Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I think the 87 million figure is badly bloated. I don't like to see that kind of thing. Actual unemployment numbers are bad enough. Nothing gained from exagrating.
My previous comment to you was based on you saying:
"people over 65---They're retired or should be retired.
Kids under 18 -- they should all be in school. Whether they are or not. So don't count them either."
I agree that kids over 18 should be in school, but millions are not. If they and those over 65 who are looking for work and can't find it, belong in the unemployment stats.
IMO, your comments were imperious.
B2B
Thank you for providing another example of the wisdom of our Founders. They set up a system that saved us from that bloated raving lunatic, Al Gore.
Let me guess. You will now spend some pargraphs trashing Dubya.
B2B
back2 - Please. SCOTUS illegally installed little Georgie as POTUS. Isn't that enough for you?
good post....the democrats are NOT the same democratic party of the 1950s, 60s, 70s.....now, they are controlled by an "inner circle" of hard core far leftists/progressives.....they have morphed into the American socialist party....
and, as you pointed out, the Republicans are no "prize" either....
which makes it boil down to your observation....them (the government) vs. us (the people)....
very well stated..........
I do agree with you, especially since the Democrats are not what Democrats were when I was raised as one and to become one.
I am now, and have been for a while a registered Republican, but I am not totally happy with most of them now either; especially the RINO's (Republican In Name Only).
I truly believe it is THEM (the gov') against US (We The People).
****************
Progressiveness Must Die Today,
In Order That We May Be Free Tomorrow
OMG/OBAMA MUST GO - NOBAMA IN 2012!!!
King Chris wouldn't label all people not working over 65 as unemployed or try to claim that 87 million of the 281 million people in the US are unemployed.
Chris
I'll flat out say it. Democrats DO NOT want a legitimate election system. It's not that Republicans have never been the beneficiaries of iullegal votes, But Democrats work hard to keep the voting system open to fraud.
B2B
My guess is that people over 65 that are still working do so because they need the money. Would King Chris commonnd that kids under 18 stay in school? Or if they aren't in school, what would King Chris have them do?
It seems to me that if people are looking for a job and can't find one, they qualify as unemployed.
Emperor Obama does a good enough job of "adjusting " employment nunmbers without help for King Chris.
B2B
Whats more sensational? That articles figures or the Govt figures of 8.1%?
I'm just saying that a 65+ person not working shouldn't be automatically considered "unemployed" in order to justify a sensationalized story headline.
According to this:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
if my arithmetic is correct, about 70 million people are under 18 and 37 million are over 65.
So to claim thee are 87 million unemployed people out of 281 million is a pretty wild (and pretty false) claim.
Chris
a lot of people over 65 work because they can't afford not to
and retirement age is 72 I believe
People over 65 shouldn't even be part of the employment statistic. They're retired or should be retired.
Kids under 18 -- they should all be in school. Whether they are or not. So don't count them either.
So I guess the "40 million visible unemployed" make an interesting headline..
Chris
I absolutely agree. Electronic voting must end.
they can do that all they want
but it won't mean crap
they'll be up against people with their backs against the wall
and the ability to organize and maintain a solid resistance
that can't be beat
I won't be a part of it
too far removed and doing something else and made sure I would be out of it with me and mine
I paid my dues.
but
that doesn't change the fact that once they awaken the people that can and will resist
guerrilla warfare will win the day....hands down....it will win
it has an extreme advantage that cannot be ignored
too many are too well prepared for gov't troops to win that war
the gov't will win some battles
but each battle will create martyrs and heroes
and there will be cries just like
Remember The Alamo
that will both inspire and inflame the masses
imo, they have underestimated the American Spirit
and it WILL prevail
and if foreign troops are brought in
God help them
they will be totally fucked.........
Afghanistan is nothing compared to what can happen in this country if the gov't turns on the people
just my opinion
but that's my take........
and the troops can't say no
Soros & Our Votes - Follow Up.
I should have checked it, truth or fiction has this: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/s/Spanish-Voter-Tabulation.htm
Thanks Pre!
****************
Progressiveness Must Die Today,
In Order That We May Be Free Tomorrow
OMG/OBAMA MUST GO - NOBAMA IN 2012!!!
If we truly wish to eliminate voter fraud we must make an earnest start by eliminating all forms of electronic voting and vote counting, and get back all votes being counted by volunteers and with witnesses. JMO
****************
Progressiveness Must Die Today,
In Order That We May Be Free Tomorrow
OMG/OBAMA MUST GO - NOBAMA IN 2012!!!
moxa....Robert Reich....he can't even lie well.....claims there should be capitalism while espousing socialism.....
socialist gov encroachment:
Ritholtz Interviews with Jonathan Miller: An Uncompromised View of Contemporary American Politics and Economics (w/add'l content)
Below are selected points from two of the Ritholtz interviews with Jonathan Miller. The original podcasts are linked below.
October 6, 2011 Interview:
On High-Frequency trading: It's a zero sum game. They are skimming. Mom and pop's pension fund is being ripped off a little bit on every trade. Only shameless whores, that are the publicly traded exchanges, would steal from the public. If the exchanges were not-for-profits no one would ever think of doing this. It is this kind of behavior that makes the public wary of investing in stock markets.
On Real Estate: Fannnie Mae's stated goal of homeownership was 75%. Now we are 66%. The long-term average is slightly lower. The National Association of Realtors reported one single month at the height of the bubble as being not a good time to buy. The water cooler there is filled with hallucinogenics.
On Rogue Bankers: There is no such thing as rogue traders. There are only rogue banks. If you are that grossly negligent that you have to be rescued by the government, then I guarantee you they are doing lots of other things wrong. If you have an entity that messed up so badly that it can't survive... how are you going to go out and run a marathon? Jamie Dimon is the next CEO who needs a humbling.
On Deleveraging: Consumers today are coming off a massive credit binge. Following a binge, according to Rogoff and Reinhart, consumers will go through deleveraging that will last 5 to 10 years. They are only buying what they can afford right now.
On Normal Recessions vs. Credit Crisis Recessions: In normal times, people are trading up, buying more stuff, bigger houses... then things begin to overheat, the fed raises rates, financing becomes more expensive, people spend less, home and car prices start declining, people not overleveradged find value and start spending. A moving-to-good-hands takes place. This time is different because it is a credit crisis recovery. If you don't want to say this time is different, say that you are using the wrong data set. The post world war II recession recoveries are a different animal. What you should be looking at are credit crisis recoveries - Sweden, Mexico, Argentina, Japan. Those are all decade-long recovery periods. A doctor can't look at every patient and treat them the same. This guy has the hiccups, this guy has a gunshot wound.
On This Time is Different and Lending Standards: This time it was different. Lending standards disappeared. Risk was being offloaded and hidden. They stopped using historic ratios and metrics like p/e for stocks or median home price to median incomes for houses. Normal lending standards went away. Fog this mirror, you can have a loan. The pendulum has now swung the other way on lending standards. It's hard to get a loan.
On Fed policy of keeping rates low and promising to keep them there: Fed and Congress can't write checks to banks anymore. So they will give them money to recapitalize them by allowing them to borrow at 0% from Fed and lend to the Treasury at 2%. It will take a decade.
On Larry Summers: We now find out that the single biggest asshole in America is Larry Summers, who browbeat Obama into bailing out Citibank. Larry Summers oversaw the repeal of Glass Steagall as Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Whitehouse, and oversaw the Commodities Futures Modernization Act which took the entire universe of derivatives and hid them from federal regulators. The Treasury Secretary should have advised Clinton that it was garbage. Then, when he went back to the White House, he wasn't done fucking the country. He gave us one last bend over and grab your ankles.
On Robert Rubin: Another giant asshole - he gave us Geithner and Summers. You don't send the same surgeon in after a botched surgery because the first surgeon is more interested in covering up his work.
On Obama: Putting Rubin, Summers and Geithner in power was the tragedy of the Obama administration. Obama and Bush were both given an opportunity to be transformational - a Churchill, a Roosevelt. Obama's problem was that he sought out the biggest asshole in America - Robert Rubin.
On Credit Rating Agencies: To me, if you give up your virtue for money, you are a prostitute. Credit rating agencies are prostitutes.
To listen to the interview, visit The Big Picture Blog: http://tiny.cc/mrywdw
***
January 21, 2011 Inteview:
On Lending Criteria: From 1,000,000 BC to 2002, all commercial credit was based upon the buyer's ability to service that loan. From 2002 to 2007 that no longer mattered. We brought in millions and millions of people who would not have qualified if there were standards. Prices dropped from demand going away. Those people then had to get out of those homes somehow.
On Programs Designed to Prop Up Housing Prices: All the programs designed to prop up house prices are counter-productive. We don't have the demand to take care of the supply. Either we open up the borders to people with money, or let housing prices settle back to a healthy level. The latter will take a decade. One solution is bringing in engineers, mathematicians, etc.
On the Financialization of the US Economy: From a macro perspective, the US economy has been financialized. Wall Street is supposed to bring capital to companies working on new products. And, in theory, they also manage retirement accounts and assets - but they don't do a good job of that. Everything else - moving paper around, structuring finance, all that other bullshit - is just a waste of energy. It doesn't do anything for society. And, even worse, it pulls people - mathematicians, engineers, etc. - into the industry who would otherwise have gone into the Googles, the Apples, etc.
On Bailouts: The worst part of the bailouts is that the normal post-recession collapse in this sector was stopped in its tracks. The normal definancialization of the economy was stopped. Finance should support business - like lawyers or accountants do. Nationwide, the industry should be about 7% to 9% of profits (historically). At its peak it was 24%. Now it is 18% so it's not nearly where it should be.
[note: different figures presented in this Washington Post piece: From 1973 through 1985, as Simon Johnson, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, documented in 2009, American banks never earned more than 16 percent of domestic corporate profits. By the mid-2000s, that figure rose to 41 percent.]
On Lobbying: I have libertarian friends who are always bitching about government. I always say to them, when a dog bites you in the ass... that's what dogs do - don't blame the dog. Look up the leash and see who is holding the handle. When you look at Congress - Congress is the snapping dog. But they are somebody's bitch. You have to see who is holding the leash. Very often it is banks and Wall Street and the financial sector having Congress do its bidding. Most of the things that got us into trouble have been done at the bequest of the banks. For example, the 2004 change in leverage ratios... ironically known as the Bear Stearns Act - as in banks larger than Bear Stearns had lower ratio requirements. First of all, why do you change a law for just 5 banks and not for all of them? That shows you how corrupt the system is.
On Congress: I don't want to say Congress are whores, that go to these corporate executives with knee pads and lip-gloss... Congress is corrupt. Politicians in both parties are worthless. Every day I have to get up and prevent myself from releasing my ninja assassins to go pick out some people who are undercutting the Republic here. They don't even hide how corrupt they are anymore. It just came out that one of the new guys had sent out a note to CFO's asking them what legislation they would like to see changed. They will do anything for any kind of campaign contribution.
On a Real Estate Bottom: Ritholtz uses 3 measures: median income to median home price, value of housing as % of GDP, and cost of owning vs. cost of renting. The first 2 are still showing 7.5% to 15% overvalue. The third metric makes cost of owning look reasonable. The problem is that it is skewed by 3 things: 1. unusually low rates with the Fed at 0%, 2. people are reluctant to buy assets that are falling in value, and 3. people are piling into rentals so rents are going up. That's only if you take the snapshot. But if you look at the moving picture, it may get even more reasonable to buy.
On Fair Value: Things are rarely at fair value. It is something you momentarily enjoy as you careen from one extreme to the other.
On What Prevented a Manhattan Real Estate Implosion: In New York, co-ops prevented Manhattan real estate from imploding. Banks had their heads up their asses, but co-op boards were heroes. They said it's 30% down, we will climb up your ass with a microscope, we want 10 years of tax documents... and if you want a no-doc loan, move to Idaho. Foreclosure rates on co-ops are tiny. If you have to be in Manhattan, with co-op charges and other charges, payments will be about the same as renting.
On Anecdotal Views of the Economy: Depending on who you are and what your circle of friends is, you will experience very different Americas in terms of the economy. If you are a college grad, the unemployment rate is 4.8%. If you are a computer programmer/engineer, the unemployment rate is 0%. The greater the skill set you have, the less employment issues you will see. I always tell people the plural of anecdote is not data. That's why it's so important not to just rely on your own experience.
On Greenspan: Greenspan has to go down in history as the worst Fed Chairman.
On Bankers and Risk: I look at bankers like 5 year olds - if you give a 5 year old a bowl of chocolate bars and say they can have one... As soon as you leave the room they will eat until they are sick. Bankers are no different. As soon as you say, "You're a big boy... we trust you not to blow up the economy and send the world to the precipice..." They are so short-term focused, they will do whatever is necessary to get that bonus, and then will let the world go to hell and let it be someone else's problem. The whole run-up from 2003-2007 was make-believe, based on risk not mattering. If risk doesn't matter, you mash your foot to the carpet and let the speedometer go up to 250. When the driver hits the wall he kills himself. The difference is the driver kills himself, but the bankers take everyone with them.
On Mark Zandi: He's a great guy. Horrific economist. He has been wrong about everything.
On the Unemployment Rate: Keep in mind the way the unemployment rate is calculated. It is a percentage based on the size of the labor pool. When the economy gets better, it causes people outside the labor pool to jump back in. So you have more people hiring but perversely the unemployment rate goes up. It is important not to just look at the headline. In the early years of the Bush administration, for example, the unemployment rate went way down. Either more people were getting jobs, or people were leaving the labor force. It took 47 months to get back to the pre-Bush-recession levels of employment. Now we have not yet experienced the dynamic where people come back into the labor pool. That is yet to come.
To listen to the January 21, 2011 podcast, visit Jonathan Miller's Housing Helix Blog: http://tiny.cc/y3ywdw
http://www.capitalismwithoutfailure.com/2011/10/ritholtz-interview-with-jonathan-miller.html
The Answer Isn't Socialism; It's Capitalism That Better Spreads the Benefits of the Productivity Revolution
Robert Reich
Francois Hollande's victory doesn't and shouldn't mean a movement toward socialism in Europe or elsewhere. Socialism isn't the answer to the basic problem haunting all rich nations.
The answer is to reform capitalism. The world's productivity revolution is outpacing the political will of rich societies to fairly distribute its benefits. The result is widening inequality coupled with slow growth and stubbornly high unemployment.
In the United States, almost all the gains from productivity growth have been going to the top 1 percent, and the percent of the working-age population with jobs is now lower than it's been in more than thirty years (before the vast majority of women moved into paid work).
Inequality is also growing in Europe, along with chronic joblessness. Europe is finding it can no longer afford generous safety nets to catch everyone who has fallen out of the working economy.
Consumers in China are gaining ground but consumption continues to shrink as a share of China's increasingly productive economy, while inequality in China is soaring. China's wealthy elites are emulating the most conspicuous consumption of the rich in the West.
At the heart of the productivity revolution are the computers, software, and the Internet that have found their way into the production of almost everything a modern economy creates. Factory workers are being replaced by computerized machine tools and robotics; office workers, by software applications; professionals, by ever more specialized apps; communications and transportation workers, by the Internet.
Some work continues to be outsourced abroad to very low-wage workers in developing nations but this is not the major cause of the present trend. This work now comprises such a tiny fraction of the costs of production that it's becoming cheaper for companies to do more of it at home with computers and software, and even bring back some of it ("in-source") from abroad.
Consumers in rich nations are reaping some of the benefits of the productivity revolution in the form of lower prices or more value for the money -- consider the cost of color TVs, international phone calls, or cross-country flights compared to what they were before.
But most of the gains are going to the shareholders who own the companies, and to the relatively small number of very talented (or very lucky and well-connected) managers, engineers, designers, and legal or financial specialists on whom the companies depend for strategic decisions about what to produce and how.
Increasingly, via stock options and bonuses, the owners and the "talent" are one and the same. While many other people indirectly own shares of stock through their pensions and 401-K plans, 90 percent of the value of all financial assets in the U.S. belongs to the richest 10 percent of the American population.
Meanwhile, a large number of low-paid service workers sell personalized comfort and attention -- something software can't do -- in the retail, restaurant, hotel, and hospital sectors (most U.S. job growth since 2009 has occurred here.) Others -- temps, contract workers, the under- and partially-employed, fill in where they can. A growing number are not working.
The problem is not that the productivity revolution has caused unemployment or under-employment. The problem is its fruits haven't been widely shared. Less work isn't a bad thing. Most people prefer leisure. A productivity revolution such as we are experiencing should enable people to spend less time at work and have more time to do whatever they'd rather do.
The problem comes in the distribution of the benefits of the productivity revolution. A large portion of the population no longer earns the money it needs to live nearly as well as the productivity revolution would otherwise allow. It can't afford the "leisure" its now experiencing involuntarily.
Not only is this a problem for them; it's also a problem for the overall economy. It means that a growing portion of the population lacks the purchasing power to keep the economy going. In the United States, consumers account for 70 percent of economic activity. If they as a whole cannot afford to buy all the goods and services the productivity revolution is generating, the economy becomes stymied. Growth is anemic; unemployment remains high.
That's why "supply-side" tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy are perverse. Corporations and the rich don't need more tax cuts; they're swimming in money as it is. The reason they don't invest in additional productive capacity and hire more people is they don't see a sufficient market for the added goods and services, which means an inadequate return on such investment.
But more Keynesian stimulus won't help solve the more fundamental problem. Although added government spending has gone some way toward filling the gap in demand caused by consumers whose jobs and incomes are disappearing, it can't be a permanent solution. Even if the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes, deficits would soon get out of control. Additional public investments in infrastructure and basic research and development can make the economy more productive - but more productivity doesn't necessarily help if a growing portion of the population can't absorb it.
What to do? Learn from our own history.
The last great surge in productivity occurred between 1870 and 1928, when the technologies of the first industrial revolution were combined with steam power and electricity, mass produced in giant companies enjoying vast economies of scale, and supplied and distributed over a widening system of rails. That ended abruptly in the Great Crash of 1929, when income and wealth had become so concentrated at the top (the owners and financiers of these vast combines) that most people couldn't pay for all these new products and services without going deeply and hopelessly into debt -- resulting in a bubble that loudly and inevitably popped.
If that sounds familiar, it should. A similar thing happened between 1980 and 2007, when productivity revolution of computers, software, and, eventually, the Internet spawned a new economy along with great fortunes. (It's not coincidental that 1928 and 2007 mark the two peaks of income concentration in America over the last hundred years, in which the top 1 percent raked in over 23 percent of total income.)
But here's the big difference. During the Depression decade of the 1930s, the nation reorganized itself so that the gains from growth were far more broadly distributed. The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 recognized unions' rights to collectively bargain, and imposed a duty on employers to bargain in good faith. By the 1950s, a third of all workers in the United States were unionized, giving them the power to demand some of the gains from growth. Meanwhile, Social Security, unemployment insurance, and worker's compensation spread a broad safety net. The forty-hour workweek with time-and-a-half for overtime also helped share the work and spread the gains, as did a minimum wage. In 1965, Medicare and Medicaid broadened access to health care. And a progressive income tax, reaching well over 70 percent on the highest incomes, also helped ensure that the gains were spread fairly.
This time, though, the nation has taken no similar steps. Quite the contrary: A resurgent right insists on even more tax breaks for corporations and the rich, massive cuts in public spending that will destroy what's left of our safety nets, including Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, fewer rights for organized labor, more deregulation of labor markets, and a lower (or no) minimum wage.
This is, quite simply, nuts.
And this is why a second Obama administration, should there be one, must focus its attention on more broadly distributing the gains from growth. This doesn't mean "redistributing" from rich to poor, as in a zero-sum game. To the contrary, the rich will do far better with a smaller share of a robust, growing economy than they're doing with a large share of an economy that's barely moving forward.
This will require real tax reform -- not just a "Buffett" minimal tax but substantially higher marginal rates and more brackets at the top, with a capital gains rate matching the income-tax rate. It also means a larger Earned Income Tax Credit, whose benefits extend high into the middle class. That will enable many Americans to move to a 35-hour workweek without losing ground -- thereby making room for more jobs.
It means Medicare for all rather than an absurdly-costly system that relies on private for-profit insurers and providers.
It will require limiting executive salaries and empowering workers to get a larger share of corporate profits. The Employee Free Choice Act should be an explicit part of the second-term agenda.
It will require strict limits on the voracious, irresponsible behavior of Wall Street, from which we've all suffered. The Glass-Steagall Act must be resurrected (the so-called Volcker Rule is more ridden with holes than cheese), and the big banks broken up.
And it will necessitate a public educational system - including early child education - second to none, and available to all our young people.
We don't need socialism. We need a capitalism that works for the vast majority. The productivity revolution should be making our lives better -- not poorer and more insecure. And it will do that when we have the political will to spread its benefits.
Obama betrays the left; cheers continued expansion of drug war, criminalization of plant-based medicine
http://www.naturalnews.com/035584_Obama_War_on_Drugs_prohibition.html
If you happen to need even more evidence that President Obama has gutted his campaign promises and betrayed not only the left but also African Americans who enthusiastically supported his election, he has just gone public with his support for the continued war on drugs. Keeping marijuana criminalized, it seems -- and keeping more African Americans in prison -- is a top priority for the Obama administration.
This means Obama supports the midnight DEA raids on our citizenry; the filling of prisons with small-time pot smokers; the disproportionately punitive sentences handed down to black men and women across America who aren't really criminals at all... they merely suffer from a chemical addiction that would more rightly be considered a medical issue.
Nearly every country in Latin America has now openly and publicize recognized that the so-called "war on drugs" is a complete and total failure. But Obama thinks it's just great! Fill the prisons! Prosecute more blacks! Buy more guns and night vision gear for the DEA! That's what Obama's America stands for, it seems.
"I personally and my administration's position is that legalization is not the answer," Obama said just hours before the meeting of Latin American leaders at the Convention Centre in Cartagena, Colombia, for the Americas Summit (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17716926). Meanwhile, Obama's top Secret Service agents and military commanders were banging Colombian whores in the background, then refusing to pay them their $47 prostitution fee. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035580_Secret_Service_Colombia_prostitutes...) Obama had "no comment" on that particular issue.
Let's get real about all this. Marijuana prohibition simply doesn't work. At least not for reducing crime and drug addiction. Anyone who thinks prohibition works is completely delusional. But it does work for certain special interests. What are those special interests, anyway?
Who BENEFITS from the continued criminalization of marijuana?
If you really want to know why prohibition remains in place with marijuana, it's simple to find out why. Just ask yourself "Who benefits?"
• The DEA. Without a drug "problem," the DEA won't get hundreds of millions of dollars worth of increases in operating budgets from the federal purse strings. If drugs were decriminalized, the DEA would have to be sharply downsized (which would be a great thing for liberty and safety but a terrible thing for the DEA honchos).
• Private prisons. Thanks to illegal agreements between prison operators and state governments, prisons can put prisoners to work at slave labor wages -- just a few cents an hour -- manufacturing goods that the corporate prison owners sell for pure profit. If you thought the Nike sweatshops in Asia were bad, go visit a prison in the USA some time and watch the slave labor taking place right here at home.
• Local police. The "drug war" is the excuse that local police departments use to receive more grant money for weapons, assault gear and now even armored assault vehicles to be used against the citizens. Without the drug war excuse, all this grant money disappears and these cops have to go back to actually serving the community instead of bashing in doors like a bunch of cocaine cowboys.
• The government drug runners! It's now a well-known fact that the ATF, DEA and other government agencies are all heavily involved in running drugs across America. Just Google any of these terms if you want to check it out for yourself. The ATF is even engaged in money laundering through the globalist banks. This is why government crackdowns on drugs are highly selectively -- drug raids are really just a way to eliminate the competition so that the biggest drug dealer of all -- the government itself -- can continue to rake in the maximum profits. Legalizing drugs would obviously cause street prices to collapse, sucking all the profits out of the government-run drug business.
• Local District Attorneys and prosecutors. Without the drug war to give them a juicy field of easy targets to prosecute, their careers would take a huge hit. It's so much harder to arrest real criminals than to go after pot smokers and raw milk farmers, isn't it? Gee, imagine the difficulty of actually fighting REAL crime for a change?
• Big Government. The entire government benefits from the continued criminalization of drugs. For starters, it establishes the outrageous precedent that government can outlaw a native plant -- even a plant that has grown wild across North America for hundreds of years. This alone is an outrageous encroachment on fundamental human freedom. Beyond that, the government can always point to "drug violence" as another excuse to squash our freedoms and put in place a tyrannical police state. It's all "for your own good," of course. Isn't it always?
• Big Pharma and the hospital industry. Because recreational drugs are illegal, they're often cut with dangerous chemicals that cause liver damage and kidney damage. This results in yet more repeat business for hospitals and the drug industry. If street drugs were legalized, they would be standardized and regulated, and adulteration of those products would be extremely rare. They would be safer to use, in other words, which is exactly what the pharmaceutical industry is dead set against. They only make money when people are damaged or sick from using street drugs concocted in somebody's trailer.
Who LOSES from the drug war? You!
So we've covered the beneficiaries of the drug war, but who loses from it? You do, of course: Your liberties, freedoms, tax dollars and personal safety are all threatened by the existence of the war on drugs. Decriminalizing and regulating these drugs would have an enormously positive impact on you and your life.
If drugs were decriminalized, here's what would happen:
• Drug gangs would vanish as their source of revenues (illegal drugs at black market prices) dry up.
• Drug-related crime would sharply fall.
• State revenues would skyrocket from the regulated sale of legalized marijuana.
• The corrupt prison industry would collapse to perhaps only 25% of its current size.
• Your personal safety and security would be greatly enhanced due to the lack of drug violence, shootings, home invasions and more.
• Mexican drug gangs would lose their power base, resulting in a sharp drop in crime along the border.
• Former "criminal" pot smokers would once again become taxpaying members of the workforce, contributing to the financial upkeep of society rather than draining it as prisoners.
• The happiness index across society would sharply rise.
Even the Red Cross says decriminalize marijuana
It's all pure economics, my friends. Cause and effect. Legalize recreational drugs and you end the violence, the crime, the prison system overload and the entire underground market for the stuff.
It's all so obvious that even the Red Cross has called for decriminalization (http://copssaylegalize.blogspot.com/2012/03/red-cross-calls-for-drug....).
At the same time, countless members of the FBI, DEA and active-duty police organizations are also openly calling for decriminalization (http://www.leap.cc/).
The rational argument for ending prohibition is further detailed at www.Norml.org
There are no rational reasons for keeping marijuana criminalized. There are only political reasons for doing so. That's why Obama continues to support the irrational war on drugs -- because it's a political issue.
Obama, the betrayer of the political left
Obama, of course, is a teleprompter-reading puppet of the global elite. He does what they tell him to do, and right now they're telling him to keep pushing Drug War propaganda because it's a highly effective way to expand the police state and keep people living in fear while denying them access to plant-based medicine.
Obama, it turns out, has betrayed the left so many times I can hardly keep count: He supports the GMO industry, he signed the NDAA which expands secret arrests and secret Gitmo-style prisons, he's an opponent of farm and food freedom (http://www.naturalnews.com/035301_Obama_executive_orders_food_supply....) and he has proven himself to be nothing more than a big business operative who defends the status quo while preaching "hope and change" that he never delivers.
Obama has assaulted free speech, due process (http://www.naturalnews.com/034537_NDAA_Bill_of_Rights_Obama.html), medical freedom and parental rights. In doing so, he has betrayed many of the top priorities of the very people who once put him into office.
He wants to keep marijuana criminalized because that's what the police state fascist system of corporate control wants.
Of course, this doesn't mean the alternatives we're given are going to be any better. This is not some pitch for Romney, for God's sake. That guy is just as much of a corporate sellout as Obama (and Bush before him). Elections are created to present the illusion that the People have a choice when, in reality, all they're voting for is which color of puppet they want to see on television while we're all being imprisoned, exploited, enslaved and oppressed by a growing fascist state.
Care to guess which candidate would have decriminalized marijuana from the get-go? His name is Ron Paul, and the ideas of freedom and liberty that he espouses are the real answer for the future of our nation. No matter who shows up in the ballot box this November, Ron Paul is my President, because he's the only candidate who is deeply committed to legalizing freedom in America.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035584_Obama_War_on_Drugs_prohibition.html#ixzz1u8d10V3q
Congress Revolts On Obama Plan That Would Ban 'Buy American'
By Zach Carter
Posted: 05/3/2012 4:18 pm
WASHINGTON -- A group of 68 House Democrats and one Republican sent a letter to President Barack Obama on Thursday urging him to reconsider an element of the controversial free trade agreement currently being negotiated by the administration. If approved in its current form, the pact would effectively ban "Buy American" policies in government contracting.
Although the deal, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, has received relatively little media attention in the United States, it has sparked international friction among consumer groups and environmental activists who worry that terms demanded by the Obama administration will eliminate important public protections. Domestically, however, the deal's primary source of political tension is from a portion that could ban "Buy American" provisions -- a restriction that opponents emphasize would crimp U.S. jobs. (my bolding for emphasis)
Since the 1930s, the American government has offered preferential treatment to American producers in the awarding of federal contracts. If a domestic producer offers the government a more expensive bid than a foreign producer, it can still be awarded the contract under certain circumstances, but more recent free trade agreements have granted other nations the same negotiating status as domestic firms. The Obama administration is currently pushing to grant the several nations involved in the Trans-Pacific deal the same privileged status, according to the Thursday letter.
"We do not believe this approach is in the best interests of U.S. manufacturers and U.S. workers," the letter reads. "Of special concern is the prospect that firms established in TPP countries, such as the many Chinese firms in Vietnam, could obtain waivers from Buy American policies. This could result in large sums of U.S. tax dollars being invested to strengthen other countries' manufacturing sectors, rather than our own."
The letter from members of Congress to the administration marks a rare glimpse inside the typically secretive trade negotiation process. The terms of the free trade negotiations, including the Trans-Pacific pact, are withheld from the public, even though the governments of all the countries involved have access to them. Many major U.S. corporations have access to the draft negotiation texts through their positions on advisory boards to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the White House agency which negotiates trade deals.
"Buy American" provisions do not help all U.S. firms equally. Corporations headquartered in the U.S. that offshore most of their manufacturing operations do not benefit from the system designed to promote domestic production in the way that companies with actual U.S. manufacturing operations do.
Public interest groups also worry that the same trade policies that could ban Buy American breaks will also prevent the U.S. government from making environmental or public health stipulations in federal contracts. The current language barring preferential treatment for American goods is so broad as to limit government specifications on goods to purely functional aspects. When contracting for paper, for instance, the government could specify that it wants to buy paper of the dimensions 8.5" by 11" -- but it could not require that the paper be composed of recycled materials or use non-toxic dye.
The potential "Buy American" ban also conflicts with a top theme of Obama's re-election campaign -- boosting U.S. manufacturing. In February, the administration proposed fixing a tax loophole that has been exploited by oil and gas companies in order to provide breaks to domestic manufacturers. The tax proposal is not expected to gain any traction during an election year, however, although prospects for the trade agreement are much stronger. Last year, Congress approved three free trade deals initially negotiated by President George W. Bush that Obama had decided to support.
The White House was not immediately available for comment.
USTR spokeswoman Carol Guthrie told HuffPost that the administration is seeking "fair, transparent, predictable and non-discriminatory" contracting rules.
"The U.S. aim in covering government procurement under the TPP is to provide new market opportunities for U.S. goods, services, and suppliers," Guthrie said.
Read the full letter to Obama at: http://tiny.cc/x0cwdw
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/03/obama-trade-congress-buy-american_n_1475277.html?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl5%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D157905
along with that....
after you follow the link, on the right side of the page click "Sunday".....and, the newspaper's front page will come up.....
the headline reads: "voting machines: full of defects, easily hacked....
http://www2.palmbeachpost.com/archives/
I know more about it than you may think... A large part of my business is dealing with health insurance. I Insure 17 of my employees And yes it is broken but the government is NEVER the answer when it comes to commerce IMO.... Just look at the Cost of Obamacare without one single person receiving benefits yet... The GAO just doubled its estimates to close to 2 trillion dollars..
The Advance of a One World Government and a North American Union
Under the guise of filling us all in on what his White House department is doing to "clear away red tape", the evil bastard is really informing his followers about the advancements in one world government and a North American union:
http://www.blacklistednews.com/index.php
The 86 million invisible unemployed
http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_86_million_invisible_unemployed/19301/0/38/38/Y/M.html
EPA’s Plans for Implementing UN’s Agenda 21
One of the most successful grassroots campaigns during the past year has been the Stop Agenda 21 movement both at the local level and state level. However, we haven’t heard as much about Agenda 21 implementation at the national level.
http://thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/11224-epas-plans-for-implementing-uns-agenda-21
Shoot-to-Kill Order to Enforce No-Fly Zone During NATO Summit
The government is informing small plane pilots that if they enter the no-fly zone during the summit, they might be shot down.?
http://blacklistednews.visibli.com/share/DjL7pR
Human genes engineered into experimental GMO rice being grown in Kansas
http://dprogram.net/2012/05/02/human-genes-engineered-into-experimental-gmo-rice-being-grown-in-kansas/
Police Drugging Occupy Protesters
http://dprogram.net/2012/05/03/police-drugging-occupy-protesters/
No-Fly Zone To Be Enforced By Shoot-To-Kill Order During NATO Summit
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/05/02/no-fly-zone-to-be-enforced-by-shoot-to-kill-order-during-nato-summit/
Plans to keep residents and dignitaries safe during the NATO Summit include a no-fly zone, with a shoot-to-kill warning for those who break the ban.
As CBS 2’s Susanna Song reports, the government is informing small plane pilots that if they enter the no-fly zone during the summit, they might be shot down.
This is no joke. It will be enforced for May 19 to May 21.
The flight advisory was issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. The advisory bans non-commercial aircraft from flying within 10 nautical miles of downtown Chicago at altitudes below 18,000 feet.
A nautical mile is about one minute of arc of latitude along any meridian. It amounts to 1,852 meters, or about 1.15078 standard miles.
In addition, the restrictions include an outer ring from 10 to 30 miles around downtown Chicago. Only planes arriving or departing at local airports will be allowed within that outer ring. Flight training, seaplanes, and other types of flights will be banned from the outer ring.
Any plane violating the flight restrictions will be intercepted.
“The United States Government may use deadly force against the airborne aircraft, if it is determined that the aircraft poses an imminent security threat,” the advisory says. “Be advised that noncompliance with the published (notice to airmen) may result in the use of force.”
The advisory says lesser violations by airmen might result in civil penalties and the suspension of airmen certificates, as well as criminal charges.
As CBS 2 Chief Correspondent Jay Levine reports, what those restrictions mean is, for three days, there will be a virtual no-fly zone extending from Lake County, Indiana, to Lake County, Illinois. The zone will also stretch well into DuPage County and over Lake Michigan.
“It’s an easy three days off of work,” said Chopper 2 HD pilot Jeff Fair. He’s familiar with all the airports that will be affected by the temporary flight restrictions.
He said the restrictions will essentially shut down general aviation – which refers to all flights that are not military, scheduled airline, or scheduled cargo flights.
“There will be no (general aviation) activity within those three days,” Fair said.
The only aircraft allowed to fly within the restricted area include regularly-scheduled commercial passenger and cargo carriers, police, and military planes supporting the Secret Service.
This no-fly zone is not new. The 30-mile no-fly zone is enforced for all presidential visits. Similar flight restrictions were also in place immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks because of terrorism-related concerns.
The airports affected by the flight restrictions range from big ones like O’Hare and Midway international airports, to other multi-runway fields – like Lewis Airport in Lockport – as well as small airstrips like the one in Bolingbrook.
At least a dozen airfields fall within the restricted area.
Meantime, when President Barack Obama comes to Chicago for the summit, he’ll stay at the Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers along the Chicago River.
CBS 2's Mike Parker reports NATO host committee officials held a briefing for residents of the surrounding Streeterville neighborhood on Wednesday, warning them that traffic in the area will be an unholy mess during the summit.
There will be tight security around the Sheraton and other downtown hotels where NATO dignitaries are staying, and there will be dozens of motorcades taking the delegates to and from the summit at McCormick Place.
More than 200 Streeterville residents got that word at a meeting Wednesday night with NATO summit planners.
Arnette Henintze, a former Secret Service agent who has been consulting with the NATO host committee, said the bottom line is 60 heads of state will be staying at downtown area hotels.
That means street traffic will likely be a nightmare at times, especially when NATO delegates and their motorcades are on the roads.
The tight security measures will have a negative impact on people living, working, shopping, and visiting downtown.
“You will see three- and four-car motorcades. You’ll see 12- and 15-car motorcades. And if you see the president’s – and a couple of other heads of state’s – you’re going to see 20- and 30-car motorcades,” Heintze told local residents.
Michael Jackson, the district manager of CD One Price Cleaners, works at Michigan Avenue and Cermak Road, one block outside the security perimeter that will be established around McCormick Place during the summit.
He welcomes the extra security, but hopes his customers won’t feel pressured to stay away.
“I believe that Chicago has shown a reputation of handling things correctly, and I don’t think that’s going to be any different in this particular case either,” Jackson said, adding that he was “absolutely” confident in leaders and officials in keeping everyone safe.
Codex Alimentarius: An Introduction to Soft Kill Eugenics
http://dprogram.net/2012/05/03/codex-alimentarius-an-introduction-to-soft-kill-eugenics/
New Obama Executive Order Pushes Us Closer To A North American Union
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/new-obama-executive-order-pushes-us-closer-to-a-north-american-union-and-a-one-world-economic-system
Lost Japanese Parakeet Reunited With Owner After It Tells Police Its Address
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/47280372#47280372
Should Mitt Romney worry about Ron Paul?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2012/0505/Should-Mitt-Romney-worry-about-Ron-Paul
Obama Mentor Calls for Re-Education Camps
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-mentor-calls-for-re-education-camps.html
Cadillac XTS Built In China
GM to build 2013 Cadillac XTS in China this year
By Melissa Burden
The Detroit News
April 23, 2012
General Motors Co. announced Monday at the Beijing auto show that it will begin building its all-new 2013 Cadillac XTS sedan in China this year and later will bring the ELR luxury electric coupe in the country.
The production announcements mark a significant step in GM's push for Cadillac to become a global brand.
"Introducing the XTS is part of our strategy of adding one new model per year to our Cadillac lineup in China through 2016 to address the needs of luxury car buyers nationwide," GM Chairman and CEO Dan Akerson said in a statement.
ELR technology details, production location and its Chinese introduction date will be announced at a later time, according to a news release. The XTS will be available in the fourth quarter in China and will be manufactured by Shanghai General Motors, a partnership between GM and SAIC Motor Corp.
The announcement follows a report earlier this month in The Detroit News that GM was expected to announce at the auto show that it would build XTS in China later this year. Joel Ewanick, GM's global chief marketing officer, also told The News that the all-new Cadillac ATS, a compact luxury sedan, and the popular midsize CTS sedan will eventually be built in China.
Ewanick said GM will build its brand in China and then Europe to grow the brand over the next decade.
Currently, only the Cadillac SLS, an extended length luxury sedan, is built in China. Cadillac imports the CTS, SRX crossover and Escalade from plants in the United States and Mexico.
GM began selling Cadillacs in China in 2004. Sales have grown from essentially zero at the end of 2007 and early 2008 to 30,000 last year. Its 2011 sales were up 72.8 percent from 2010.
Cadillac also expects to double its dealer network of about 50 in China in the next year or two, Cadillac spokesman David Caldwell previously has told The News.
mburden@detnews.com
(313) 222-2319
From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120423/AUTO0103/204230371#ixzz1u7TqBkiG
****************
Progressiveness Must Die Today,
In Order That We May Be Free Tomorrow
OMG/OBAMA MUST GO - NOBAMA IN 2012!!!
Racism? That's Zero's number one weapon; since he has taken office race relations in this country have slipped back at least fifty years. He’s reaping what he sowed.
He's Counting On It!
****************
Progressiveness Must Die Today,
In Order That We May Be Free Tomorrow
OMG/OBAMA MUST GO - NOBAMA IN 2012!!!
This board is dedicated to it's founder and my good friend ONEBGG
who was a Patriot and was a Good Friend to Many.
These words fit him best:
Good friends are like gold:
Rare, Reliable, Beautiful and Valuable.
signed....T
Declaration Of Independence
This is the Simply Government Board (GOV); No discussion of other boards are allowed here - all posts doing so will be deleted.
Rules Of The Board:
If it's a Copy & Paste, an active link is required, if it's an email, run it through an Internet search for a link; there is usually a reason it's an email, many are false.
When I ask for link, I'm asking for the original link; links to another board are considered spam and are not allowed here.
If a poster here has a moderator on PM Block you will not be allowed to post here.
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |