.
Total loans from commercial banks grew by $89 billion yoy to December. Of that $61 billion was credit card debt. That means banks only lent $28 billion to business or to individuals. These numbers show you how stressed consumers are, amid accelerating job loss, low wages and high inflation, home price deflation, the effects of illegal immigration and the losses in equity in stocks, never mind having their retirement accounts clobbered. Credit card debt is up – it has risen more in the recent 10 weeks than it has in the previous 10 months. The increase is annualized at 48.3%. American Express delinquencies on credit payments rose to 4.1% in the third quarter, up from 2.5% yoy, their pool of uncollectible loans to a high of 6.7%. If it weren’t so sad the following would be laughable. The second largest credit card merchant vendor is McDonalds. This is a sign of very serious distress. This level of credit card usage is unsustainable.
All this comes as stock market losses worldwide reduced global wealth by $16 trillion. A good part of which was in retirement accounts. This coming year government will admit to unemployment of more than 9%. That puts U6 at 14% and long-term at 17% using government figures. The duration of current unemployment is nine months or 38 weeks. That will be at least 14 months at the end of 2009. Unless unemployment benefits are expended an additional six months they’ll be lots of people in serious financial trouble. That means less consumption, which will feed recession. Incidentally, that will widen the budget deficit. Unemployed don’t pay taxes and that means less revenue.
We see a 2009 budget deficit of $1.2 trillion plus, as the recession deepens. The only thing keeping the end of 2009 out of depression will be massive injections of money and credit and that will cause the dollar to fall and inflation, gold and silver to rise. With all this in the mix we see would-be newsletter writers, economists and analysts predicting already slow recovery by the end of 2009. In order to be politically acceptable they didn’t recognize recession until a few months ago, a year and one-half behind the curve. This in spite of massive welfare during the year.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
The Obama Campaign’s Credit-Card Crack-up
The Obama Campaign’s Credit-Card Crack-up
Tom Blumer
Nov 02, 2008
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/
the-obama-campaigns-credit-card-crack-up/
A breakdown of controls has enabled foreign and other unaccountable funds to pour into the Obama campaign — and it's not an accident.
The campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has been and may still be accepting credit-card and prepaid-card contributions from overseas. It has done so in a way that may very likely prevent it from refunding the contributions to “donors,” many of whom may have had their credit cards used without their consent. It’s virtually impossible that the system for accepting card contributions was inadvertently set up without adequate controls, and almost certain that existing controls were instead deliberately disabled to create untraceability. Finally, it is likely that the total dollar amounts involved run in millions, if not tens of millions, of dollars.
In mid-August, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, writing at American Thinker, summarized a pattern of irregularities she had found. Geller, and readers who assisted her, discovered that:
* “Obama’s overseas (foreign) contributors are making multiple small donations, ostensibly in their own names, over a period of a few days, some under maximum donation allowances, but others are aggregating in excess of the maximums when all added up.”
* The contributions had come from over 50 specifically named countries and major cities.
* Obviously bogus contributor names that a 7 year-old would have known to be fictitious, including “Hbkjb, jkbkj,” “Doodad Pro,” and “Good Will,” were frequent.
* “Thousands of Obama’s foreign donations ended in cents.” U.S. contributors very rarely contribute in anything other than whole dollar amounts, so the reason why contributions would end with anything other than “.00? would almost always involve foreign currency translation.
In a later post, Geller listed 18 donors who had contributed more than the legal $2,300 limit. “Good Will” and “Doodad Pro” were among them, to the tune of over ten grand each.
You might think “Well that’s pretty bad, but really no big deal, because at some point, Obama will just refund the money.”
In many cases, that does not appear likely.
On October 22, Geller’s “Who Is John Galt?” post revealed information that should have set off alarms in newsrooms across America — namely, that anyone could pretend to be someone else, with someone else’s address, and successfully process a credit-card donation to Obama. Reader Craig reported the following (bold is mine):
I’ve read recent reports of the Obama campaign receiving donations from dubious names and foreign locales and it got me wondering; how is this possible?
I run a small internet business and when I process credit cards I’m required to make sure the name on the card exactly matches the name of the customer making the purchase. Also, the purchasers address must match that of the cardholders. If these don’t match, then the payment isn’t approved. Period. So how is it possible that the Obama campaign could receive donations from fictional people and places? Well, I decided to do a little experiment. I went to the Obama campaign website and entered the following:
Name: John Galt; Address: 1957 Ayn Rand Lane; City: Galts Gulch; State: CO; Zip: 99999
Then I checked the box next to $15 and entered my actual credit card number and expiration date (it didn’t ask for the 3-digit code on the back of the card) and it took me to the next page and “Your donation has been processed. Thank you for your generous gift.”
This simply should not, and could not, happen in any business or any campaign that is honestly trying to vet it’s (sic) donors.
How can this happen? Here’s how (found at the same Atlas post; bolds are mine):
Having worked for companies that process credit cards online, it is necessary to go through and manually disable the safeguards that they put in place to verify a person’s address and zip code with the cardholder’s bank. But international banks don’t currently have the same safeguards that banks in the U.S. have, which also works in the One’s favor.So most likely they’ve disabled the necessary safeguards for U.S. cards …
The disabled components involved are part of what is known as the “AVS” (Automated Verification System). Many bloggers and blog commenters have confirmed the accuracy of the just-excerpted claims, including the fact that the merchant has to take proactive steps to rewrite or disable existing programming and controls to make AVS not work.
This information would indicate that Team Obama does not know (or pretends not to know; that would be for investigators to determine) who specifically has donated much of its campaign money — and the fact that they don’t know is deliberate.
Further, the lack of controls in Obama’s campaign-contribution system enables the use of prepaid cards, which if paid for in cash, are more than likely completely untraceable without going back to store video recordings, most of which are discarded or overwritten after a short time.
From all appearances, in both cases — unverified credit-card and prepaid-card contributions — it is very likely that the Obama campaign couldn’t refund monies received even if it wanted to. Donations to Obama are making it to statements of cardholders who never authorized them. The only people who might get their money back are the ones who catch the charges. And what about charges to stolen or forged cards?
Despite many tests, no one has been able to show that these material control weaknesses exist in the McCain-Palin contributions system.
Meanwhile, though space doesn’t permit fully chronicling the specifics, America’s mainstream Obama-mad media has been negligent in covering this astonishing story, either failing to report it at all (which Clay Waters of NewsBusters has noted is the case at the New York Times), or blandly understating the severity and, if you will, audacity of the enterprise (Washington Post, October 25 and October 28; National Journal).
If this were John McCain’s campaign, a deafening “what did he know and when did he know it?” chorus would have begun well over a week ago.
As it is, most voters have cast or will cast their presidential ballots totally unaware of what may very well be the largest and most highly-organized campaign-finance fraud in U.S. elections history.
As they do, they should be asking, “What did Obama know and when did he know it?”
Tom Blumer
Nov 02, 2008
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/
the-obama-campaigns-credit-card-crack-up/
A breakdown of controls has enabled foreign and other unaccountable funds to pour into the Obama campaign — and it's not an accident.
The campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has been and may still be accepting credit-card and prepaid-card contributions from overseas. It has done so in a way that may very likely prevent it from refunding the contributions to “donors,” many of whom may have had their credit cards used without their consent. It’s virtually impossible that the system for accepting card contributions was inadvertently set up without adequate controls, and almost certain that existing controls were instead deliberately disabled to create untraceability. Finally, it is likely that the total dollar amounts involved run in millions, if not tens of millions, of dollars.
In mid-August, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, writing at American Thinker, summarized a pattern of irregularities she had found. Geller, and readers who assisted her, discovered that:
* “Obama’s overseas (foreign) contributors are making multiple small donations, ostensibly in their own names, over a period of a few days, some under maximum donation allowances, but others are aggregating in excess of the maximums when all added up.”
* The contributions had come from over 50 specifically named countries and major cities.
* Obviously bogus contributor names that a 7 year-old would have known to be fictitious, including “Hbkjb, jkbkj,” “Doodad Pro,” and “Good Will,” were frequent.
* “Thousands of Obama’s foreign donations ended in cents.” U.S. contributors very rarely contribute in anything other than whole dollar amounts, so the reason why contributions would end with anything other than “.00? would almost always involve foreign currency translation.
In a later post, Geller listed 18 donors who had contributed more than the legal $2,300 limit. “Good Will” and “Doodad Pro” were among them, to the tune of over ten grand each.
You might think “Well that’s pretty bad, but really no big deal, because at some point, Obama will just refund the money.”
In many cases, that does not appear likely.
On October 22, Geller’s “Who Is John Galt?” post revealed information that should have set off alarms in newsrooms across America — namely, that anyone could pretend to be someone else, with someone else’s address, and successfully process a credit-card donation to Obama. Reader Craig reported the following (bold is mine):
I’ve read recent reports of the Obama campaign receiving donations from dubious names and foreign locales and it got me wondering; how is this possible?
I run a small internet business and when I process credit cards I’m required to make sure the name on the card exactly matches the name of the customer making the purchase. Also, the purchasers address must match that of the cardholders. If these don’t match, then the payment isn’t approved. Period. So how is it possible that the Obama campaign could receive donations from fictional people and places? Well, I decided to do a little experiment. I went to the Obama campaign website and entered the following:
Name: John Galt; Address: 1957 Ayn Rand Lane; City: Galts Gulch; State: CO; Zip: 99999
Then I checked the box next to $15 and entered my actual credit card number and expiration date (it didn’t ask for the 3-digit code on the back of the card) and it took me to the next page and “Your donation has been processed. Thank you for your generous gift.”
This simply should not, and could not, happen in any business or any campaign that is honestly trying to vet it’s (sic) donors.
How can this happen? Here’s how (found at the same Atlas post; bolds are mine):
Having worked for companies that process credit cards online, it is necessary to go through and manually disable the safeguards that they put in place to verify a person’s address and zip code with the cardholder’s bank. But international banks don’t currently have the same safeguards that banks in the U.S. have, which also works in the One’s favor.So most likely they’ve disabled the necessary safeguards for U.S. cards …
The disabled components involved are part of what is known as the “AVS” (Automated Verification System). Many bloggers and blog commenters have confirmed the accuracy of the just-excerpted claims, including the fact that the merchant has to take proactive steps to rewrite or disable existing programming and controls to make AVS not work.
This information would indicate that Team Obama does not know (or pretends not to know; that would be for investigators to determine) who specifically has donated much of its campaign money — and the fact that they don’t know is deliberate.
Further, the lack of controls in Obama’s campaign-contribution system enables the use of prepaid cards, which if paid for in cash, are more than likely completely untraceable without going back to store video recordings, most of which are discarded or overwritten after a short time.
From all appearances, in both cases — unverified credit-card and prepaid-card contributions — it is very likely that the Obama campaign couldn’t refund monies received even if it wanted to. Donations to Obama are making it to statements of cardholders who never authorized them. The only people who might get their money back are the ones who catch the charges. And what about charges to stolen or forged cards?
Despite many tests, no one has been able to show that these material control weaknesses exist in the McCain-Palin contributions system.
Meanwhile, though space doesn’t permit fully chronicling the specifics, America’s mainstream Obama-mad media has been negligent in covering this astonishing story, either failing to report it at all (which Clay Waters of NewsBusters has noted is the case at the New York Times), or blandly understating the severity and, if you will, audacity of the enterprise (Washington Post, October 25 and October 28; National Journal).
If this were John McCain’s campaign, a deafening “what did he know and when did he know it?” chorus would have begun well over a week ago.
As it is, most voters have cast or will cast their presidential ballots totally unaware of what may very well be the largest and most highly-organized campaign-finance fraud in U.S. elections history.
As they do, they should be asking, “What did Obama know and when did he know it?”
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
How large is the Bradley effect and does it matter for Obama?
How large is the Bradley effect and does it matter for Obama?
David Strömberg
Nov 03, 2008
http://voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/2514
Will tomorrow’s US presidential election be closer than expected because Barack Obama is African-American? This column looks at the last decade of US electoral contests with black candidates and says that there is a Bradley effect, in which African-American candidates garner lower vote shares than predicted by opinion polls. If that holds true, it will be close tomorrow.
Should Barack Obama worry about the Bradley effect? The much-discussed effect refers to observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes, in which African-American candidates receive a smaller vote share than would be predicted using opinion polls. In this column, I study US congressional and gubernatorial contests from 1998 to 2006 – black candidates on average receive a 2-3% lower share of the two-party vote than non-black candidates with similar numbers in the polls. If an effect of a similar size would appear in the current presidential race, then it would lower Obama’s probability of winning from 85% to 53%. However, black Republican candidates drive the result, so it may not apply to Obama’s campaign.
Data
My sample includes 431 elections for the offices of House, Senate and Governor 1998-2006 for which I have election and opinion poll data and information on whether the candidate was black. The data on elections was provided by Jim Snyder at MIT, the data on candidate race is from the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, and the polling data was gathered from various sources. This data is similar to that of Daniel Hopkins (2008), who uses data from 133 gubernatorial and Senate elections from 1989-2006.
There are 26 black candidates in the sample, 17 Democrats and 9 Republicans (4 in gubernatorial races, and 11 each for the offices of House and Senate). I will only analyse races where a black candidate ran against a candidate who was not black. This eliminates two races, one of which is Barack Obama’s race for Senator of Illinois against Alan Keyes in 2004. I am left with 22 races. The relevant sample of 22 elections is quite small, so all results should be taken with a grain of salt (still, the sample is larger than existing studies).
The 2-3% Bradley effect
Figure 1 shows the relationship between polling and vote outcomes for races for House, Senate and Governor 1998-2006. I only include polls performed from August to the date of the election. Each dot shows the poll and vote average within each two-percent opinion poll interval, 0-2, 2-4, etc. The grey dots are non-black candidates, the blue dots are black Democratic candidates, and the red dots are black Republican candidates. The grey line shows the fitted values of a regression of Democratic vote share on Democratic poll share, for non-black candidates. As you can see, black candidates on average do worse than other candidates polling at the similar numbers in the polls: Democratic black candidates more often lie below the regression line (expected vote, conditional on poll) and Republican black candidates more often lie above.
[contd.]
David Strömberg
Nov 03, 2008
http://voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/2514
Will tomorrow’s US presidential election be closer than expected because Barack Obama is African-American? This column looks at the last decade of US electoral contests with black candidates and says that there is a Bradley effect, in which African-American candidates garner lower vote shares than predicted by opinion polls. If that holds true, it will be close tomorrow.
Should Barack Obama worry about the Bradley effect? The much-discussed effect refers to observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes, in which African-American candidates receive a smaller vote share than would be predicted using opinion polls. In this column, I study US congressional and gubernatorial contests from 1998 to 2006 – black candidates on average receive a 2-3% lower share of the two-party vote than non-black candidates with similar numbers in the polls. If an effect of a similar size would appear in the current presidential race, then it would lower Obama’s probability of winning from 85% to 53%. However, black Republican candidates drive the result, so it may not apply to Obama’s campaign.
Data
My sample includes 431 elections for the offices of House, Senate and Governor 1998-2006 for which I have election and opinion poll data and information on whether the candidate was black. The data on elections was provided by Jim Snyder at MIT, the data on candidate race is from the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, and the polling data was gathered from various sources. This data is similar to that of Daniel Hopkins (2008), who uses data from 133 gubernatorial and Senate elections from 1989-2006.
There are 26 black candidates in the sample, 17 Democrats and 9 Republicans (4 in gubernatorial races, and 11 each for the offices of House and Senate). I will only analyse races where a black candidate ran against a candidate who was not black. This eliminates two races, one of which is Barack Obama’s race for Senator of Illinois against Alan Keyes in 2004. I am left with 22 races. The relevant sample of 22 elections is quite small, so all results should be taken with a grain of salt (still, the sample is larger than existing studies).
The 2-3% Bradley effect
Figure 1 shows the relationship between polling and vote outcomes for races for House, Senate and Governor 1998-2006. I only include polls performed from August to the date of the election. Each dot shows the poll and vote average within each two-percent opinion poll interval, 0-2, 2-4, etc. The grey dots are non-black candidates, the blue dots are black Democratic candidates, and the red dots are black Republican candidates. The grey line shows the fitted values of a regression of Democratic vote share on Democratic poll share, for non-black candidates. As you can see, black candidates on average do worse than other candidates polling at the similar numbers in the polls: Democratic black candidates more often lie below the regression line (expected vote, conditional on poll) and Republican black candidates more often lie above.
[contd.]
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Can Obama win popular vote but lose election?
Can Obama win popular vote but lose election?
Liz Sidoti, AP Writer
Nov 03, 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081103/
ap_on_el_pr/split_decision
It's a nightmare scenario for Democrats — their nominee Barack Obama winning the popular vote while Republican John McCain ekes out an Electoral College victory. Sure, McCain trails in every recent national poll. Sure, surveys show that Obama leads in the race to reach the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.
Sure, chances of Republicans retaining the White House are remote.
But some last-minute state polls show the GOP nominee closing the gap in key states — Republican turf of Virginia, Florida and Ohio among them, and Democratic-leaning Pennsylvania, too.
If the tightening polls are correct and undecided voters in those states break McCain's way — both big ifs — that could make for a repeat of the 2000 heartbreaker for Democrats that gave Republicans the White House.
In 2000, Democrat Al Gore narrowly won the popular vote by 537,179 votes. But George W. Bush won the state-by-state electoral balloting that determines the presidency, 271 to 266. The outcome wasn't clear until a 36-day recount awarded Florida, then worth 25 electoral votes, to Bush by just a 537-vote margin.
Before the 2000 election, political insiders had speculated just the opposite, that perhaps Bush would win the popular vote but lose the presidency to Gore.
One day before the 2008 election, Obama sat atop every national poll.
Enthusiastic by all measures, the Illinois senator's Democratic base was expected to run up the score in liberal bastions of party strongholds such as New York and California.
But the race appeared to be naturally tightening in top battlegrounds that each candidate likely will need to help them reach the magic number in the Electoral College, electoral-rich Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia among them.
To win, McCain must hold on to most states that went to Bush in 2004, or pick up one or more that went to Democrat John Kerry four years ago to make up for any losses. McCain's biggest target for a pickup is Pennsylvania, which offers 21 votes and where several public polls show Obama's lead shrinking from double digits to single digits.
McCain faces a steep hurdle. Obama leads or is tied in a dozen or so Bush-won states, and has the advantage in most Kerry-won states.
The Republican's campaign argues that as national surveys tighten, McCain's standing in key states also rises and that, combined with get-out-the-vote efforts, will lift McCain to victory in Bush states and, perhaps, others.
There's still another possibility, perhaps more improbable than the first — that McCain wins the popular vote while Obama clinches the White House.
True, Democrats have been fired up all year.
True, Republicans haven't been.
True, Obama and McCain have been faring about even among independent voters.
But there are signs that the GOP's conservative base has rallied in the final stretch and these voters usually turn out in droves, even if lukewarm on the candidate.
Then there's the question of a tie in the Electoral College. In that case, members of the next House would select the winner.
If Obama carries every state that Democrat John Kerry won in 2004, plus Iowa, New Mexico and Nevada, then he and McCain each would have 269 electoral votes. A tie also would result if McCain takes New Hampshire from the Democrats' column but loses Iowa, New Mexico and another state that Bush won, Colorado.
In an election year that's defied conventional wisdom time and again, anything can happen.
Liz Sidoti, AP Writer
Nov 03, 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081103/
ap_on_el_pr/split_decision
It's a nightmare scenario for Democrats — their nominee Barack Obama winning the popular vote while Republican John McCain ekes out an Electoral College victory. Sure, McCain trails in every recent national poll. Sure, surveys show that Obama leads in the race to reach the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.
Sure, chances of Republicans retaining the White House are remote.
But some last-minute state polls show the GOP nominee closing the gap in key states — Republican turf of Virginia, Florida and Ohio among them, and Democratic-leaning Pennsylvania, too.
If the tightening polls are correct and undecided voters in those states break McCain's way — both big ifs — that could make for a repeat of the 2000 heartbreaker for Democrats that gave Republicans the White House.
In 2000, Democrat Al Gore narrowly won the popular vote by 537,179 votes. But George W. Bush won the state-by-state electoral balloting that determines the presidency, 271 to 266. The outcome wasn't clear until a 36-day recount awarded Florida, then worth 25 electoral votes, to Bush by just a 537-vote margin.
Before the 2000 election, political insiders had speculated just the opposite, that perhaps Bush would win the popular vote but lose the presidency to Gore.
One day before the 2008 election, Obama sat atop every national poll.
Enthusiastic by all measures, the Illinois senator's Democratic base was expected to run up the score in liberal bastions of party strongholds such as New York and California.
But the race appeared to be naturally tightening in top battlegrounds that each candidate likely will need to help them reach the magic number in the Electoral College, electoral-rich Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia among them.
To win, McCain must hold on to most states that went to Bush in 2004, or pick up one or more that went to Democrat John Kerry four years ago to make up for any losses. McCain's biggest target for a pickup is Pennsylvania, which offers 21 votes and where several public polls show Obama's lead shrinking from double digits to single digits.
McCain faces a steep hurdle. Obama leads or is tied in a dozen or so Bush-won states, and has the advantage in most Kerry-won states.
The Republican's campaign argues that as national surveys tighten, McCain's standing in key states also rises and that, combined with get-out-the-vote efforts, will lift McCain to victory in Bush states and, perhaps, others.
There's still another possibility, perhaps more improbable than the first — that McCain wins the popular vote while Obama clinches the White House.
True, Democrats have been fired up all year.
True, Republicans haven't been.
True, Obama and McCain have been faring about even among independent voters.
But there are signs that the GOP's conservative base has rallied in the final stretch and these voters usually turn out in droves, even if lukewarm on the candidate.
Then there's the question of a tie in the Electoral College. In that case, members of the next House would select the winner.
If Obama carries every state that Democrat John Kerry won in 2004, plus Iowa, New Mexico and Nevada, then he and McCain each would have 269 electoral votes. A tie also would result if McCain takes New Hampshire from the Democrats' column but loses Iowa, New Mexico and another state that Bush won, Colorado.
In an election year that's defied conventional wisdom time and again, anything can happen.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Stocks likely to recover no matter who's president
Stocks likely to recover no matter who's president
Madlen Read, AP Business Writer
Nov 02, 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081102/
ap_on_bi_ge/election_stock_market
Wall Street prefers Republicans, McCain supporters argue. But stocks have done better under Democratic presidents, Obama supporters fire back.
When it comes to the stock market — especially this turbulent market — does it really matter who is elected president?
Yes and no. Politicians do influence the economy — and they'll play a big role in how the country emerges from this current crisis. But analysts say neither presidential candidate can be a cure for what's ailing Wall Street.
Moreover, most analysts believe the battered stock market has nowhere to go but up next year, no matter who ends up in the White House — and history will probably give the victor credit even if he actually had little to do with the rally.
Still, the stock market is just one part of the economy, and under either Barack Obama or John McCain, the United States needs to recover from a downturn whose severity has not yet been determined. And either candidate will face a budget deficit of around $500 billion when he's sworn into office — a shortfall expected to climb to $1 trillion next year.
Because of the deficit, the financial climate might end up affecting the new president's policies more than his policies will affect the financial climate.
That's not to say, of course, there aren't differences in the impact McCain or Obama would have on U.S. businesses, and in turn, their stocks. Robert Froehlich, an investment strategist at Deutsche Bank, said it's likely that under Obama, the alternative energy sector would do well, and possibly the paper and steel industries if he enforces trade treaties. And under McCain, Froehlich said, it's likely that big energy companies would do better because he does not support a windfall profits tax, and that financial companies could benefit because of his stance on dividend taxes, long-term capital gains taxes, and estate taxes.
"Don't expect the next president to say, 'I'm strapped with this economic crisis, I'm going to throw all my plans away,'" Froehlich said.
There are historical trends one can draw between presidents and how the stock market performs. The question is how seriously to take them.
The Dow Jones industrial average and the broader Standard & Poor's 500 index have posted larger returns during the terms of Democratic presidents. But this statistic doesn't prove that Democratic policies boost the stock market — the major indexes have also done better under a Republican Congress than a Democratic Congress.
Another pattern to take note of is the stock market's apparent four-year cycle, described by market historian Yale Hirsch in his Presidential Election Cycle Theory. The theory says the stock market does well in a presidential election year, badly in the year after the election and then improves until the next presidential election. This pattern has held up for most of the century, although it's being tested by the two terms of President George W. Bush.
However, the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve, rather than the influence of the president, can explain this pattern better, according to a 2007 study by CFA Institute Education managing director Robert Johnson, University of Wisconsin professor Scott Beyer and Northern Illinois University professor Gerald Jensen. Their study found that the Fed has tended to lower interest rates during the latter half of presidential terms — and lower interest rates encourage borrowing and spending.
And investors shouldn't get too caught up in the market's short-term reaction after the election results. The Dow surged, for example, after President Hoover was elected in 1928 — and the next year the it crashed, ushering in the Great Depression.
Madlen Read, AP Business Writer
Nov 02, 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081102/
ap_on_bi_ge/election_stock_market
Wall Street prefers Republicans, McCain supporters argue. But stocks have done better under Democratic presidents, Obama supporters fire back.
When it comes to the stock market — especially this turbulent market — does it really matter who is elected president?
Yes and no. Politicians do influence the economy — and they'll play a big role in how the country emerges from this current crisis. But analysts say neither presidential candidate can be a cure for what's ailing Wall Street.
Moreover, most analysts believe the battered stock market has nowhere to go but up next year, no matter who ends up in the White House — and history will probably give the victor credit even if he actually had little to do with the rally.
Still, the stock market is just one part of the economy, and under either Barack Obama or John McCain, the United States needs to recover from a downturn whose severity has not yet been determined. And either candidate will face a budget deficit of around $500 billion when he's sworn into office — a shortfall expected to climb to $1 trillion next year.
Because of the deficit, the financial climate might end up affecting the new president's policies more than his policies will affect the financial climate.
That's not to say, of course, there aren't differences in the impact McCain or Obama would have on U.S. businesses, and in turn, their stocks. Robert Froehlich, an investment strategist at Deutsche Bank, said it's likely that under Obama, the alternative energy sector would do well, and possibly the paper and steel industries if he enforces trade treaties. And under McCain, Froehlich said, it's likely that big energy companies would do better because he does not support a windfall profits tax, and that financial companies could benefit because of his stance on dividend taxes, long-term capital gains taxes, and estate taxes.
"Don't expect the next president to say, 'I'm strapped with this economic crisis, I'm going to throw all my plans away,'" Froehlich said.
There are historical trends one can draw between presidents and how the stock market performs. The question is how seriously to take them.
The Dow Jones industrial average and the broader Standard & Poor's 500 index have posted larger returns during the terms of Democratic presidents. But this statistic doesn't prove that Democratic policies boost the stock market — the major indexes have also done better under a Republican Congress than a Democratic Congress.
Another pattern to take note of is the stock market's apparent four-year cycle, described by market historian Yale Hirsch in his Presidential Election Cycle Theory. The theory says the stock market does well in a presidential election year, badly in the year after the election and then improves until the next presidential election. This pattern has held up for most of the century, although it's being tested by the two terms of President George W. Bush.
However, the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve, rather than the influence of the president, can explain this pattern better, according to a 2007 study by CFA Institute Education managing director Robert Johnson, University of Wisconsin professor Scott Beyer and Northern Illinois University professor Gerald Jensen. Their study found that the Fed has tended to lower interest rates during the latter half of presidential terms — and lower interest rates encourage borrowing and spending.
And investors shouldn't get too caught up in the market's short-term reaction after the election results. The Dow surged, for example, after President Hoover was elected in 1928 — and the next year the it crashed, ushering in the Great Depression.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
The Great Depression of 2008
The Great Depression of 2008
Leeroy F. Dermit
Sep 27, 2008
http://www.leeroyfdermit.com/2008/09/
great-depression-of-2008.html
On issue after issue, every time I dig deeper and think for myself, I discover that government is the cause – not the cure, but if free markets are so great, then how have we come within days of another Great Depression? Is it really about free markets vs. regulation? Is it naked short sellers? How big a factor is consumer and business confidence? Do the media and politicians really understand economics? Could there be economic terrorism afoot?
Conventional Wisdom
The conventional wisdom just doesn’t add up.
The conventional wisdom is that America has been in recession since late 2007, and that the cause is 20 years of Republican deregulation. Deregulation supposedly caused a recession by causing the prices for oil, steel, copper, etc. to soar, by allowing some greedy people to sell loans to some people who couldn’t afford them, and by allowing some people to more easily bet that stocks will go down (naked short sellers).
By August 28th, I had lost 3% of my savings, so how had I lost 53% of my savings by October 10th?
The conventional wisdom is obviously a myth, so we are going to have to look at a lot of facts and think for ourselves.
Free Markets
The argument for deregulation, free markets, competition, etc. is that although problems (both internal and external) can occur at all levels and at all times, for each kind of problem, some competitors will have made the right decisions to survive while those who made the wrong decisions will fail. Failure makes room for new competitors. Also, competitors can learn from past mistakes. Therefore, while every kind of problem big and small can happen once, free markets continually adapt and improve, and thus a future recurrence of that problem is unlikely. Free markets are thus more likely to serve customers best.
Unlike businesses and private organizations, government is a monopoly that forbids competition and forces us to buy its services, and thus government is less accountable and less adaptable than businesses. Therefore, government can afford to be inefficient and can make the same mistakes over and over again. Government is thus more likely to cause a problem than to solve one.
This is a pretty good summary of the argument for free markets.
Liberal Fascists
The argument for regulation may have been best summarized by Mario Palmieri (“The Philosophy of Fascism”, 1936):
Economic initiative cannot be left to the arbitrary decisions of private individual interest. Open competition, if not wisely directed and restricted, actually destroys wealth instead of creating it.
I used to think that regulation was the new form of socialism, but then I read this quote, and now I see that the Democrats are not really socialists – but are fascists. Therefore, we could accurately refer to the Democrats as socialists or as fascists – but let’s not get sidetracked.
American Capitalism
America does not really have free markets (a.k.a. capitalism). We have the second highest business taxes in the world, a ton of regulations, a load of frivolous lawsuits, the Federal Reserve, the IRS, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Securities Exchange Commission, etc.
The trend is not purely deregulation either. We now have Sarbanes Oxley, a resurgence of The Community Reinvestment Act, etc.
Of course, we do have some scary deregulation too. For example, we now have naked short sellers.
The Community Reinvestment Act
Everybody knows that banks gave loans to people who could not pay them back, and that this supposedly wouldn’t happen in a free market – which is true. However, we don’t have a free market.
The government instituted the community Reinvestment Act which ordered Fannie Mae to encourage banks to give loans to poor people and minorities regardless of credit worthiness – because that is fair, and socialism is fair if it is anything.
Freddie Mac was charged with converting these subprime loans into Mortgage Backed Securities.
Don’t take my word for it. Wikipedia says:
In early 1993 President Bill Clinton ordered new regulations for the CRA which would increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities. The new rules, during a time when many banks were merging and needed to pass the CRA review process to do so, substantially increased the number and aggregate amount of loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans, some of which were "risky mortgages."
What did the Bush Administration do?
In 2003, the Bush Administration recommended that a new Department of the Treasury agency should supervise the primary agents guaranteeing subprime loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congressional support was approximately split along Party lines and the proposal eventually failed.
What did Obama do? Obama worked with ACORN to train activists to pressure banks to make bad loans. Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA – and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN. I got this fact from a very revealing article about Obama/ACORN at: Obama helps ACORN set up Homeowners for Failure.
Clearly, the CRA is an example of increasing regulation (and Democrats) contributing to the current financial crisis.
Fannie Mae
To better understand how the government (not Wall Street) is a major cause at the center of the subprime mess, it is helpful to first understand that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are basically an arm of the Democratic party.
Sarbanes-Oxley
Part of the Sarbanes-Oxley regulation (instituted to prevent another Enron) requires the use of Mark-to-Market accounting – even in cases such as those instruments created by government institution Freddie Mac known as Mortgage Backed Securities (perhaps an unintended consequence?). Therefore, MBSs are treated just like stock even though there are real houses with their own market values as collateral for them, and thus at the end of a day, if the market value of those MBSs (not the houses) is too low, then a bank may not have enough money to pay the margin call unless they sell enough assets at a huge loss. In July This happened to Merrill Lynch who had to sell 30.6 billion dollars worth of MBSs for 6 billion. The houses alone were worth 25 billion.
Again, we see that government intervention itself has contributed to the current economic crisis.
The Fed did It
As we all know, Alan Greenspan artificially lowered interest rates in a largely successful (although now temporary) attempt to bring us out of the great Clinton.com crash at the end of the Clinton administration, which of course continued into the Bush administration.
Low rates obviously contributed greatly to the housing bubble. Low rates also increased the supply of dollars through increased borrowing, which thus weakened the dollar.
Again, we see that government intervention itself has contributed to the current economic crisis, and guess what – they’re doing it again!
The Cities did it
Perhaps the other main contributor to the housing bubble (in addition to the Fed) is the rapidly growing trend of local government intervention known as Managed Growth. It takes many forms, but Managed Growth typically is where a city restricts permits for new houses and buys up land along its outskirts to prevent development there too.
Note that cities such as Atlanta, Houston, and Dallas did not employ managed growth and thus continued to have steady housing appreciation consistent with previous decades. Consequently, housing prices in these cities did not fall (except for a little bit very recently).
Again, we see that government intervention itself has contributed to the current economic crisis, and guess what – they’re still doing it!
It’s Confidence Stupid
By all accounts, the overall problem in the market that has suddenly turned the problems of a few banks and home owners into another Great Depression – is a loss of confidence.
Just a few months ago, most businesses were still having record profits, but if consumers and businesses lose confidence and fear a recession, then they will spend less and pay down debt – which will cause a recession!
Markets Succeed where Governments Fail
What did happen was that Russia invaded Georgia, and Obama was utterly powerless to do anything about it. The US government was utterly powerless, and the European Union was just as powerless.
However, another force more powerful than the US Government, the European Union, and even more powerful than Barack Obama … forced Russia to promptly withdraw from Georgia.
In a nutshell, Putin had been acting aggressively, such as flying nuclear bombers to the edge of Alaskan airspace, then he invaded Georgia, and his agression caused foreign investors and businesses to flee Russia. Whereas, the governments of America and Europe failed to influence Russia in the least, market forces brought the conflict to a prompt end.
The conventional wisdom is that government solves problems created by markets, but we now see that markets solve problems created government – such as war.
Conclusion
I know it is hard to stop thinking about those naked short sellers, but the reality is that politicians, government, laws, regulation, etc. are the cause of the current economic crisis. The media and the Democrats call for more government, and no strong voice has countered them, but we now know that government is a problem masquerading as its own cure.
Neither political party has shown the slightest understanding of economics. The Democrats, the media, and Obama blame deregulation, and all John McCain can do is look guilty. I thought he was going to cry at the beginning of the first Presidential debate. PULEEEASE!
I know of precisely ONE politician who understands – Ron Paul.
You won’t hear any of THIS on MSNBC. Does that make Keith Olberman the – WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD? J
Let’s summarize:
The conventional wisdom is that Republicans, free-markets, and deregulation caused the current economic crisis; whereas, the reality is that Democrats, government, and regulation caused the current economic crisis.
1. Alan Greenspan helped cause a housing bubble when he lowered interest rates in a largely successful attempt to bring us out of the crash at the end of the Clinton administration.
2. Managed growth laws by local governments also contributed greatly to the housing bubble.
3. The Community Reinvestment Act caused a proliferation of subprime loans, which implicates Clinton, Obama, ACORN, Fannie Mae, and the whole Democratic Party.
4. The Democratic Party and most of the mainstream media have been working diligently to spread fear and reduce confidence, and fear causes recessionary behavior.
5. The new Sarbanes-Oxley regulations caused the new government mandated Mortgage Backed Securities to be valued at the market price (Mark-to-Market) at the end of each day, which caused banks to go under with little forewarning.
6. The war in Iraq has played a small role, but has reduced confidence in America and the dollar.
7. Markets solve problems, like the Russian invasion of Georgia, where governments are powerless.
The Future
Maybe once the people learn the reality, they will have a greater desire for freedom.
The promise of reality is freedom.
Leeroy F. Dermit
Sep 27, 2008
http://www.leeroyfdermit.com/2008/09/
great-depression-of-2008.html
On issue after issue, every time I dig deeper and think for myself, I discover that government is the cause – not the cure, but if free markets are so great, then how have we come within days of another Great Depression? Is it really about free markets vs. regulation? Is it naked short sellers? How big a factor is consumer and business confidence? Do the media and politicians really understand economics? Could there be economic terrorism afoot?
Conventional Wisdom
The conventional wisdom just doesn’t add up.
The conventional wisdom is that America has been in recession since late 2007, and that the cause is 20 years of Republican deregulation. Deregulation supposedly caused a recession by causing the prices for oil, steel, copper, etc. to soar, by allowing some greedy people to sell loans to some people who couldn’t afford them, and by allowing some people to more easily bet that stocks will go down (naked short sellers).
By August 28th, I had lost 3% of my savings, so how had I lost 53% of my savings by October 10th?
The conventional wisdom is obviously a myth, so we are going to have to look at a lot of facts and think for ourselves.
Free Markets
The argument for deregulation, free markets, competition, etc. is that although problems (both internal and external) can occur at all levels and at all times, for each kind of problem, some competitors will have made the right decisions to survive while those who made the wrong decisions will fail. Failure makes room for new competitors. Also, competitors can learn from past mistakes. Therefore, while every kind of problem big and small can happen once, free markets continually adapt and improve, and thus a future recurrence of that problem is unlikely. Free markets are thus more likely to serve customers best.
Unlike businesses and private organizations, government is a monopoly that forbids competition and forces us to buy its services, and thus government is less accountable and less adaptable than businesses. Therefore, government can afford to be inefficient and can make the same mistakes over and over again. Government is thus more likely to cause a problem than to solve one.
This is a pretty good summary of the argument for free markets.
Liberal Fascists
The argument for regulation may have been best summarized by Mario Palmieri (“The Philosophy of Fascism”, 1936):
Economic initiative cannot be left to the arbitrary decisions of private individual interest. Open competition, if not wisely directed and restricted, actually destroys wealth instead of creating it.
I used to think that regulation was the new form of socialism, but then I read this quote, and now I see that the Democrats are not really socialists – but are fascists. Therefore, we could accurately refer to the Democrats as socialists or as fascists – but let’s not get sidetracked.
American Capitalism
America does not really have free markets (a.k.a. capitalism). We have the second highest business taxes in the world, a ton of regulations, a load of frivolous lawsuits, the Federal Reserve, the IRS, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Securities Exchange Commission, etc.
The trend is not purely deregulation either. We now have Sarbanes Oxley, a resurgence of The Community Reinvestment Act, etc.
Of course, we do have some scary deregulation too. For example, we now have naked short sellers.
The Community Reinvestment Act
Everybody knows that banks gave loans to people who could not pay them back, and that this supposedly wouldn’t happen in a free market – which is true. However, we don’t have a free market.
The government instituted the community Reinvestment Act which ordered Fannie Mae to encourage banks to give loans to poor people and minorities regardless of credit worthiness – because that is fair, and socialism is fair if it is anything.
Freddie Mac was charged with converting these subprime loans into Mortgage Backed Securities.
Don’t take my word for it. Wikipedia says:
In early 1993 President Bill Clinton ordered new regulations for the CRA which would increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities. The new rules, during a time when many banks were merging and needed to pass the CRA review process to do so, substantially increased the number and aggregate amount of loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans, some of which were "risky mortgages."
What did the Bush Administration do?
In 2003, the Bush Administration recommended that a new Department of the Treasury agency should supervise the primary agents guaranteeing subprime loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congressional support was approximately split along Party lines and the proposal eventually failed.
What did Obama do? Obama worked with ACORN to train activists to pressure banks to make bad loans. Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA – and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN. I got this fact from a very revealing article about Obama/ACORN at: Obama helps ACORN set up Homeowners for Failure.
Clearly, the CRA is an example of increasing regulation (and Democrats) contributing to the current financial crisis.
Fannie Mae
To better understand how the government (not Wall Street) is a major cause at the center of the subprime mess, it is helpful to first understand that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are basically an arm of the Democratic party.
Sarbanes-Oxley
Part of the Sarbanes-Oxley regulation (instituted to prevent another Enron) requires the use of Mark-to-Market accounting – even in cases such as those instruments created by government institution Freddie Mac known as Mortgage Backed Securities (perhaps an unintended consequence?). Therefore, MBSs are treated just like stock even though there are real houses with their own market values as collateral for them, and thus at the end of a day, if the market value of those MBSs (not the houses) is too low, then a bank may not have enough money to pay the margin call unless they sell enough assets at a huge loss. In July This happened to Merrill Lynch who had to sell 30.6 billion dollars worth of MBSs for 6 billion. The houses alone were worth 25 billion.
Again, we see that government intervention itself has contributed to the current economic crisis.
The Fed did It
As we all know, Alan Greenspan artificially lowered interest rates in a largely successful (although now temporary) attempt to bring us out of the great Clinton.com crash at the end of the Clinton administration, which of course continued into the Bush administration.
Low rates obviously contributed greatly to the housing bubble. Low rates also increased the supply of dollars through increased borrowing, which thus weakened the dollar.
Again, we see that government intervention itself has contributed to the current economic crisis, and guess what – they’re doing it again!
The Cities did it
Perhaps the other main contributor to the housing bubble (in addition to the Fed) is the rapidly growing trend of local government intervention known as Managed Growth. It takes many forms, but Managed Growth typically is where a city restricts permits for new houses and buys up land along its outskirts to prevent development there too.
Note that cities such as Atlanta, Houston, and Dallas did not employ managed growth and thus continued to have steady housing appreciation consistent with previous decades. Consequently, housing prices in these cities did not fall (except for a little bit very recently).
Again, we see that government intervention itself has contributed to the current economic crisis, and guess what – they’re still doing it!
It’s Confidence Stupid
By all accounts, the overall problem in the market that has suddenly turned the problems of a few banks and home owners into another Great Depression – is a loss of confidence.
Just a few months ago, most businesses were still having record profits, but if consumers and businesses lose confidence and fear a recession, then they will spend less and pay down debt – which will cause a recession!
Markets Succeed where Governments Fail
What did happen was that Russia invaded Georgia, and Obama was utterly powerless to do anything about it. The US government was utterly powerless, and the European Union was just as powerless.
However, another force more powerful than the US Government, the European Union, and even more powerful than Barack Obama … forced Russia to promptly withdraw from Georgia.
In a nutshell, Putin had been acting aggressively, such as flying nuclear bombers to the edge of Alaskan airspace, then he invaded Georgia, and his agression caused foreign investors and businesses to flee Russia. Whereas, the governments of America and Europe failed to influence Russia in the least, market forces brought the conflict to a prompt end.
The conventional wisdom is that government solves problems created by markets, but we now see that markets solve problems created government – such as war.
Conclusion
I know it is hard to stop thinking about those naked short sellers, but the reality is that politicians, government, laws, regulation, etc. are the cause of the current economic crisis. The media and the Democrats call for more government, and no strong voice has countered them, but we now know that government is a problem masquerading as its own cure.
Neither political party has shown the slightest understanding of economics. The Democrats, the media, and Obama blame deregulation, and all John McCain can do is look guilty. I thought he was going to cry at the beginning of the first Presidential debate. PULEEEASE!
I know of precisely ONE politician who understands – Ron Paul.
You won’t hear any of THIS on MSNBC. Does that make Keith Olberman the – WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD? J
Let’s summarize:
The conventional wisdom is that Republicans, free-markets, and deregulation caused the current economic crisis; whereas, the reality is that Democrats, government, and regulation caused the current economic crisis.
1. Alan Greenspan helped cause a housing bubble when he lowered interest rates in a largely successful attempt to bring us out of the crash at the end of the Clinton administration.
2. Managed growth laws by local governments also contributed greatly to the housing bubble.
3. The Community Reinvestment Act caused a proliferation of subprime loans, which implicates Clinton, Obama, ACORN, Fannie Mae, and the whole Democratic Party.
4. The Democratic Party and most of the mainstream media have been working diligently to spread fear and reduce confidence, and fear causes recessionary behavior.
5. The new Sarbanes-Oxley regulations caused the new government mandated Mortgage Backed Securities to be valued at the market price (Mark-to-Market) at the end of each day, which caused banks to go under with little forewarning.
6. The war in Iraq has played a small role, but has reduced confidence in America and the dollar.
7. Markets solve problems, like the Russian invasion of Georgia, where governments are powerless.
The Future
Maybe once the people learn the reality, they will have a greater desire for freedom.
The promise of reality is freedom.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Economic Crisis May Be Boon For Cybercriminals
Economic Crisis May Be Boon For Cybercriminals
Kelly Jackson Higgins
Oct 28, 2008
http://www.darkreading.com/security/attacks/
showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211601123
How the global financial crisis is affecting organized cybercrime
One industry sector is actually happy about the current state of the global economy: cybercriminals.
Organized cybercrime has already begun capitalizing on the global financial crisis, cybercrime experts say, with targeted phishing attacks on customers whose banks have folded, and attacks that scam consumers who may be shopping less online, but are now spending more time at home. With fewer business and consumer targets available, the bad guys are redirecting their efforts to adapt to the market. For example, credit cards are out; debit cards are in.
One attack used Citigroup's attempted takeover of Wachovia as a premise for stealing Wachovia customers' credentials. (Wells Fargo eventually outbid Citigroup for Wachovia). "There's been a surge in phishing, telling customers that due to the new takeover, they need new credentials," says Ori Eisen, founder and chief innovation officer for 41st Parameter. If the victim hands over his old credentials to "set" his new ones, it's game over for his bank account information.
Socially engineered attacks are typically a lucrative ploy by seasoned attackers. The FBI is seeing more spear phishing aimed at businesses that were hit hard by the economic downturn. The attackers lure them with promises of financial assistance, for instance, and some even pretend to be subpoenas from the Justice Department. One attack via e-mail urged bidders who had lost out on a government contract to resubmit their bids and, thus, spill sensitive contact and other information.
Other researchers have cited a direct correlation between the stock market's nosedive and an increase in cybercrime activity. And phony antivirus popups warning that your "system may be infected so you'd better run this scan" preyed on fears, he says.
Meanwhile, law enforcement and cybercrime experts say more malicious Web sites posing as economic or financial advisory services will start to emerge in this jittery financial climate.
That means a reverse in the trend from the past few months of cybercriminals' silently infecting legitimate sites. "Expect to see malicious sites crop up that are geared to information-stealing, malware-dropping, pharming, and phishing rather than compromising legitimate site," he says.
And just as street crime increases in times of financial stress, more novice attackers and script kiddies are likely to perform an online version of shoplifting and bank robbery. "You're going to see more quick-hit script kiddies, like street crime," DiMino says.
It's simple enough for these amateur hackers to get into the business -- there's plenty of off-the-shelf software that automates phishing. All it takes is a Web server. "We know [when] it's an amateur because they are leaving their servers completely open and unprotected," Yuval Ben-Itzhak says.
The insider threat, too, will likely also intensify as layoffs spread in the corporate world. "You're going to see insider attacks and less direct hacks," Shadowserver's DiMino says. "There will be more of an attempt to infiltrate from inside, with botnets and SQL injection."
With potentially fewer overall enterprise targets, cybercrime organizations could end up fighting over turf. "In general, cybercrime is nothing more than a new form of organized crime," the FBI's Mott says. "You may see more online cybercrime 'violence.' DDoS attacks may go up."
Kelly Jackson Higgins
Oct 28, 2008
http://www.darkreading.com/security/attacks/
showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211601123
How the global financial crisis is affecting organized cybercrime
One industry sector is actually happy about the current state of the global economy: cybercriminals.
Organized cybercrime has already begun capitalizing on the global financial crisis, cybercrime experts say, with targeted phishing attacks on customers whose banks have folded, and attacks that scam consumers who may be shopping less online, but are now spending more time at home. With fewer business and consumer targets available, the bad guys are redirecting their efforts to adapt to the market. For example, credit cards are out; debit cards are in.
One attack used Citigroup's attempted takeover of Wachovia as a premise for stealing Wachovia customers' credentials. (Wells Fargo eventually outbid Citigroup for Wachovia). "There's been a surge in phishing, telling customers that due to the new takeover, they need new credentials," says Ori Eisen, founder and chief innovation officer for 41st Parameter. If the victim hands over his old credentials to "set" his new ones, it's game over for his bank account information.
Socially engineered attacks are typically a lucrative ploy by seasoned attackers. The FBI is seeing more spear phishing aimed at businesses that were hit hard by the economic downturn. The attackers lure them with promises of financial assistance, for instance, and some even pretend to be subpoenas from the Justice Department. One attack via e-mail urged bidders who had lost out on a government contract to resubmit their bids and, thus, spill sensitive contact and other information.
Other researchers have cited a direct correlation between the stock market's nosedive and an increase in cybercrime activity. And phony antivirus popups warning that your "system may be infected so you'd better run this scan" preyed on fears, he says.
Meanwhile, law enforcement and cybercrime experts say more malicious Web sites posing as economic or financial advisory services will start to emerge in this jittery financial climate.
That means a reverse in the trend from the past few months of cybercriminals' silently infecting legitimate sites. "Expect to see malicious sites crop up that are geared to information-stealing, malware-dropping, pharming, and phishing rather than compromising legitimate site," he says.
And just as street crime increases in times of financial stress, more novice attackers and script kiddies are likely to perform an online version of shoplifting and bank robbery. "You're going to see more quick-hit script kiddies, like street crime," DiMino says.
It's simple enough for these amateur hackers to get into the business -- there's plenty of off-the-shelf software that automates phishing. All it takes is a Web server. "We know [when] it's an amateur because they are leaving their servers completely open and unprotected," Yuval Ben-Itzhak says.
The insider threat, too, will likely also intensify as layoffs spread in the corporate world. "You're going to see insider attacks and less direct hacks," Shadowserver's DiMino says. "There will be more of an attempt to infiltrate from inside, with botnets and SQL injection."
With potentially fewer overall enterprise targets, cybercrime organizations could end up fighting over turf. "In general, cybercrime is nothing more than a new form of organized crime," the FBI's Mott says. "You may see more online cybercrime 'violence.' DDoS attacks may go up."
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Socialism We Can Believe In
Socialism We Can Believe In
Ben Johnson
Oct 29, 2008
http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/
Read.aspx?GUID=80B64E8F-3866-430D-842A-E8986E27E927
Now that a 2001 public radio interview has surfaced to confirm The One has plotted to redistribute middle class wealth since the beginning of his political career, the media are in overdrive to save their savior. In a burst of “news” stories culled directly from the talking points of the George Soros-funded Media Matters, a string of reporters have accused the McCain/Palin campaign of misrepresenting Obama’s statements and ideology. In the process, these impartial journalists and analysts for the nation’s most prestigious media outlets have obfuscated more than McCain could manage in his most imaginative “rhetorical flourish.”
Obama spokesman Bill Burton responded in identical fashion to other irrefutable scandals, such as his candidate’s longtime association with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright: he channeled the Wizard of Oz. “This is a fake news controversy,” he said, “drummed up by the all too common alliance of Fox News, the Drudge Report, and John McCain, who apparently decided to close out his campaign with the same false, desperate attacks that have failed for months.” After shooting the messengers, the campaign, and its allies at Media Matters, claimed Obama had merely been offering an intellectual assessment of civil rights strategy – and in no way advocating (perish the thought!) the Supreme Court redistribute wealth. In his only remark addressing the content of the tape, Burton asserted, “In this seven-year-old interview, Senator Obama did not say that the courts should get into the business of redistributing wealth at all.” [Bill Burton later got into an on-air tiff with Fox News journalist Megyn Kelly, ironically charging her network with having “an agenda.”]
Soon, his words found their way into the mouths of multiple unbiased, independent journalists.
The Washington Post awarded the McCain campaign “two Pinocchios” for lying about the tape. “Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said,” the Post contended. The paper concluded, “The McCain camp is wrong to suggest that the Illinois senator advocated an [sic.] ‘wealth redistribution’ role for the Supreme Court.”
Obama made his now-infamous comments on “Odyssey,” a program hosted on the Chicago NPR station WBEZ-FM. Chicago Public Radio quickly rolled into full protection mode, with CPR’s Ben Calhoun claiming someone on YouTube “posted excerpts of the interview, edited to misrepresent Obama's statements…Obama’s position is distinctly misrepresented.” He adds, “ironically, he says the Supreme Court was a failure in cases that it took on a role of redistributing resources.”
Others went further in defending the pure common sense of Obama’s call for “economic justice.” Andrew Sullivan blogged, “it seems to me that this statement is actually a conservative one about the limits of judicial activism. Is this really all McCain has left?”
Yet no one could equal NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, who said, with a straight face, that Obama took “a strict constructionist view.” Mitchell added, “he was saying the courts were not in that business and shouldn’t be in that business.”
The world’s largest news agency joined the fray. The Associated Press charged, “Republican John McCain is misreading seven-year-old comments by rival Barack Obama.” The story implies his comments dealt only with civil rights strategy, not the court. It added, “Obama did not define redistributive change in the interview, but he said one example of such change involves education, ‘how do we get more money into the schools and how do we actually create equal schools and equal educational opportunity.’” Thus, “redistribution” simply means equal schooling; who could be against that?
In all these cases, one is left with the impression his is merely a meandering historical argument of refined legal theory, using highly specified language that does not mean what it sounds like. Normal people like Joe the Plumber cannot possibly comprehend it. However, all these media reports distort the facts and leave a false impression that covers up the explosive revelation contained in his own words: Barack Obama believes the Constitution embodies a “fundamental flaw” in the fabric of America “that continues to this day,” has pined for “economic justice” for at least a decade, seeks political power to implement “wealth redistribution” with the aid of Congress, implies the Supreme Court should “break free” from the “constraints” of the Founders, believes public financing of abortion is an “important” aspect of the struggle, and has promised an “activist” Executive Branch to enforce his socialistic vision.
Yet the view that slavery lingers in 21st century America is perhaps the most contemptuous thing one can say about a country that lost hundreds of thousands of lives fighting a war to end slavery, endured massive social upheaval to bury Jim Crow, transferred untold trillions of dollars of wealth so that we would “wipe away the scars of centuries,” then welcomed the son of a Kenyan Muslim reared in a foreign land and are presently entertaining a national debate about elevating him to the most powerful office in the world.
It is, however, precisely what is to be expected from an individual reared by an “unreconstructed liberal” mother of the ‘60s era, an individual who consciously sought out Marxist professors – both as college instructors and as sponsors for his career in Chicago politics.
Far from an insignificant and highly theoretical bout of legal navel-gazing, this 2001 interview provides a clear glimpse into the ideology Obama wishes to implement. For this reason, the transcripts must be assailed – with those news outlets that report them.
After all, he does not have the luxury of saying he made these comments when he was naïve and inexperienced, because he is still naïve and inexperienced. Further, reparations based on race, sex, class, or sexual orientation still lie at the heart of his judicial philosophy. His only option is to deny the words on the page. His fan base in the media has gotten ahead of him on the matter. Will he be successful in his effort to deny his own views and thereby get an opportunity to implement them?
Next Tuesday, we may find out.
Ben Johnson
Oct 29, 2008
http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/
Read.aspx?GUID=80B64E8F-3866-430D-842A-E8986E27E927
Now that a 2001 public radio interview has surfaced to confirm The One has plotted to redistribute middle class wealth since the beginning of his political career, the media are in overdrive to save their savior. In a burst of “news” stories culled directly from the talking points of the George Soros-funded Media Matters, a string of reporters have accused the McCain/Palin campaign of misrepresenting Obama’s statements and ideology. In the process, these impartial journalists and analysts for the nation’s most prestigious media outlets have obfuscated more than McCain could manage in his most imaginative “rhetorical flourish.”
Obama spokesman Bill Burton responded in identical fashion to other irrefutable scandals, such as his candidate’s longtime association with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright: he channeled the Wizard of Oz. “This is a fake news controversy,” he said, “drummed up by the all too common alliance of Fox News, the Drudge Report, and John McCain, who apparently decided to close out his campaign with the same false, desperate attacks that have failed for months.” After shooting the messengers, the campaign, and its allies at Media Matters, claimed Obama had merely been offering an intellectual assessment of civil rights strategy – and in no way advocating (perish the thought!) the Supreme Court redistribute wealth. In his only remark addressing the content of the tape, Burton asserted, “In this seven-year-old interview, Senator Obama did not say that the courts should get into the business of redistributing wealth at all.” [Bill Burton later got into an on-air tiff with Fox News journalist Megyn Kelly, ironically charging her network with having “an agenda.”]
Soon, his words found their way into the mouths of multiple unbiased, independent journalists.
The Washington Post awarded the McCain campaign “two Pinocchios” for lying about the tape. “Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said,” the Post contended. The paper concluded, “The McCain camp is wrong to suggest that the Illinois senator advocated an [sic.] ‘wealth redistribution’ role for the Supreme Court.”
Obama made his now-infamous comments on “Odyssey,” a program hosted on the Chicago NPR station WBEZ-FM. Chicago Public Radio quickly rolled into full protection mode, with CPR’s Ben Calhoun claiming someone on YouTube “posted excerpts of the interview, edited to misrepresent Obama's statements…Obama’s position is distinctly misrepresented.” He adds, “ironically, he says the Supreme Court was a failure in cases that it took on a role of redistributing resources.”
Others went further in defending the pure common sense of Obama’s call for “economic justice.” Andrew Sullivan blogged, “it seems to me that this statement is actually a conservative one about the limits of judicial activism. Is this really all McCain has left?”
Yet no one could equal NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, who said, with a straight face, that Obama took “a strict constructionist view.” Mitchell added, “he was saying the courts were not in that business and shouldn’t be in that business.”
The world’s largest news agency joined the fray. The Associated Press charged, “Republican John McCain is misreading seven-year-old comments by rival Barack Obama.” The story implies his comments dealt only with civil rights strategy, not the court. It added, “Obama did not define redistributive change in the interview, but he said one example of such change involves education, ‘how do we get more money into the schools and how do we actually create equal schools and equal educational opportunity.’” Thus, “redistribution” simply means equal schooling; who could be against that?
In all these cases, one is left with the impression his is merely a meandering historical argument of refined legal theory, using highly specified language that does not mean what it sounds like. Normal people like Joe the Plumber cannot possibly comprehend it. However, all these media reports distort the facts and leave a false impression that covers up the explosive revelation contained in his own words: Barack Obama believes the Constitution embodies a “fundamental flaw” in the fabric of America “that continues to this day,” has pined for “economic justice” for at least a decade, seeks political power to implement “wealth redistribution” with the aid of Congress, implies the Supreme Court should “break free” from the “constraints” of the Founders, believes public financing of abortion is an “important” aspect of the struggle, and has promised an “activist” Executive Branch to enforce his socialistic vision.
Yet the view that slavery lingers in 21st century America is perhaps the most contemptuous thing one can say about a country that lost hundreds of thousands of lives fighting a war to end slavery, endured massive social upheaval to bury Jim Crow, transferred untold trillions of dollars of wealth so that we would “wipe away the scars of centuries,” then welcomed the son of a Kenyan Muslim reared in a foreign land and are presently entertaining a national debate about elevating him to the most powerful office in the world.
It is, however, precisely what is to be expected from an individual reared by an “unreconstructed liberal” mother of the ‘60s era, an individual who consciously sought out Marxist professors – both as college instructors and as sponsors for his career in Chicago politics.
Far from an insignificant and highly theoretical bout of legal navel-gazing, this 2001 interview provides a clear glimpse into the ideology Obama wishes to implement. For this reason, the transcripts must be assailed – with those news outlets that report them.
After all, he does not have the luxury of saying he made these comments when he was naïve and inexperienced, because he is still naïve and inexperienced. Further, reparations based on race, sex, class, or sexual orientation still lie at the heart of his judicial philosophy. His only option is to deny the words on the page. His fan base in the media has gotten ahead of him on the matter. Will he be successful in his effort to deny his own views and thereby get an opportunity to implement them?
Next Tuesday, we may find out.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Huffington Post and Politico Lead Wave of Explosive Growth
Huffington Post and Politico Lead Wave of Explosive Growth
Press Release
Oct 22, 2008
http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=2525
Huffington Post and Politico Lead Wave of Explosive Growth at Independent Political Blogs and News Sites this Election Season.
Political Blog Visitors Skew Older, Wealthier, More Male than Overall U.S. Internet Population.
Comsore, Inc. (NASDAQ: SCOR), a leader in measuring the digital world, today released a study of visitation to political blogs and news sites during the 2008 presidential election season, which showed strong gains at most sites compared to year ago. HuffingtonPost.com led among a group of selected stand-alone political blogs and news sites with 4.5 million visitors in September, up 472 percent versus year ago, while Politico.com attracted 2.4 million visitors (up 344 percent) and DrudgeReport.com saw 2.1 million visitors (up 70 percent).
“With each new election cycle, the Internet is playing a more significant role in shaping the stories of the day that are so crucial in formulating public opinion on issues and candidates,” said Andrew Lipsman, senior analyst at comScore. “That most mainstream news outlets now have their own political blogs is a testament to their increasing reach and influence. However, several independent blogs unaffiliated with larger media outlets paved the way in this space and are really beginning to enter the mainstream public consciousness with this current election cycle.”
Selected Stand-Alone* Political Blogs & News Sites
huffingtonpost.com
politico.com
drudgereport.com
realclearpolitics.com
freerepublic.com
capitol advantage
dailykos.com
townhall.com
newsbusters.org
worldnetdaily.com
talkingpointsmemo.com
michellemalkin.com
redstate.com
crooksandliars.com
rawstory.com
pollster.com
mediamatters.org
fivethirtyeight.com
cqpolitics.com
americablog.com
*Stand-alone refers to blogs unaffiliated with larger news properties, such as the New York Times Caucus Blog or Time’s“The Page”.
Some additional findings include:
· September represented the single biggest month on record for both HuffingtonPost.com and Politico.com since their respective launches.
· Several sites dedicated to political poll-watching achieved notable gains. RealClearPolitics.com, which tracks composites of polls by state, attracted 1.1 million visitors in September, up 489 percent versus year ago. Two other polling-oriented sites, Pollster.com with 194,000 visitors and FiveThirtyEight.com with 169,000 visitors, also saw notable traffic in September.
· The top conservative leaning blog, FreeRepublic.com, actually saw marginal declines versus year ago, though it still attracted nearly 1 million visitors in September. Other conservative blogs, such as Newsbusters.org (up 547 percent to 732,000 visitors), WorldNetDaily.com (up 55 percent to 636,000 visitors) and MichelleMalkin.com (up 140 percent to 247,000 visitors) saw strong gains.
Political Blog Visitors Skew Older and Wealthier Than Average Americans
Looking at the demographic profiles for the top three sites, HuffingtonPost.com, Politico.com and DrudgeReport.com, one can conclude that visitors to these sites tend to be older, wealthier, and more likely to be male than the average U.S. Internet user.
Of the three sites, Politico.com skewed the oldest with 23 percent of its visitors age 55 and older, while DrudgeReport.com skewed wealthiest, with 40 percent of its visitors earning at least $100,000 a year, and had the highest concentration of males at 57 percent. HuffingtonPost.com, the site with the largest audience, was the most similar of the three when compared to the overall U.S. Internet audience.
Press Release
Oct 22, 2008
http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=2525
Huffington Post and Politico Lead Wave of Explosive Growth at Independent Political Blogs and News Sites this Election Season.
Political Blog Visitors Skew Older, Wealthier, More Male than Overall U.S. Internet Population.
Comsore, Inc. (NASDAQ: SCOR), a leader in measuring the digital world, today released a study of visitation to political blogs and news sites during the 2008 presidential election season, which showed strong gains at most sites compared to year ago. HuffingtonPost.com led among a group of selected stand-alone political blogs and news sites with 4.5 million visitors in September, up 472 percent versus year ago, while Politico.com attracted 2.4 million visitors (up 344 percent) and DrudgeReport.com saw 2.1 million visitors (up 70 percent).
“With each new election cycle, the Internet is playing a more significant role in shaping the stories of the day that are so crucial in formulating public opinion on issues and candidates,” said Andrew Lipsman, senior analyst at comScore. “That most mainstream news outlets now have their own political blogs is a testament to their increasing reach and influence. However, several independent blogs unaffiliated with larger media outlets paved the way in this space and are really beginning to enter the mainstream public consciousness with this current election cycle.”
Selected Stand-Alone* Political Blogs & News Sites
huffingtonpost.com
politico.com
drudgereport.com
realclearpolitics.com
freerepublic.com
capitol advantage
dailykos.com
townhall.com
newsbusters.org
worldnetdaily.com
talkingpointsmemo.com
michellemalkin.com
redstate.com
crooksandliars.com
rawstory.com
pollster.com
mediamatters.org
fivethirtyeight.com
cqpolitics.com
americablog.com
*Stand-alone refers to blogs unaffiliated with larger news properties, such as the New York Times Caucus Blog or Time’s“The Page”.
Some additional findings include:
· September represented the single biggest month on record for both HuffingtonPost.com and Politico.com since their respective launches.
· Several sites dedicated to political poll-watching achieved notable gains. RealClearPolitics.com, which tracks composites of polls by state, attracted 1.1 million visitors in September, up 489 percent versus year ago. Two other polling-oriented sites, Pollster.com with 194,000 visitors and FiveThirtyEight.com with 169,000 visitors, also saw notable traffic in September.
· The top conservative leaning blog, FreeRepublic.com, actually saw marginal declines versus year ago, though it still attracted nearly 1 million visitors in September. Other conservative blogs, such as Newsbusters.org (up 547 percent to 732,000 visitors), WorldNetDaily.com (up 55 percent to 636,000 visitors) and MichelleMalkin.com (up 140 percent to 247,000 visitors) saw strong gains.
Political Blog Visitors Skew Older and Wealthier Than Average Americans
Looking at the demographic profiles for the top three sites, HuffingtonPost.com, Politico.com and DrudgeReport.com, one can conclude that visitors to these sites tend to be older, wealthier, and more likely to be male than the average U.S. Internet user.
Of the three sites, Politico.com skewed the oldest with 23 percent of its visitors age 55 and older, while DrudgeReport.com skewed wealthiest, with 40 percent of its visitors earning at least $100,000 a year, and had the highest concentration of males at 57 percent. HuffingtonPost.com, the site with the largest audience, was the most similar of the three when compared to the overall U.S. Internet audience.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Dollar and yen benefit in crisis
Dollar and yen benefit in crisis
Tim Bowler
Oct 27, 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7693020.stm
The US dollar and the Japanese yen are emerging as winning currencies in the global financial crisis.
Both are considered safe havens because their banks have lent less than banks in other countries to emerging markets. In contrast, the main currency losers have been the euro and the British pound.
Investors had been using dollar-denominated loans to invest elsewhere, but as the crisis has worsened cash-strapped banks and lenders have been calling in these loans, which has resulted in a scramble for dollars to pay them off.
The yen has gained from the ending of the "carry trade", where currency investors sought to take advantage of the difference in interest rates between Japan - where rates have been traditionally low - and other countries where rates were higher.
The pound has come in for a hammering given the British economy's vulnerability to the financial crisis and expectations of further UK interest rate cuts.
Meanwhile the euro is falling in value because of worries about Europe's exposure to emerging markets - particularly in eastern European countries.
RISING DOLLAR
The dollar has emerged as one of the main winners in the financial crisis.
As credit has dried up, banks have started to call in loans, which has meant borrowers having to buy up dollars to repay loans they owe in the currency.
This all of which means the price of the dollar is set to continue rising.
It is possible that the prospect of falling US interest rates may offset some of this demand for the dollar, as the US already has the lowest interest rates of any G7 industrialised country except Japan.
Another potential limit on the dollar's rise, may be the flood of debt the US government will sell to finance its budget deficit and bank bailouts. However, most currency traders expect the dollar to continue to strengthen over coming months.
SOARING YEN
The Japanese yen has been the other main beneficiary, and against the US dollar it has risen towards a 13-year high - despite the dollar's strength.
This is largely down to the virtual ending of the yen "carry trade" where investors had sought to take advantage of the difference in countries' interest rates.
The shares of top Japanese exporters like Toyota and Sony have been hit hard - despite reports Japan's government is considering a massive capital injection into struggling banks in a bid to calm jittery financial markets.
Mounting concerns about the surging yen have the G7 group of leading industrial nations to issue a statement warning about "recent excessive volatility".
WEAKENING POUND
In the UK, the pound has continued to fall sharply against the dollar, battered by fears of a recession and predictions that the Bank of England may be ready to slash interest rates further.
The Bank of England cut interest rates on 22 October to 4.5% and most economists expect it will be forced to cut interest rates again in an attempt to stave off a prolonged and painful recession.
On Friday, figures showed the UK economy shrank for the first time in 16 years, contracting by 0.5% in the third quarter, intensifying fears about the depth of recession the country could be facing.
The pound's steep falls have led some currency experts to forecast that it could fall below the $1.50 level.
FALLING EURO
The euro is under pressure on two counts - on worries about European banks' exposure to investments in emerging markets and on expectations that the European Central Bank will cut interest rates.
It has now fallen to its lowest level against the dollar in over two years.
European banks have lent heavily to crisis-stricken eastern European countries such as Ukraine, Hungary and Belarus. Ukraine and Hungary have both turned to the International Monetary Fund for help, and more countries are expected to follow.
Any damage to the European banking system would worsen the financial losses that have forced governments to put up about 1.7 trillion euros in guarantees and other aid.
The euro's weakness is an almost complete reversal of the situation in July, when the 15-country currency hit a lifetime high of $1.6038 - to the dismay of politicians across the continent who then worried that the high value of the currency would hit European exports.
Tim Bowler
Oct 27, 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7693020.stm
The US dollar and the Japanese yen are emerging as winning currencies in the global financial crisis.
Both are considered safe havens because their banks have lent less than banks in other countries to emerging markets. In contrast, the main currency losers have been the euro and the British pound.
Investors had been using dollar-denominated loans to invest elsewhere, but as the crisis has worsened cash-strapped banks and lenders have been calling in these loans, which has resulted in a scramble for dollars to pay them off.
The yen has gained from the ending of the "carry trade", where currency investors sought to take advantage of the difference in interest rates between Japan - where rates have been traditionally low - and other countries where rates were higher.
The pound has come in for a hammering given the British economy's vulnerability to the financial crisis and expectations of further UK interest rate cuts.
Meanwhile the euro is falling in value because of worries about Europe's exposure to emerging markets - particularly in eastern European countries.
RISING DOLLAR
The dollar has emerged as one of the main winners in the financial crisis.
As credit has dried up, banks have started to call in loans, which has meant borrowers having to buy up dollars to repay loans they owe in the currency.
This all of which means the price of the dollar is set to continue rising.
It is possible that the prospect of falling US interest rates may offset some of this demand for the dollar, as the US already has the lowest interest rates of any G7 industrialised country except Japan.
Another potential limit on the dollar's rise, may be the flood of debt the US government will sell to finance its budget deficit and bank bailouts. However, most currency traders expect the dollar to continue to strengthen over coming months.
SOARING YEN
The Japanese yen has been the other main beneficiary, and against the US dollar it has risen towards a 13-year high - despite the dollar's strength.
This is largely down to the virtual ending of the yen "carry trade" where investors had sought to take advantage of the difference in countries' interest rates.
The shares of top Japanese exporters like Toyota and Sony have been hit hard - despite reports Japan's government is considering a massive capital injection into struggling banks in a bid to calm jittery financial markets.
Mounting concerns about the surging yen have the G7 group of leading industrial nations to issue a statement warning about "recent excessive volatility".
WEAKENING POUND
In the UK, the pound has continued to fall sharply against the dollar, battered by fears of a recession and predictions that the Bank of England may be ready to slash interest rates further.
The Bank of England cut interest rates on 22 October to 4.5% and most economists expect it will be forced to cut interest rates again in an attempt to stave off a prolonged and painful recession.
On Friday, figures showed the UK economy shrank for the first time in 16 years, contracting by 0.5% in the third quarter, intensifying fears about the depth of recession the country could be facing.
The pound's steep falls have led some currency experts to forecast that it could fall below the $1.50 level.
FALLING EURO
The euro is under pressure on two counts - on worries about European banks' exposure to investments in emerging markets and on expectations that the European Central Bank will cut interest rates.
It has now fallen to its lowest level against the dollar in over two years.
European banks have lent heavily to crisis-stricken eastern European countries such as Ukraine, Hungary and Belarus. Ukraine and Hungary have both turned to the International Monetary Fund for help, and more countries are expected to follow.
Any damage to the European banking system would worsen the financial losses that have forced governments to put up about 1.7 trillion euros in guarantees and other aid.
The euro's weakness is an almost complete reversal of the situation in July, when the 15-country currency hit a lifetime high of $1.6038 - to the dismay of politicians across the continent who then worried that the high value of the currency would hit European exports.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Banks Are Likely to Hold Tight to Bailout Money
Banks Are Likely to Hold Tight to Bailout Money
Louise Story and Eric Dash
Oct 16, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/business/
17bank.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Even as the government moves to plug holes in the nation’s banks, new gaps keep appearing.
As two financial giants, Citigroup and Merrill Lynch, reported fresh multibillion-dollar losses on Thursday, the industry passed a grim milestone: All of the combined profits that major banks earned in recent years have vanished.
Since mid-2007, when the credit crisis erupted, the country’s nine largest banks have written down the value of their troubled assets by a combined $323 billion. With a recession looming, the pain is unlikely to end there. The problems that began with home mortgages, analysts say, are migrating to auto, credit card and commercial real estate loans.
The deepening red ink underscores a crucial question about the government’s plan: Will lenders deploy their new-found capital quickly, as the Treasury hopes, and unlock the flow of credit through the economy? Or will they hoard the money to protect themselves?
Even with the capital from the government, analysts say, the banking industry still needs to raise around $275 billion in light of the looming losses.
Mr. Dugan added that he would not examine how the banks used the money, but he said their actions would “be open to the court of public opinion.”
The banks could use the money from the government for any number of things. Some analysts say the banks may use it to acquire weaker competitors. Others say they might use it to avoid painful cost-cutting. And still others say the banks may sit on the capital.
Lenders have been pulling back on credit lines for businesses, mortgages, home equity loans and credit card offers, and analysts said that trend was unlikely to be reversed by the government’s money.
“I don’t think that the market wants to see that capital being put to work to leverage the business up again,” said Roger Freeman, an analyst at Barclays Capital, which acquired parts of the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers last month. “My expectation is it’s quarters off, not months off, before you see that capital being put to work.”
Many banks are still plagued by past excesses. Losses on a variety of different types of loans of all sorts are growing and spreading beyond the country’s borders. Citigroup and Merrill Lynch have each lost money every quarter in the last year, as deteriorating assets wiped out revenue.
Merrill, which is in the process of merging with Bank of America, reported a $5.15 billion loss, dragged down by about $12 billion in write-downs.
Citigroup lost $2.82 billion, as its $13.2 billion in charges related to credit losses more than overwhelmed every bit of revenue that the bank generated. And analysts say Citigroup is likely to face several more quarters of loan losses as the global economy slows.
Every corner of the economy goes through cyclical ups and downs. But the banking downturn has acted with ferocious speed to erase past profits.
In the case of the nine-largest commercial banks — Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Washington Mutual and Wachovia — profits from early 2004 until the middle of 2007 were a combined $305 billion. But since July 2007, those banks have marked down their valuations on loans and other assets by just over that amount.
At Citigroup, for instance, the write-downs on mortgages and other loans have eaten away 60 percent of all the profits made by the bank during the boom years. At Morgan Stanley, the cost has reached 70 percent of those profits, and at Merrill Lynch, the tally is 250 percent of the investment bank’s record earnings over those three and half years.
It is those same banks that are in some shape benefiting from the government’s recent capital infusion. Three of the nine — Merrill Lynch, Washington Mutual and Wachovia — are in the process of mergers with others in the group. Two other banks — State Street and Bank of New York Mellon — also received capital from the government this week.
Several of the banks, including Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs, declined to comment on how they will spend the government funds once they arrive.
Indeed, observers point to the growing well of bank losses, deeper by the quarter, as reason to question whether the government funding will be used as a financial Band-Aid, instead of an engine to move forward.
“It is the government’s responsibility to set the terms and conditions on this money,” said David M. Walker, the former federal comptroller general and now president of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. “This is the people’s money. They’re giving it out with no rules.”
Louise Story and Eric Dash
Oct 16, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/business/
17bank.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Even as the government moves to plug holes in the nation’s banks, new gaps keep appearing.
As two financial giants, Citigroup and Merrill Lynch, reported fresh multibillion-dollar losses on Thursday, the industry passed a grim milestone: All of the combined profits that major banks earned in recent years have vanished.
Since mid-2007, when the credit crisis erupted, the country’s nine largest banks have written down the value of their troubled assets by a combined $323 billion. With a recession looming, the pain is unlikely to end there. The problems that began with home mortgages, analysts say, are migrating to auto, credit card and commercial real estate loans.
The deepening red ink underscores a crucial question about the government’s plan: Will lenders deploy their new-found capital quickly, as the Treasury hopes, and unlock the flow of credit through the economy? Or will they hoard the money to protect themselves?
Even with the capital from the government, analysts say, the banking industry still needs to raise around $275 billion in light of the looming losses.
Mr. Dugan added that he would not examine how the banks used the money, but he said their actions would “be open to the court of public opinion.”
The banks could use the money from the government for any number of things. Some analysts say the banks may use it to acquire weaker competitors. Others say they might use it to avoid painful cost-cutting. And still others say the banks may sit on the capital.
Lenders have been pulling back on credit lines for businesses, mortgages, home equity loans and credit card offers, and analysts said that trend was unlikely to be reversed by the government’s money.
“I don’t think that the market wants to see that capital being put to work to leverage the business up again,” said Roger Freeman, an analyst at Barclays Capital, which acquired parts of the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers last month. “My expectation is it’s quarters off, not months off, before you see that capital being put to work.”
Many banks are still plagued by past excesses. Losses on a variety of different types of loans of all sorts are growing and spreading beyond the country’s borders. Citigroup and Merrill Lynch have each lost money every quarter in the last year, as deteriorating assets wiped out revenue.
Merrill, which is in the process of merging with Bank of America, reported a $5.15 billion loss, dragged down by about $12 billion in write-downs.
Citigroup lost $2.82 billion, as its $13.2 billion in charges related to credit losses more than overwhelmed every bit of revenue that the bank generated. And analysts say Citigroup is likely to face several more quarters of loan losses as the global economy slows.
Every corner of the economy goes through cyclical ups and downs. But the banking downturn has acted with ferocious speed to erase past profits.
In the case of the nine-largest commercial banks — Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Washington Mutual and Wachovia — profits from early 2004 until the middle of 2007 were a combined $305 billion. But since July 2007, those banks have marked down their valuations on loans and other assets by just over that amount.
At Citigroup, for instance, the write-downs on mortgages and other loans have eaten away 60 percent of all the profits made by the bank during the boom years. At Morgan Stanley, the cost has reached 70 percent of those profits, and at Merrill Lynch, the tally is 250 percent of the investment bank’s record earnings over those three and half years.
It is those same banks that are in some shape benefiting from the government’s recent capital infusion. Three of the nine — Merrill Lynch, Washington Mutual and Wachovia — are in the process of mergers with others in the group. Two other banks — State Street and Bank of New York Mellon — also received capital from the government this week.
Several of the banks, including Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs, declined to comment on how they will spend the government funds once they arrive.
Indeed, observers point to the growing well of bank losses, deeper by the quarter, as reason to question whether the government funding will be used as a financial Band-Aid, instead of an engine to move forward.
“It is the government’s responsibility to set the terms and conditions on this money,” said David M. Walker, the former federal comptroller general and now president of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. “This is the people’s money. They’re giving it out with no rules.”
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Mass layoffs highest since 9/11
Mass layoffs highest since 9/11
Emily Maltby
Oct 22, 2008
http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/22/
news/economy/mass_layoffs/index.htm
Government report says job cuts of 50 or more up significantly last month.
The number of layoff announcements involving at least 50 workers rose in September to the highest level since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks seven years ago, the government said Wednesday.
There were 2,269 mass layoff actions, up 497 from August, according to statistics released by the Labor Department. That was the most mass layoffs since the 2,407 in September 2001.
Overall, the number of initial claims for unemployment benefits related to mass layoffs rose by 61,726 to 235,681. That was the highest level since September 2005, after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, resulting in 297,544 claims.
The manufacturing industry pulled the most devastating numbers, accounting for 28% of all mass layoffs and 36% of unemployment insurance claims in September. More specifically, 19,278 of the 46,391 claims in that industry came from the transportation equipment sector.
"Most manufacturers are pretty secure," said Chris Kuehl, economic analyst for the Fabricators and Manufacturers Association. "But there's been a lot of action in the auto and aerospace sectors, such as the Boeing strikes and the low demand for cars due to the credit crunch."
Kuehl believes that layoffs at auto and aerospace companies, a large segment of the manufacturing industry, don't tell the whole story. "After all, the medical manufacturing and energy segments are gangbusters," he said.
But the overall situation is grim, and the worst may not be over, according to some experts.
Sue Murphy, manager for National Human Resources Association in Nashua, N.H., believes that there will be an increase in layoffs as the practice of scrutinizing employee count continues.
She said companies will accelerate the trend of cutting hours, replacing jobs with technology and outsourcing labor during tough times like these, when their priorities are protecting costs and market share.
"The companies look at the nice-to-haves and the must-haves, and the employees that are not essential will be up for review," Murphy said. "A lot of quality people will be out of work."
Emily Maltby
Oct 22, 2008
http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/22/
news/economy/mass_layoffs/index.htm
Government report says job cuts of 50 or more up significantly last month.
The number of layoff announcements involving at least 50 workers rose in September to the highest level since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks seven years ago, the government said Wednesday.
There were 2,269 mass layoff actions, up 497 from August, according to statistics released by the Labor Department. That was the most mass layoffs since the 2,407 in September 2001.
Overall, the number of initial claims for unemployment benefits related to mass layoffs rose by 61,726 to 235,681. That was the highest level since September 2005, after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, resulting in 297,544 claims.
The manufacturing industry pulled the most devastating numbers, accounting for 28% of all mass layoffs and 36% of unemployment insurance claims in September. More specifically, 19,278 of the 46,391 claims in that industry came from the transportation equipment sector.
"Most manufacturers are pretty secure," said Chris Kuehl, economic analyst for the Fabricators and Manufacturers Association. "But there's been a lot of action in the auto and aerospace sectors, such as the Boeing strikes and the low demand for cars due to the credit crunch."
Kuehl believes that layoffs at auto and aerospace companies, a large segment of the manufacturing industry, don't tell the whole story. "After all, the medical manufacturing and energy segments are gangbusters," he said.
But the overall situation is grim, and the worst may not be over, according to some experts.
Sue Murphy, manager for National Human Resources Association in Nashua, N.H., believes that there will be an increase in layoffs as the practice of scrutinizing employee count continues.
She said companies will accelerate the trend of cutting hours, replacing jobs with technology and outsourcing labor during tough times like these, when their priorities are protecting costs and market share.
"The companies look at the nice-to-haves and the must-haves, and the employees that are not essential will be up for review," Murphy said. "A lot of quality people will be out of work."
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Online Businesses Subject to Local Laws...Everywhere
Online Businesses Subject to Local Laws...Everywhere
Ben Worthen
Oct 21, 2008
http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/10/21/
online-businesses-subject-to-local-lawseverywhere/
A judge in Kentucky seized the Web addresses of more than 140 Internet-gambling sites last week, the latest example of how local governments can affect online businesses with physical operations beyond their jurisdictions.
It is common to think of the Internet as a global network that transcends geography. But online entities are often forced to adhere to laws in the places where they do business. One iconic example is a ruling by a French court in 2000, where the court said a French law banning the sale of Nazi paraphernalia applied to U.S.-based Web site Yahoo.
In the Kentucky case, Circuit Court Judge Thomas Wingate concluded that gambling Web sites were “virtual keys” that provided access to places where one could play online versions of gambling devices such as slot machines and roulette tables, which are illegal in the state.
None of the online businesses—such as GoldenPalace.com, PokerStars.com and UltimateBet.com—are based in Kentucky or rely on technical equipment located in the state. Still, the sites readily accept bets placed by users in Kentucky and process payments from banks based there. That is what triggered Judge Wingate to seize control of the Web addresses.
“Seizing,” it should be noted, sounds more ominous than it is when applied to the Internet realm. It prevents an Internet registrar that issues Web site names from transferring a Web address to a different registrar, even if the owner of the address, such as a gambling site, requests it. The gambling sites will remain operational until the judge issues a forfeiture order, at which point they will become state property.
The court said it will lift its seizure order for online casinos if they implement technology that would block Kentucky residents from accessing their sites.
Groups affiliated with the online casinos are worried about the precedent the ruling sets. “If you’re a business operator, you should be subject to the laws where you do and pursue business, and not have to worry about a state halfway around the world taking away your storefront,” says Jeremiah Johnston, president of the Internet Commerce Association, which monitors legal matters for online businesses. He adds that there is no reason that other governments couldn’t use the same technique to challenge online businesses for whatever reason they choose.
Todd Greene, an attorney for Oversee.net, which has a subsidiary called Moniker Online Services that is the registrar for two of the gambling sites, says he doesn’t believe that the Kentucky court has the jurisdiction to order the seizure. While Moniker has frozen the domain names for now — effectively following the court order — it is doing so as a matter of policy.
J. Michael Brown, secretary of justice and public safety for Kentucky, who brought the lawsuit, says he only wants to stop what he considers an illegal activity.
A final hearing is set for November.
Update: We want to make it clear that the Web sites and registrars aren’t just sitting by, but intend to challenge both the Kentucky courts ruling and its jurisdiction in the matter.
Ben Worthen
Oct 21, 2008
http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/10/21/
online-businesses-subject-to-local-lawseverywhere/
A judge in Kentucky seized the Web addresses of more than 140 Internet-gambling sites last week, the latest example of how local governments can affect online businesses with physical operations beyond their jurisdictions.
It is common to think of the Internet as a global network that transcends geography. But online entities are often forced to adhere to laws in the places where they do business. One iconic example is a ruling by a French court in 2000, where the court said a French law banning the sale of Nazi paraphernalia applied to U.S.-based Web site Yahoo.
In the Kentucky case, Circuit Court Judge Thomas Wingate concluded that gambling Web sites were “virtual keys” that provided access to places where one could play online versions of gambling devices such as slot machines and roulette tables, which are illegal in the state.
None of the online businesses—such as GoldenPalace.com, PokerStars.com and UltimateBet.com—are based in Kentucky or rely on technical equipment located in the state. Still, the sites readily accept bets placed by users in Kentucky and process payments from banks based there. That is what triggered Judge Wingate to seize control of the Web addresses.
“Seizing,” it should be noted, sounds more ominous than it is when applied to the Internet realm. It prevents an Internet registrar that issues Web site names from transferring a Web address to a different registrar, even if the owner of the address, such as a gambling site, requests it. The gambling sites will remain operational until the judge issues a forfeiture order, at which point they will become state property.
The court said it will lift its seizure order for online casinos if they implement technology that would block Kentucky residents from accessing their sites.
Groups affiliated with the online casinos are worried about the precedent the ruling sets. “If you’re a business operator, you should be subject to the laws where you do and pursue business, and not have to worry about a state halfway around the world taking away your storefront,” says Jeremiah Johnston, president of the Internet Commerce Association, which monitors legal matters for online businesses. He adds that there is no reason that other governments couldn’t use the same technique to challenge online businesses for whatever reason they choose.
Todd Greene, an attorney for Oversee.net, which has a subsidiary called Moniker Online Services that is the registrar for two of the gambling sites, says he doesn’t believe that the Kentucky court has the jurisdiction to order the seizure. While Moniker has frozen the domain names for now — effectively following the court order — it is doing so as a matter of policy.
J. Michael Brown, secretary of justice and public safety for Kentucky, who brought the lawsuit, says he only wants to stop what he considers an illegal activity.
A final hearing is set for November.
Update: We want to make it clear that the Web sites and registrars aren’t just sitting by, but intend to challenge both the Kentucky courts ruling and its jurisdiction in the matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)