Signs that a collapse is under way.

[SilverSurfer_OG]

Theres no doubt we are all being irradiated at record levels what with all the mobile phones and nuclear shit.

There are ways to rid the body of heavy metals. Zeolite and plenty fresh water will go a long way. Spirulina is another excellent treatment.

I would say the prospect of adding lithium to the drinking water is a good sign...

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/05/22/052211-news-lithium-1-5/

 

[SpasticGramps]

BTW. If you are a retiree with a pension from Uncle Sam you are getting robbed right now because of the debt ceiling debacle. Oh, but worry not. The criminals will pay you back. They are good for it. You have every reason in the world to trust them.

Treasury Continues To Dip Into Retirement Accounts, Prepares To "Take Out" $66 Billion Chunk To Make Room For New Bond Issuance

Today, very quietly, the Treasury released its latest refunding announcement, in which it disclosed it would issue another $66 billion in 3, 10 and 30 Year notes next week. The irony of course is that the US is and continues to be at its debt ceiling limit (or just $25 million short of it), at a total of $14,293,975 million. Furthermore, as was also disclosed by the Treasury, this gross issuance will also be the net amount added in marketable debt, as upon settlement on June 15, there will be no redemptions of maturing bonds. Which simply means that the continued "disinvesting" (which is merely a polite word for plundering) from intragovernmental debt, also known as retirement accounts, is about to kick into high gear. As a reminder, the only solution that Geithner currently has to run the government, at least until August 2 when even this runs out, is to slowly drain the debt in non-marketable accounts, in the form of Suspension of G-Fund and ESF reinvestments, as well as the Redemption and suspension of of CSRDF Investments, measure which when combined will provide a short-term buffer of $232 billion. Yet for all practical purposes, what is happening is that retirement accounts are now being seriously plundered, and if the unthinkable were to happen, and the debt ceiling would not rise, not only would the US be in technical default, but various retirement funds, which already are underfunded, would find themselves even more severely in the Red. As the chart below shows, the total amount of intragovernmental debt currently outstanding, has dropped to levels last seen in early April, even as total debt has continued its steadfast move higher. The scary thing is that by the time August 2 rolls around, the current total of $4.608 trillion in various Trust Funds, will drop to well about $4.4 trillion, or an implicit 6% underfunding in 2 months merely to keep the bloated government operating for a few more months.

Of course if everything turns out fine, these disinvestments will be promptly reversed as the Treasury doubles down on its borrowing spree to fund the retirement accounts that currently are being pillaged. For the sake of all government worker retirees, we hope this is the final outcome.

Better put your hope hats on if you work for Uncle Sam. Bernanke has everything under control just like he did with the sub-prime mini-mess. Next up will be 401k's.

Bernanke Reassures Markets That Subprime Contagion Contained In the Money March 17, 2007

he markets are lower in early trading, but not by much. Fed Chairman Bernanke made a speech this morning about the subprime lending market. He said he does not expect significant spillovers to hurt the rest of the economy, but he does not want to see credit lending restricted by such an amount that it restrains our financial system.

Retail stocks are strongest out of the gate this morning. KSS reports earnings after the close. And last night, HPQ reported a strong quarter and guidance.

Jobless claims unexpectedly fell in this morning's report, indicating that the labor market remains strong. This is pushing bond yields higher, with the 10-year at 4.73%, approaching its April highs near 4.77%. Oil is also a bit higher, trading at $62.90.

Asian markets were mixed overnight, and the Yen is lower once again versus the dollar. Yesterday's session showed a surprisingly strong run into the close. I think today will be more of a quiet consolidation day.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

For the record, I'm no fan of Ben and this is just belated hand wringing...

IMO, Greenspan took a crap on us for 8 years. While there were few to no legal measures to reign in the housing furor, Greenspan left interest rates historically low. This allowed the proverbial fires to burn.

The tech bust didn't seem to dissuade Greenspan from Ayn Rands free-market theory. But the housing bubble did persuade Greenspan to publicly eschew any idea that markets regulate themselves. Too bad his epiphany was on exit.

In free-market theory, my business model won't succeed if ethically challenged. Just the thought of decreased market share will keep me honest.

 

[igrowone]

For the record, I'm no fan of Ben and this is just belated hand wringing...

IMO, Greenspan took a crap on us for 8 years. While there were few to no legal measures to reign in the housing furor, Greenspan left interest rates historically low. This allowed the proverbial fires to burn.

The tech bust didn't seem to dissuade Greenspan from Ayn Rands free-market theory. But the housing bubble did persuade Greenspan to publicly eschew any idea that markets regulate themselves. Too bad his epiphany was on exit.

In free-market theory, my business model won't succeed if ethically challenged. Just the thought of decreased market share will keep me honest.

here we go, dead on in my opinion
i'm no fan of Ben either, but he's just the new tip of the iceberg
we've had decades of cheap money, Bernanke is just doing the accepted practice, although that has become extreme
the latest job report just popped out, and it's not good

 

[SpasticGramps]

To say that Greenspan is an Ayn Rand disciple is incorrect IMO. He is a fascist and a corporatist. Just as Bernanke is. The very institution of the Federal Reserve Bank and central planning is the exact opposite of free-market theory. No proponent of the Federal Reserve system can call themselves a free market theorist without being intellectually dishonest IMO. The two are mutually exclusive and not logically coherent. You cannot be for central planning and then say you believe in the free market. For a central planner to espouse that he is a laissez faire free market theorist is a lie.

For the record I don't believe in laissez faire free markets. Fraud must be regulated, but when the central planning institution is the fraud then what do you do?

 

[SpasticGramps]

As for the jobs report. No surprise here. They continue to be terrible. The economy continues to stall out as it withers on the vine.

People Who Want A Job Now, Average Duration Of Unemployment Both Hit All Time Highs

Two charts that confirm that the US economy is, and has been for the past 3 years, in nothing short of a depression.

And average duration of unemployment which just hit 39.7 weeks. Another record. (chart courtesy of John Lohman)

After about 6 months all these unemployed people become unemployable because of skill erosion. Don't worry about them though. The gubbermint doesn't count them with the U-3 unemployment number. Here pretty soon all the MSM news will be saying how great everything is because we have 0% unemployment, but are in a depression,

Some economist on CNBC yesterday was saying how the FED would be gone in 25 years and Bernanke will be known as one of the greatest failures ever. Really, he is just the asshole who gets the hold the bag whenever the SHTF. I think 25 years is quite generous too. I expect the FED to end themselves in fairly short order.

 

[In~Plain~Site]

I wonder what Ol' Ben did for a living before being appointed, or was it anointed?

 

[turbolaser4528]

who cares, fuck em all I aint tryin gto live more than a few more years anyway..

just gonna grow my trees and stock weapons n food.

Bring on the zombie apocalypse this life is starting to bore me anyway!!

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

To say that Greenspan is an Ayn Rand disciple is incorrect IMO. He is a fascist and a corporatist. Just as Bernanke is. The very institution of the Federal Reserve Bank and central planning is the exact opposite of free-market theory. No proponent of the Federal Reserve system can call themselves a free market theorist without being intellectually dishonest IMO. The two are mutually exclusive and not logically coherent. You cannot be for central planning and then say you believe in the free market. For a central planner to espouse that he is a laissez faire free market theorist is a lie.

For the record I don't believe in laissez faire free markets. Fraud must be regulated, but when the central planning institution is the fraud then what do you do?

Thanks Gramps. I just checked out aynrand.org. Thanks for adding the IMO and you're correct. You're pointing out the distinction. .

You make a case for folks like me. I happen to distrust blanket, free-market theory but saying it like you did, "fraud must be regulated" gives me reassurance. Not to mention that institutionalized fraud is the apple that upsets the cart.

I enjoy when you influence my perspective... especially when I come up short. That aside, I always enjoy the conversation.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I wonder what Ol' Ben did for a living before being appointed, or was it anointed?

Fly in the anointment.

I've read Ben's a Great Depression scholar. Maybe he knows how to get there faster than anybody else.

 

[SilverSurfer_OG]

^^^^ Yeah just like Obama is an expert on US constitutional law

It takes real effort and planning to ruin what was the greatest country on earth.

You guys heard of Bitcoin? Havent quite wrapped my head around it all but sounds good

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread711555/pg1

How about this peach:

Obama Deregulates GMO Crops Despite Supreme Court Injunction

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread711979/pg1

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

You guys heard of Bitcoin? Havent quite wrapped my head around it all but sounds good

I tried to wrap my head around it. The only fact in the piece is the BVDW's warning. The rest might be a bit confusing.

(Libertarian News) Recently I wrote an article entitled "The Most Dangerous Creation In The History Of Man"...

contrast with...

(Libertarian News) I’ve received several requests for more information about how people can put Bitcoin to work for them. Most articles on Bitcoin, and even the Bitcoin site itself, don’t give a clear top to bottom description of how common users of Bitcoin can put the currency to use.

Is Libertarian News experiencing a Bitcoin paradox?

How does mnemeth1 draw a distinction?

(mnemeth1) The article goes on to explain how to use the new currency and why it is superior to all other currencies in existence.

This will change the face of the planet.

So what's your take on the piece, SilverSurfer_OG? I find it interesting that mnemeth1 contradicts Libertarian news to set up his opinion. But uh, Libertarian News appears to contradict themselves.

 

[HempKat]

Theres no doubt we are all being irradiated at record levels what with all the mobile phones and nuclear shit.

There are ways to rid the body of heavy metals. Zeolite and plenty fresh water will go a long way. Spirulina is another excellent treatment.

I would say the prospect of adding lithium to the drinking water is a good sign...

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/05/22/052211-news-lithium-1-5/

No need, there's already plenty of lithium, zanax, prozac, and god only knows what else in the drinking water from all the idiots taking medications and are ignorant of proper handling and disposal.

 

[Hydrosun]

To say that Greenspan is an Ayn Rand disciple is incorrect IMO. He is a fascist and a corporatist. Just as Bernanke is. The very institution of the Federal Reserve Bank and central planning is the exact opposite of free-market theory. No proponent of the Federal Reserve system can call themselves a free market theorist without being intellectually dishonest IMO. The two are mutually exclusive and not logically coherent. You cannot be for central planning and then say you believe in the free market. For a central planner to espouse that he is a laissez faire free market theorist is a lie.

For the record I don't believe in laissez faire free markets. Fraud must be regulated, but when the central planning institution is the fraud then what do you do?

For the record I DO believe in laissez faire free markets; AND Fraud has ALWAYS been regulated. Fraud is both a common law crime and a common law civil violation. Ms. Rand spoke of the importance of HONEST law courts and the importance of freedom to contract.

Mr. Greenspan fell away from Rand's truth decades ago. That dead Russian born woman wrote down a great deal of truth. It is no surprise that the media and spin doctors want her remembered as an extremist spouting an untenable philosophy. Read her work and you will understand how much she gave to the world and why her writings still ring true multiple generations after she authored them.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

For the record I DO believe in laissez faire free markets; AND Fraud has ALWAYS been regulated. Fraud is both a common law crime and a common law civil violation. Ms. Rand spoke of the importance of HONEST law courts and the importance of freedom to contract.

Mr. Greenspan fell away from Rand's truth decades ago. That dead Russian born woman wrote down a great deal of truth. It is no surprise that the media and spin doctors want her remembered as an extremist spouting an untenable philosophy. Read her work and you will understand how much she gave to the world and why her writings still ring true multiple generations after she authored them.

Mind if I draw a distinction? There may have been a point of contention over central monetary authority but there was consensus on free markets regulating themselves.

If Greenspan fell away from Rand decades ago, why did he wait until he was walking out the door to acknowledge? IMO, that's more fuel to suggest that Greenspan believed free markets could regulate themselves.

"AND Fraud has ALWAYS been regulated"

Maybe in theory. Investment markets weren't regulated until Glass Stegall. The distribution of food and drugs weren't cumulatively regulated until the inception of FDA. Worker safety wasn't regulated until OSHA. Environmental standards weren't regulated until EPA. Not enough space here to arguably demonstrate that markets never regulated themselves.

Without enforcement, regulation equals a former mine executive overseeing mine safety. (Big money in those pillars, lets see how many we can profit from while defending miner deaths as unavoidable.) Big oil over big oil. Enron, MCI, Arthur Anderson etc over Enron, MCI, Arthur Anderson etc.

The "market" is a cloud. It's innate nature neither produces nor negates regulation. That's up to the people that comprise the market.

Reading that a free marketeer endorses fraud regulation is refreshing. Suggesting we've always regulated is rather perplexing.

It's not that I resist proven principles. You can verify that by exampling successful "market regulation."

 

[Hydrosun]

Just because new government interference is passed into law does not mean that markets have failed or that the government will be sucessful.

All the agencies and corporations you mention establish the fact that rules don't make for a regulated market. Tens of thousands of pages of rules, regulations, restrictions, requirements, and responsibilities even after all this Enron, MCI, and Bernie Madoff scammed people for billions. FDA doesn't stop counterfeit drugs, bad food kills people, miners still die in explosions and collapses.

Now for an almost free market that shows the success of self regulation I'd point you to cannabis and sports betting. Both these activities are illegal in most of the USA however both can be engaged in at fairly consistent prices and qualities.

 

[enter sandman]

A sign you ask...look in the mirror

 

[The iD]

lol that you think Cannabis isnt regulated. illegality is regulation to the maximum. the price is consistently inflated and quality is consistently depressed.

you make the assumption that regulatory laws are typically passed to suppress crime and corruption, when in fact they are enacted to streamline it and consolidate power into the hands of the few.

rules were meant to be broken. people still commit murder despite the possibility of the death penalty in a number of states/countries. do you think that murder should instead go unpunished due to the failure of the death penalty?

-iD

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Just because new government interference is passed into law does not mean that markets have failed or that the government will be sucessful.

All the agencies and corporations you mention establish the fact that rules don't make for a regulated market. Tens of thousands of pages of rules, regulations, restrictions, requirements, and responsibilities even after all this Enron, MCI, and Bernie Madoff scammed people for billions. FDA doesn't stop counterfeit drugs, bad food kills people, miners still die in explosions and collapses.

Now for an almost free market that shows the success of self regulation I'd point you to cannabis and sports betting. Both these activities are illegal in most of the USA however both can be engaged in at fairly consistent prices and qualities.

That would indicate unproven, free-market ideology. Ideology has it's limitations. Some ideals are exercised and they're proven or dispelled.

For example, "tax cuts equals more jobs". We have zero economic data that supports this ideology. In fact, just the opposite has historical emphasis. The top paid 39% in the 1990s. As a result, revenues grew instead of diminished. The economy grew instead of contracting, deficits turned into surplusses and 23 million full-time jobs were added to the work force. Right now, 25 million people need a full-time job. It would take an economist to point out how 8 years of plan B can't be mitigated by less than three years of plan A. Especially when plan B countered the successes of the 1990s. Don't forget, some peeps want to drown this baby in a bathtub so don't be surprised when the baby's soaked.

We have seen (hundreds?) (thousands?) of examples of unregulated areas (mostly where regulation was dissolved) that produced disaster. Sometimes, repeatedly. I should say produces because the same, unregulated system that caused us the worst economic pain since the depression is still in place

Does that mean you must be regulated so that you don't pop the next bubble? With all due respect, that's not the point. Regulation doesn't individualize responsibility vs fraud. Segments of the economy can and have tanked the show. We can't verify that x number of 310 million people qualify for the cloud and the rest get regulated.



Speaking of success, the 1990s plan had to be to be turned 180* to make 2001-2008 tank. (Remember the bathtub?) We don't just have two ways to go the same direction. One way wants to go back to the pre-depression era.

It wasn't fluke, chance, maybe, I think, etc. It was polar-opposite economic strategy for a polar-opposite end game. One man thought he could give back the goods to the rich and take SS away from all of us.

2001-2008 proved you personally don't want your SS substituted with a Glass Stegall [less] private sector market.

I don't question your sincerity of belief. But I do look for indicators that either support of dispel my beliefs. If my economic strategy at home looks like a depletion plan, logic suggests somebody else is inflating. I wouldn't do that at home, much less to the country.

How long does one wait to see if a plan pans or tanks? We're living 1920s style right now. We've already been there. We've seen what income disparity at this proportion does to the economy. We sputtered until we broke down. Since, we have indicators (statistics) that repeatedly show that x tax rate produces y GDP, where x and y aren't static.

To imagine that even responsible regulation makes fraud a thing of the past oversimplifies the issue. Do we stop giving parking tickets or stop towing away the car that continually takes your parking place? Nope. I gots a feeling that you'd appreciate that the space you paid for is mandated to be yours for the paid amount of time.

How does the cloud dissuade the driver from taking your space? And when they do, it ain't the cloud that returns it. You'd have to pay somebody a profit to keep your space yours. Add the profit element to every profit-free service you enjoy as a taxpayer.

Not paying taxes? Then one has their cake and eats it too.

Thanks for giving two examples. A (to be immeasurably generous) quazi legal?... illegal? substance and an international market the US doesn't mandate.



BTW, those entities that soaked us in the early 2000s were deregulated. We didn't get soaked until they were uh... deregulated.

Maddof is a criminal and we've got those in the tens of millions.

 

[SilverSurfer_OG]

I tried to wrap my head around it. The only fact in the piece is the BVDW's warning. The rest might be a bit confusing.



contrast with...

Is Libertarian News experiencing a Bitcoin paradox?

How does mnemeth1 draw a distinction?

So what's your take on the piece, SilverSurfer_OG? I find it interesting that mnemeth1 contradicts Libertarian news to set up his opinion. But uh, Libertarian News appears to contradict themselves.

Theres certainly a fair amount of confusion regarding Bitcoins. I only heard about them few days ago.

BVDW's warning is representative of the status quo/establishments fear of being made redundant by a peer to peer, de-centralised currency that is immune to inflation.

Its like having cash in digital form as far as i understand it.

I enjoyed watching the Keiser report video where a lot is said and good questions asked.

Think what bittorrents have done to copyrights and the entertainment industry... nothing short of a revolution!