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.
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.
So what pattern of manipulation are you seeing? Oil price vs. fed interest rate vs. US dollar as reserve currency vs. inflation.... what is the plan? LOL... there is always a plan... I see a sucker trap... buy precious metals on dip... IMO.
Crude Oil Futures Decline for Fourth Day as Dollar Strengthens
Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A
By Rachel Graham
Dec. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil dropped for a fourth day, trading near $75 a barrel as the dollar gained amid speculation the U.S. Federal Reserve may start raising interest rates.
Oil closed at its lowest since Oct. 14 last week after a better-than-forecast U.S. jobless report bolstered the dollar. Commodities including gold and crude oil typically weaken when the dollar gains in value. Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Ali al- Naimi said the price near $75 a barrel is “perfect.”
“A stronger dollar is automatically bad for commodities and can put oil under pressure,” Hannes Loacker, an analyst at Raiffeisen Zentralbank Oesterreich, said by phone from Vienna. “There are fears that interest rates might go up, this is helping the dollar.”
Crude oil for January delivery fell as much as 91 cents, or 1.2 percent, to $74.56 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract was at $75.05 a barrel at 10:38 a.m. London time.
The dollar strengthened to $1.4756 per euro, the strongest level since Nov. 4, from $1.4858 in New York last week.
“We may see some weakness in the short term,” said Angelos Damaskos, who manages the Junior Oils Trust. “The oil price has been pushed up by financial demand. A lot of investors have been buying against the dollar.”
In the mid-term, “I am confident demand will exceed supply and prices will push higher,” Damaskos said, citing rising demand in India and China.
China Imports
Chinese oil import data expected later this week may help buoy the market, said Paul Harris, head of natural resources risk management at the Bank of Ireland in Dublin.
Last month China’s oil imports rose to the second-highest level on record, as growing industrial output spurred fuel demand. Those data helped push the crude market higher. China is the world’s second-largest energy user after the U.S.
“A consistent series of reports in the U.S. and China will form a base for oil to appreciate,” Harris said by phone today. “It will be a grind higher,” he said, forecasting Brent prices of between $80 and $85 a barrel at the beginning of 2010.
Brent crude oil for January delivery on the London-based ICE Futures Europe exchange fell as much as 74 cents, or 1 percent, to $76.78 a barrel. The contract traded at $77.16 a barrel at 10:40 a.m. in London.
Crude oil prices are in “the right range” and there is no need to reduce inventories, Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Ali al- Naimi said on Dec. 5.
“Inventories are coming down, the price is perfect, and all investors, consumers, producers -- they’re all very happy,” al-Naimi said in Cairo, where Arab oil ministers were holding an annual meeting. Saudi Arabia is the largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.
To contact the reporter on this story: Rachel Graham in London rgraham13@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: December 7, 2009 06:25 EST
Not much more to say.... only more proof that the printing for entitlement spending is going to destroy the dollar in the end..... God help us all. Stay strong P.C.
Just started a batch of kielbasa, the smoker will be in full effect this winter... gotta get the jerky ready. It could be a long cold one. Obama will openly discuss "stimulus 2" this week... 2010 will be the tipping point.... then America loses all hope, and things will really change for many years to come.
Apollo Moon Rocks Lost in Space? No, Lost on Earth
Nearly 270 moon rocks were given to foreign countries by the U.S. during the Nixon administration
*
* Comment
Posted: September 14, 2009
TOBY STERLING,
Associated Press Writer
AMSTERDAM—Attention, countries of the world: Do you know where your moon rocks are?
The discovery of a fake moon rock in the Netherlands' national museum should be a wake-up call for more than 130 countries that received gifts of lunar rubble from both the Apollo 11 flight in 1969 and Apollo 17 three years later.
Click here to find out more!
Nearly 270 rocks scooped up by U.S. astronauts were given to foreign countries by the Nixon administration. But according to experts and research by The Associated Press, the whereabouts of some of the small rocks are unknown.
"There is no doubt in my mind that many moon rocks are lost or stolen and now sitting in private collections," said Joseph Gutheinz, a University of Arizona instructor and former U.S. government investigator who has made a project of tracking down the lunar treasures.
The Rijksmuseum, more noted as a repository for 17th century Dutch paintings, announced last month it had had its plum-sized "moon" rock tested, only to discover it was a piece of petrified wood, possibly from Arizona. The museum said it inherited the rock from the estate of a former prime minister.
The real Dutch moon rocks are in a natural history museum. But the misidentification raised questions about how well countries have safeguarded their presents from Washington.
Genuine moon rocks, while worthless in mineral terms, can fetch six-figure sums from black-market collectors.
Of 135 rocks from the Apollo 17 mission given away to nations or their leaders, only about 25 have been located by CollectSpace.com, a Web site for space history buffs that has long attempted to compile a list.
That should not be taken to mean the others are lost—just that the records kept at the time are far from complete.
The AP reviewed declassified correspondence between the State Department and U.S. embassies in 1973 and was able to locate ten additional Apollo 17 rocks—in Switzerland, Belgium, Italy, Barbados, France, Poland, Norway, Costa Rica, Egypt and Nepal.
But the correspondence yielded a meager 30 leads, such as the name of the person who received them or the museum where they were to be initially displayed. Ecuador and Cyprus are among several that said they had never heard of the rocks. Five were handed to African dictators long since dead or deposed.
The outlook for tracking the estimated 134 Apollo 11 rocks is even bleaker. The locations of fewer than a dozen are known.
"NASA turned over the samples to the State Department to distribute," said Jennifer Ross-Nazzal, a NASA historian, in an e-mailed response to questions. "We don't have any records about when and to whom the rocks were given."
"The Office of the Historian does not keep records of what became of the moon rocks, and to my knowledge, there is no one entity that does so," e-mailed Tiffany Hamelin, the State Department historian.
That may seem surprising now, but in the early 1970s, few expected Apollo 17 would be the last mission to the moon. With the passage of time, the rocks' value has skyrocketed.
NASA keeps most of the 382 kilograms (842 lbs) gathered by the Apollo missions locked away, giving small samples to researchers and lending a set of larger rocks for exhibitions.
Apollo 11 gift rocks typically weigh just 0.05 grams, scarcely more than a grain of rice. The Apollo 17 gift rocks weigh about 1.1 grams. Both are encased in plastic globes to protect them and ease viewing.
Each U.S. state got both sets of rocks, and Gutheinz said he and his students have accounted for nearly all the Apollo 17 rocks, though some are in storage and inaccessible. They have only just begun researching Apollo 11 rocks in the states.
In one known legal sale of moon samples, in 1993, moon soil weighing 0.2 grams from an unmanned Russian probe was auctioned at Sotheby's for $442,500.
Gutheinz, the former U.S. investigator, says ignorance about the rocks is an invitation to thieves, and he should know.
In 1998, he was working for the NASA Office of the Inspector General in a sting operation to uncover fake rocks when he was offered the real Apollo 17 rock—the one given to Honduras—for $5 million.
The rock was recovered and eventually returned to Honduras, but not before a fight in Florida District Court that went down in legal annals as "United States vs. One Lucite Ball Containing Lunar Material (One Moon Rock) and One Ten Inch By Fourteen Inch Wooden Plaque."
They will push the market up until the failure/success of healthcare bill and cap in trade... they it dies .... if it hits 11K... shorting it via ETF's like the FAZ may be easier to dip the toe in than trying to time the options IMO.
Elk hunt in Montana in the planning stages... 7 days on horseback, tent, bow.... heaven.
Raw juice of apple, celery, carrot, and ginger does wonders for me. All the venison and vegetables I can eat... venison high in zinc = higher testosterone levels... which all of our society seems to be fearing... real men with real opinions. Men are dangerous.
Plus... tree stand therapy helps immensely. Some weeks I just can't watch what's being done to this country.
i.e. silver, gold, lead in "usable forms" hehe. Water, food, seeds... and most of all.... get lean and mean. Nothing matters if you are not strong and can't run 50 yards without dropping dead.
The inevitably Marxist zoo XV: King George Soros
By Michael Moriarty
web posted August 24, 2009
The "Rainbow Elite" of Tom Wolfe's "Radical Chic" has been a power base ultimately consolidated by the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama volleyball game with the White House.
Had Hillary Clinton won the election in 2008, a Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton ownership of the Oval office would have looked … uh … "fishy" … and we all know how important it is for the bipartisan Progressive Movement to root out anything that looks "fishy".
The sudden arrival of "The One" seems to have saved the Progressive Day and its 100 year-old game plan.
Cartoon by Robert Minor in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in 1911. Karl Marx surrounded by an appreciative audience of Wall Street financiers: John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City Bank and Morgan partner George W. Perkins. Immediately behind Marx is Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.
This 1911 cartoon featuring Karl Marx being fawned upon by Wall Street moguls, this Capitalist/Communist love affair, this agreement to share a totalitarian power over the "Collective" … hmmm … it is all coming true, largely thanks to George Soros and Saul Alinsky.
Alinsky, the Marxist, gave Barack Obama the formula for Revolutionary "Change" that a number of Obama's best friends "can believe in". George Soros, perhaps Obama's best friend, gave the Presidential candidate all the money and influence he would need in order to defeat even "the most influential man in the world", Bill Clinton. Plus, of course, Bill's wife, Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
We're not talking sky's-the-limit poker but end-of-the-universe power games.
The Progressive Club's formula, used by both the Clintons and the Bushes, has never been so fully articulated and boldly put into action than by the Soros/Alinsky prodigy, Barack Obama.
Recently the increasingly Cheshire cat expression upon the face of George Soros and his sphinx-like silence about what is going to happen to the economy – an outcome he is sure of but unwilling to share – well … look at that cartoon again!
Karl Marx's Gang of Capitalists!
Replace the "Perkins" figure with Jeffrey Immelt, the head of General Electric … and therefore ruler of its subsidiary, NBC … and then replace Marx with Barack Obama … and, well, all that's missing are the intellectual and monetary powers above the gathering, the Red-winged angels of Saul Alinsky and George Soros.
The best-laid plans of both King George and George Soros are now facing similar Tea Parties!
Who will come out on top? George Soros or George Washington?
If we pull back the veil from the Progressive Movement, we are obliged to see its totalitarian aims.
The Progressives and their hidden, long-term eugenics strategies, begun by the Supreme Court's revolting opinions in the Buck v Bell and Roe v Wade decisions, are the ultimate products of a turn of the century Liberalism that became infected with the Victorian Francis Galton's dream of a Super Human Race. Fin-de-siècle Vienna and that city's broiling intellectual and artistic explosions captured much of this growing nightmare.
Vienna's cross-breeding of Liberalism with racial supremacy theories, matched by Wall Street's clandestine admiration for Marx's totalitarian grip upon the "intelligentsia" … out of this a wealthy and American Radical Chic created the euphemism of "Progressive".
Hitler's horrific inhumanity in 1940's Europe forced the intellectual supremacists, or "enlightened despots" as Voltaire would have labeled them had he been alive at the time, to go underground. To call themselves Liberal was safe … but it was only half the story.
America's elbow-rubbing with supremacists of any kind created its own secret elite … and that "Radical Chic" is now "Progressive".
George Soros admits to having been partly raised by Nazi's in Hungary. His ability, as a teenager, to somehow accommodate his Jewish roots with his errands for the Third Reich … hmmm … such a genius – and I believe it would take genius to rationalize a genocidal contradiction in terms - such complexity is required in order to succeed simultaneously as a Marxist and the most successful Capitalist in the Free Market. He is renowned for almost "breaking the Bank of England".
If you examine the cartoon one more time, the God of Marxist Capitalism sitting above Wall Street is George Soros.
King George of the Marxist, English-speaking world!!
A recent Hotair blog "tip", based upon a bloomberg.com article, has revealed a … well … uh … gee … rather convenient pair of economic events involving first a George Soros "repositioning" of Brazilian oil stock … and then, surprise/surprise, a $2 billion Obama/taxpayer's loan to Brazil's off-shore drilling plans which, of course, insure a gold rush boom for the same oil company in which Soros had just "repositioned" his shares, an Obama/Soros investment in an offshore drilling practice that Obama has forbidden to Alaska.
"Fishy?"
Naw! It's something that has existed, as the cartoon shows you, since 1911.
Progressive Marxist-Capitalism!!
For readers still trying to figure that oxymoron out, first read Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism. It's the gentleman's introduction to the inevitable snake pits of American Progressivism.
After one hundred years of designing the Progressive, thousand-year plan for the entire human race, what began as a necessarily subtle intrigue has now blossomed into trillion dollar games with American taxpayers' money, plans to federalize the entire American healthcare system and a Progressive lobbyist's zoo that has transformed itself into an environmentalist's blackmail scheme.
The Progressive game plan is based entirely upon a scientific philosophy that has not only removed the human race from any survival priorities but actually reduced it to an "enemies list", concentrated, at least for this seminal moment, upon old people.
Thinking the unthinkable?
Yes, and the Progressives, in their foreign affairs meetings where nothing is or can be "attributable", have been thinking the unthinkable for so long, it no longer seems … to them, at any rate … to be unthinkable.
It is now: "What must be done!"
Sound familiar? ESR
Michael Moriarty is a Golden Globe and Emmy Award-winning actor who starred in the landmark television series Law and Order from 1990 to 1994. His recent film and TV credits include The Yellow Wallpaper, 12 Hours to Live, Santa Baby and Deadly Skies. Contact Michael at rainbowfamily2008@yahoo.com.
7 stories Obama doesn't want told
John F. Harris John F. Harris Mon Nov 30, 5:45 am ET
Presidential politics is about storytelling. Presented with a vivid storyline, voters naturally tend to fit every new event or piece of information into a picture that is already neatly framed in their minds.
No one understands this better than Barack Obama and his team, who won the 2008 election in part because they were better storytellers than the opposition. The pro-Obama narrative featured an almost mystically talented young idealist who stood for change in a disciplined and thoughtful way. This easily outpowered the anti-Obama narrative, featuring an opportunistic Chicago pol with dubious relationships who was more liberal than he was letting on.
A year into his presidency, however, Obama’s gift for controlling his image shows signs of faltering. As Washington returns to work from the Thanksgiving holiday, there are several anti-Obama storylines gaining momentum.
The Obama White House argues that all of these storylines are inaccurate or unfair. In some cases these anti-Obama narratives are fanned by Republicans, in some cases by reporters and commentators.
But they all are serious threats to Obama, if they gain enough currency to become the dominant frame through which people interpret the president’s actions and motives.
Here are seven storylines Obama needs to worry about:
He thinks he’s playing with Monopoly money
Economists and business leaders from across the ideological spectrum were urging the new president on last winter when he signed onto more than a trillion in stimulus spending and bank and auto bailouts during his first weeks in office. Many, though far from all, of these same people now agree that these actions helped avert an even worse financial catastrophe.
Along the way, however, it is clear Obama underestimated the political consequences that flow from the perception that he is a profligate spender. He also misjudged the anger in middle America about bailouts with weak and sporadic public explanations of why he believed they were necessary.
The flight of independents away from Democrats last summer — the trend that recently hammered Democrats in off-year elections in Virginia — coincided with what polls show was alarm among these voters about undisciplined big government and runaway spending. The likely passage of a health care reform package criticized as weak on cost-control will compound the problem.
Obama understands the political peril, and his team is signaling that he will use the 2010 State of the Union address to emphasize fiscal discipline. The political challenge, however, is an even bigger substantive challenge—since the most convincing way to project fiscal discipline would be actually to impose spending reductions that would cramp his own agenda and that of congressional Democrats.
Too much Leonard Nimoy
People used to make fun of Bill Clinton’s misty-eyed, raspy-voiced claims that, “I feel your pain.”
The reality, however, is that Clinton’s dozen years as governor before becoming president really did leave him with a vivid sense of the concrete human dimensions of policy. He did not view programs as abstractions — he viewed them in terms of actual people he knew by name.
Obama, a legislator and law professor, is fluent in describing the nuances of problems. But his intellectuality has contributed to a growing critique that decisions are detached from rock-bottom principles.
Both Maureen Dowd in The New York Times and Joel Achenbach of The Washington Post have likened him to Star Trek’s Mr. Spock.
The Spock imagery has been especially strong during the extended review Obama has undertaken of Afghanistan policy. He’ll announce the results on Tuesday. The speech’s success will be judged not only on the logic of the presentation but on whether Obama communicates in a more visceral way what progress looks like and why it is worth achieving. No soldier wants to take a bullet in the name of nuance.
That’s the Chicago Way
This is a storyline that’s likely taken root more firmly in Washington than around the country. The rap is that his West Wing is dominated by brass-knuckled pols.
It does not help that many West Wing aides seem to relish an image of themselves as shrewd, brass-knuckled political types. In a Washington Post story this month, White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, referring to most of Obama’s team, said, “We are all campaign hacks.”
The problem is that many voters took Obama seriously in 2008 when he talked about wanting to create a more reasoned, non-partisan style of governance in Washington. When Republicans showed scant interest in cooperating with Obama at the start, the Obama West Wing gladly reverted to campaign hack mode.
The examples of Chicago-style politics include their delight in public battles with Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. (There was also a semi-public campaign of leaks aimed at Greg Craig, the White House counsel who fell out of favor.) In private, the Obama team cut an early deal — to the distaste of many congressional Democrats — that gave favorable terms to the pharmaceutical lobby in exchange for their backing his health care plans.
The lesson that many Washington insiders have drawn is that Obama wants to buy off the people he can and bowl over those he can’t. If that perception spreads beyond Washington this will scuff Obama’s brand as a new style of political leader.
He’s a pushover
If you are going to be known as a fighter, you might as well reap the benefits. But some of the same insider circles that are starting to view Obama as a bully are also starting to whisper that he’s a patsy.
It seems a bit contradictory, to be sure. But it’s a perception that began when Obama several times laid down lines — then let people cross them with seeming impunity. Last summer he told Democrats they better not go home for recess until a critical health care vote but they blew him off. He told the Israeli government he wanted a freeze in settlements but no one took him seriously. Even Fox News — which his aides prominently said should not be treated like a real news organization — then got interview time for its White House correspondent.
In truth, most of these episodes do not amount to much. But this unflattering storyline would take a more serious turn if Obama is seen as unable to deliver on his stern warnings in the escalating conflict with Iran over its nuclear program.
He sees America as another pleasant country on the U.N. roll call, somewhere between Albania and Zimbabwe
That line belonged to George H.W. Bush, excoriating Democrat Michael Dukakis in 1988. But it highlights a continuing reality: In presidential politics the safe ground has always been to be an American exceptionalist.
Politicians of both parties have embraced the idea that this country — because of its power and/or the hand of Providence — should be a singular force in the world. It would be hugely unwelcome for Obama if the perception took root that he is comfortable with a relative decline in U.S. influence or position in the world.
On this score, the reviews of Obama’s recent Asia trip were harsh.
His peculiar bow to the emperor of Japan was symbolic. But his lots-of-velvet, not-much-iron approach to China had substantive implications.
On the left, the budding storyline is that Obama has retreated from human rights in the name of cynical realism. On the right, it is that he is more interested in being President of the World than President of the United States, a critique that will be heard more in December as he stops in Oslo to pick up his Nobel Prize and then in Copenhagen for an international summit on curbing greenhouse gases.
President Pelosi
No figure in Barack Obama’s Washington, including Obama, has had more success in advancing his will than the speaker of the House, despite public approval ratings that hover in the range of Dick Cheney’s. With a mix of tough party discipline and shrewd vote-counting, she passed a version of the stimulus bill largely written by congressional Democrats, passed climate legislation, and passed her chamber’s version of health care reform. She and anti-war liberals in her caucus are clearly affecting the White House’s Afghanistan calculations.
The great hazard for Obama is if Republicans or journalists conclude — as some already have — that Pelosi’s achievements are more impressive than Obama’s or come at his expense.
This conclusion seems premature, especially with the final chapter of the health care drama yet to be written.
But it is clear that Obama has allowed the speaker to become more nearly an equal — and far from a subordinate — than many of his predecessors of both parties would have thought wise.
He’s in love with the man in the mirror
No one becomes president without a fair share of what the French call amour propre. Does Obama have more than his share of self-regard?
It’s a common theme of Washington buzz that Obama is over-exposed. He gives interviews on his sports obsessions to ESPN, cracks wise with Leno and Letterman, discusses his fitness with Men’s Health, discusses his marriage in a joint interview with first lady Michelle Obama for The New York Times. A photo the other day caught him leaving the White House clutching a copy of GQ featuring himself.
White House aides say making Obama widely available is the right strategy for communicating with Americans in an era of highly fragmented media.
But, as the novelty of a new president wears off, the Obama cult of personality risks coming off as mere vanity unless it is harnessed to tangible achievements.
That is why the next couple of months — with health care and Afghanistan jostling at center stage — will likely carry a long echo. Obama’s best hope of nipping bad storylines is to replace them with good ones rooted in public perceptions of his effectiveness.
Well... Dubai called for "a moratorium on debt repayment." $88 BILLION they want to write off.
Translated, that means, "we can't pay our friggin bills."
The Fed used the $500 BILLION they printed and handed out without Congressional approval to the world central banks to cover it because they knew it was coming.
http://dailybail.com/home/alan-grayson-which-foreign-banks-got-the-feds-500-billion-be.html
Congress wants to print more money for "cash for consumer appliances".....
another week... more insanity... a weaker dollar.
Another great article.... climate legislation has killed our dollar...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_climate_reports_they_lie.html
'Cap and Trade Is Dead' - The recently disclosed emails and documents from University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit compromise the integrity of the United Nations' global warming reports.
So declares Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, taking a few minutes away from a Thanksgiving retreat with his family. "Ninety-five percent of the nails were in the coffin prior to this week. Now they are all in."
If any politician might be qualified to offer last rites, it would be Mr. Inhofe. The top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee has spent the past decade in the thick of Washington's climate fight. He's seen the back of three cap-and-trade bills, rode herd on an overweening Environmental Protection Agency, and steadfastly insisted that global researchers were "cooking" the science behind man-made global warming.
This week he's looking prescient. The more than 3,000 emails and documents from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) that have found their way to the Internet have blown the lid off the "science" of manmade global warming. CRU is a nerve center for many of those researchers who have authored the United Nations' global warming reports and fueled the political movement to regulate carbon.
Their correspondence show a claque of scientists massaging data to make it fit their theories, squelching scientists who disagreed, punishing academic journals that didn't toe the apocalyptic line, and hiding their work from public view. "It's no use pretending that this isn't a major blow," glumly wrote George Monbiot, a U.K. writer who has been among the fiercest warming alarmists. The documents "could scarcely be more damaging." And that's from a believer. (Kimberley A Strassel, WSJ)
Ed Begley, Jr. Loses Control Over ClimateGate
Ed Begley, Jr., the enviro-wacko actor gets into a shoutfest and can't stop pointing his finger at Stuart Varney of Fox News: "You're spewing your nonsense again ..." says Begley. We're talking about Climategate, the recent discovery of e-mails by global warming 'scientists' that suggest a cover up..thousands of e-mails and documents (verified by the New York Times) have been released showing scientists trying to cover up the recent decline in temperatures and 'trick' the public.
Video Owned By Fox News Network
Key Revelation: "we are no where close to knowing where energy is going"
Click here to see what we think is perhaps the single most significant scientific revelation yet in, uh, what are we calling it -- Warmergate, maybe? "Climategate" appears to be the preferred term.
On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:
Hi Tom
How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where close to knowing where energy is going or whether clouds are changing to make the planet brighter. We are not close to balancing the energy budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty!
Kevin
Seems very explicit, doesn't he? What possible context could change its meaning? Note, too, the recent date, long after the frequently cited Kiehl & Trenberth (1997) and subsequent revision (2008). This from the guy who claims we have a net surface absorption of 0.9 Wm2.
Why is this so important? It really invalidates climate models since they are allegedly driven by the global energy budget and how energy moves through the system. If we can not account for what is happening in the climate system we can not model it nor is there any basis for climate model "projections", "predictions" or whatever you want to call the fairytales released by Gore, the IPCC or anyone else.
Peruse the global warming e-mail lies here:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php
Download and disseminate the e-mails and data of the lying global warming scientists.... whole download at the link... WINRAR document of over 150 MB of info... all the e-mails admitting to lies! All the data that they discussed "altering" to "trick" the public.
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=75J4XO4T
I think silver has a better future multiple from here before gold..... check the gold/silver ratio.
I will not work 12 hours a day, keep 30 employees, and pay out 80% of my income to the Government so "they can do good things" with my money.... I'm done working for everyone else... call me selfish... I've paid 10's of millions in personal and business tax in the last 20 years.... I'm done. I own everything I need... not interested in killing myself for the things that I WANT..... many other American employers will chose the same path... our economy is finished under these Fabian Socialists.
This government drops bombs each week.... the economy and the dollar is going to fail.... the math is insurmountable. We have a group of people not fit to walk my dog making critical policy changes right now. They seem to be crashing this bus on purpose, ignoring the public at large... and we can't stop them.
Ron Paul’s Amendment To Audit The Federal Reserve Approved
Posted By admin On November 19, 2009 @ 6:21 pm In Washington Politics | 230 Comments
StreetInsider
November 19, 2009
A key House panel approved the Paul-Grayson Amendment by an overwhelming 43-26 Thursday afternoon, which will give watchdogs new authority to audit the Federal Reserve.
Here is a summary of the Paul-Grayson Amendment:
Dear Financial Services Committee Colleague:
It is encouraging to see the issue of Federal Reserve transparency receiving so much attention during this current markup. Today we plan to offer an amendment to the Financial Stability Improvement Act that expands on the many extant proposals to enhance Federal Reserve transparency. Our amendment is based on HR 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, which has broad bipartisan and grassroots support. The bill is cosponsored by 309 Members of Congress, including all Financial Services Committee Republicans and 13 Financial Services Committee Democrats.
The amendment removes restrictions on GAO audits of the Federal Reserve, as HR 1207 does, but makes a few changes to take into account some of the concerns that the Fed has made known in public testimony. Specifically, the Paul/Grayson amendment:
* Exempts unreleased transcripts and minutes from meetings of the Board and FOMC to address the Fed’s concerns that free and open debate in their meetings would be stifled.
* Sets a 180-day time lag for release of details of market actions the Fed has undertaken, to address the Fed’s concerns that Congress or GAO is second-guessing its actions.
* Removes boilerplate language that allowed GAO to make recommendations on monetary policy and adds a section stating that nothing in the amendment shall be construed as interference in or dictation of monetary policy to the Fed.
Unlike proposals that target the Fed’s 13(3) facilities, the Paul/Grayson amendment opens up the entire $2 trillion Federal Reserve balance sheet to a GAO audit. The Fed’s recent purchases of nearly $800 billion in mortgage-backed securities (MBS) have occurred under the MBS Purchase Program, authorized under section 14(b) of the Federal Reserve Act. This program, which is expected to reach a size of $1.25 trillion, would remain exempt from audit even if all the current 13(3) audit proposals were to go into effect. Targeting facilities that are in the process of being drawn down and that are authorized under a specific subsection of the Federal Reserve while allowing other facilities to spring up in their place is counterproductive to true transparency. All purchases and loans that appear on the balance sheet should be subject to audit, without loopholes for the Fed to evade scrutiny.
More importantly, the Paul/Grayson amendment does not create any additional burdens. Some competing proposals, while making a good effort at expanding the number of 13(3) facilities open to audit, take a step backwards by imposing new restrictions on GAO that are more burdensome than the restrictions currently written into law. We cannot accept these new restrictions. Unlike competing proposals, this amendment amends existing restrictions on GAO audit authority, a necessary precondition for a complete audit. Competing proposals leave these restrictions in place, and even add new ones.
We also reject the false dichotomy between transparency and independence. The Paul/Grayson amendment would achieve the necessary transparency of the trillions of dollars of Fed interventions while keeping Congress from directly intervening in the decision-making process. Independence should not be synonymous with secrecy. We urge our colleagues to support the Paul/Grayson amendment.
Sincerely,
Ron Paul, Member of Congress
Alan Grayson, Member of Congress
The Real 'Inconvenient Truth'
Send this page link to a friend
Some facts about greenhouse and global warming
http://junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html
Loving my silver!!!!!
Crash and burn baby... crash and burn... once they dupe all the retail investors to put their money back in they will tank it... then bail out the banks again, while America has no retirement and has to work the rest of their lives from paycheck to paycheck like a bunch of slaves.
This is amazing.... still buying. Goodbye dollar. Thanks for the CHANGE fool! Make mine pre 1965 silver!
Nazi Pelosi strikes again.... jail for you if you don't participate.
That's what I am thinking..... lock and load.
Another base being built, or will we get a pullback?
Glenn Beck meets Anthony in Harlem
http://www.therightscoop.com/glenn-beck-meets-anthony-in-harlem/
CNBC - Dollar Will be Utterly Destroyed, Global Currency, New World Order
Excess Bank Reserves, Fed Balance Sheet Assets Skyrocket To Record High Levels
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/excess-bank-reserves-fed-balance-sheet-assets-skyrocket-record-high-levels
Treasury and Geithner Asking For DONATIONS to Pay Off Our National Debt?
Friday, November 13, 2009 11:17 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091112/us_nm/us_usa_economy_budget_gifts
They really think we are that stupid? You waste my money... the Fed prints $500 BILLION dollars and hands it out to central banks around the world without Congressional approval... you tax us to death, but will take donations to pay down our fiat currency debt?
http://dailybail.com/home/alan-grayson-which-foreign-banks-got-the-feds-500-billion-be.html
That's almost as dumb as people sending cash to Al Gore's Carbon Credit scam to offset their carbon footprint... and yes, I ran into a sack of skin (Ann Arbor) with a functioning brain stem that allowed it to breathe who stated, "I send in money every month when I calculate my gas and energy bills." These idiots deserve poverty. Check this site... what a great scam... if I were a criminal, I would almost be jealous of it's brilliance.
http://www.carbonplanet.com/shop/purchase_carbon_credits
A Fabian Socialist Dream Come True
The gradual revolution of the Fabian Socialists is quickly becoming a reality in America
http://www.nolanchart.com/article4425.html
Monday, August 4, 2008
The Fabian Society began in England in 1887 by a very small group of elitist socialist that sought to reform society gradually into one of socialism instead of through violent revolution. At first their purpose was to be an alternative in Britain for the more dominate Marxist Social-Democratic Federation, but their true goal was to accomplish socialism through a very gradual process using the voting booth and representative democracy as their instrument of change. In fact, one of their symbols is a Turtle with the motto: "When I Strike, I Strike Hard". Another symbol is the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing and the Globe on an Anvil being hammered into the Fabian model.
The Fabian Plan for gradual Socialist Revolution was as definitive as it possibly could be, to say it has been a conspiracy is simplistic in the extreme. It instituted a widespread educational program for its leadership and its minions, as time progressed, it opened schools, such as the London School of Economics, and the New School of Social Research.
One stroke of genius was that instead of advocating a Socialist State, they assisted in the implementation of the Welfare State, which as we should all know is merely a few steps away from a purely Socialistic State. It was, of course, implemented gradually, and played upon the weaknesses of human nature to gain popularity. Unlike the usual Socialist points of views, the Fabians didn't advocate complete State ownership of businesses, industry, agriculture or land, instead they sought to involve the State into very specific areas of importance such as electric power production, transportation, precious metals and of course, credit. The remaining balance of economic systems would be left to the private sector however; it would be highly regulated by the State and operated according to the wishes of the State.
If you look at Britain, you will see that they accomplished their goals with ease and while American has been more difficult, the goals are the same and they have made enormous advances toward those goals, as we all know. Much of their accomplishments have been realized without using that dreaded word: Socialism. They have brought the Fabian Dream to America through an extremely brilliant system that has been openly accepted by the voters of this country without the hint of suspicion on their part that they were voting a Socialistic system into place.
Now, make no mistake about it, Fabian Socialists are Statist, they are absolutely authoritarian in their philosophy. Their long-term goal has always been a Socialistic Dictatorship with full-imposition of a very legalistic society where the individual is simply a part of the collective. An example of this can be found in the writings of one of the founders of the Fabian Society, George Bernard Shaw speaking of the Socialist Utopia, he said: "Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not the character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well."
Of course, all of this would be in the best interest of society as a whole and the whole made up simply of parts, individuals merely cogs in the machine of social justice. This idea of social justice is the biggest selling point and perhaps the easiest to peddle to the people. Programs of social reform, incremental at first, allowed for the tempering of the people; allowing for them to grow accustom to the intervention of the State in the affairs of the individual. Of course, such reforms are never an end unto themselves only stepping-stones to a greater Socialist construct of society.
Regarding the great strides made toward these goals, Max Beer stated with confidence: "There was no reason for Socialists to wait for revolution. The realization of socialism had begun the moment when the State became accessible to social reform ideas." Indeed, the revolution was already half realized at the moment when the State stepped over the threshold of progressive social construction and intervention into the private lives of the people.
The first step in any Socialist plan is the reform of capitalism, when the capitalist system is sufficiently neutralized the rest comes relatively easy. The first step to an efficient plan of capitalist neutralization is control over the money supply and for that a central bank is required along with a fiat monetary system, in this country that was initiated with the advent of the Federal Reserve. Later, of course must come effective controls over major infrastructure and services, all accomplished through the New Deal. The New Deal accomplished substantial feats toward the Fabian Socialist construct with numerous price controls, quotas, subsidies, inspections, regulations, licenses, fees, penalties and massive government interventions into what was formerly private enterprise. Although you would never hear politicians of either political party to admit to support the ideals of socialism, they nevertheless not only support such measures, but also promote them.
We have recently seen a greater push toward socialism, though few realize it. The government is assuming more and more responsibility for and authority over the economy, all under the guise of protecting the people from potentially unscrupulous free marketeers. We are being moved yet another step closer to the dream-society of the Fabians. Of course, these are simply steps, essential parts to a much broader agenda, one that is authoritarian in nature and execution, even the centrally planned economy is a mere step, not the end product. It is all carefully crafted, manufactured to ensure the most popular support possible for "people-friendly" solutions while instituting a fraudulent system of central control over the unsuspecting public. The system has been marketed to the public, one specific component at a time, each component essential to the completion of the whole and that is the brilliance of this gradual imposition of Fabian Socialism in this country.
The greatest bulwark against tyranny in America has always been the system of private ownership and free enterprise, it is the cornerstone of our system of government and without it our freedoms and liberty are in jeopardy. Central economic planning is, in a very basic sense, the keystone to Fabian Socialism, for in order for it to succeed, central State planning and control must replace the system of free enterprise. While it was not necessary for the State to actually own or directly control all the elements in the economy it is enough for the State to have the right to assert itself in any area that it deems necessary. The Fabians called it "the democratization of economic power", in other words socialized and centralized control over economic direction within the country.
In 1942, Stuart Chase, in his book "The Road We Are Traveling" spelled out the system of planning the Fabians had in mind; the interesting thing is to look at that plan in comparison to 2008 America.
1. Strong, centralized government.
2. Powerful Executive at the expense of Congress and the Judicial.
3. Government controlled banking, credit and securities exchange.
4. Government control over employment.
5. Unemployment insurance, old age pensions.
6. Universal medical care, food and housing programs.
7. Access to unlimited government borrowing.
8. A managed monetary system.
9. Government control over foreign trade.
10. Government control over natural energy sources, transportation and agricultural production.
11. Government regulation of labor.
12. Youth camps devoted to health discipline, community service and ideological teaching consistent with those of the authorities.
13. Heavy progressive taxation.
It should be evident that while Socialist no longer use the name that the plan is Socialism at its heart. The Fabian Socialist Revolution began in earnest in this country in 1933 with the imposition of the Welfare State and has been steadily progressing since. Those who are promoting this system, whether in the Republican Party or Democratic Party, are nothing less than Traitors, guilty of a type of high treason that deserves the most punitive penalty for such treachery. Listen carefully to the propositions of both McCain and Obama; I suspect that you will quickly find both of their positions are not only similar, but propose in essence and detail the Fabian Socialist construct. The system that these marauders are imposing upon us will ultimately alter our system of government beyond recognition.
It is all accomplished with the utmost respectability of course, they would not dream of such an imposition without popular support and they will make sure that they have popular support.
In 1933, they proposed that private enterprise had failed leaving the jobless to starve, hope to fade and that the State must step in to save the country and protect the people from the dangers associated with the inherent problems of free enterprise. Today, the call is very similar, the State must step in to protect the people. The Corporate State is, in the minds of Fabians, the ultimate protector of the common man, the provider of security on all fronts, but it requires our complete compliance and the relinquishment of our liberty in exchange. The State is to ultimately be the only one allowed wealth, the problem is that wealth is the people's wealth confiscated in exchange for their hard labor. It is, in essence, a plan for a modern feudal society of peonage and the people are the peons.
Proofs of a Conspiracy? Look around...
Can you believe CNN finally went all the way wrong and booted Lou Dobbs? It's getting worse by the day.
On a New Form of Indentured Servitude
Posted By admin On November 10, 2009 @ 1:09 pm In Big Brother | 74 Comments
The Confluence
November 10, 2009
UPI Editor Equates 9/11 Truth Activists With Fort Hood Killer
There’s so much going on in the USA that warrants attention these days that it’s hard to know where to start. But, since I’m an economist I’m going to start here.
“There are families not eating at the end of the month,” said Stephen Quinn, executive vice president and chief marketing officer at Wal-Mart Stores, and “literally lining up at midnight” at Wal-Mart stores waiting to buy food when paychecks or government checks land in their accounts.
Among the steps Wal-Mart is taking to address the changes in shopping habits, Mr. Quinn listed an overhaul of the retailer’s private-label brand, Great Value, which is promoted in commercials describing how families can fix dinners with Great Value products “for less than $2 a serving.”
The really sad thing about this blurb is that I got it from the Media & Advertising section of the NY Times. It did not come from the op-ed page, it did not come from the business section nor the politics section. It’s there because Walmart is having to work on its product mix to reflect hunger in those families living below the poverty living in one of the richest countries in the world –The United States–and I am deeply ashamed as a citizen of that country to read this anywhere STILL after all these years.
There’s been an academic discussion about the disconnect between what some of our nation’s statistics tell us is going on and the reality on the ground. There was a conference this weekend to talk about re-working the way the nation calculates its GDP. This is extremely important. Because of globalization, we are most likely over stating our performance in way that is throwing off our policy targets. We are losing per capita income from the lowest to middle quintiles and we are hemorrhaging well-paying jobs for our most vulnerable citizens. They are not able to get enough to live on and they are not wealthy enough to buy health care insurance or to pay premium taxes to feed an already over-bloated, costly, and inefficient industry.
A widening gap between data and reality is distorting the government’s picture of the country’s economic health, overstating growth and productivity in ways that could affect the political debate on issues like trade, wages and job creation.
The shortcomings of the data-gathering system came through loud and clear here Friday and Saturday at a first-of-its-kind gathering of economists from academia and government determined to come up with a more accurate statistical picture.
The fundamental shortcoming is in the way imports are accounted for. A carburetor bought for $50 in China as a component of an American-made car, for example, more often than not shows up in the statistics as if it were the American-made version valued at, say, $100. The failure to distinguish adequately between what is made in America and what is made abroad falsely inflates the gross domestic product, which sums up all value added within the country.
American workers lose their jobs when carburetors they once made are imported instead. The federal data notices the decline in employment but fails to revalue the carburetors or even pinpoint that they are foreign-made. Because it seems as if $100 carburetors are being produced but fewer workers are needed to do so, productivity falsely rises — in the national statistics.
The most interesting thing about this is that the argument is that our workers supposedly have become increasingly more productive over the last decade or so. What we might be measuring are impacts from trade instead. This goes a long way in explaining why the returns on labor (MRP or marginal revenue product) and the returns on capital are becoming so disparate.
The statistical distortions can be significant. At worst, the gross domestic product would have risen at only a 3.3 percent annual rate in the third quarter instead of the 3.5 percent actually reported, according to some experts at the conference. The same gap applies to productivity. And the spread is growing as imports do.
That may help to explain why the recovery from the 2001 recession was a jobless one for many months and why the recovery from this recession is likely to generate few jobs for many months.
In addition, more detailed import data would help to explain wage inequality, by linking some low wages more accurately to particular industries exposed to import competition.
On another front, many argue that labor productivity is rising faster than the pay of workers who made the greater productivity possible. That argument would be watered down if more accurate data showed that productivity had been overstated.
Just as more and more working class families fall into the cracks, we also have the latest sham of health care where families now struggling to make ends meet with face a tax if they don’t buy health insurance from overpriced insurance industry plans. Let me point you back to a piece in Politico for this beauty.
Page 29, sentence one of the bill introduced by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont) says: “The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax.”
And the rest of the bill is clear that the Finance Committee does, in fact, consider it a tax: “The excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of Federal tax owed.”
The bill requires every American, with few exceptions, to carry health insurance. To enforce this individual mandate, the Senate Finance Committee created the excise tax as a penalty for people who don’t have insurance – and it can run as much as $3,800 a year per family.
The House bill also refers to the penalties for not carrying insurance as a tax. It calls for a “tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage” and amends the tax code to implement it.
I have to ask what it is wrong with this country? It seems to pushing its poor to the brink of destruction during a time of when its also funding (through direct funds and also extremely low interest rates) arbitrage profits for the already rich at places like Goldman Sachs. We might as well just call them all Princes and call ourselves the new corporate serfs because we’re going to be paying for our indentured status for some time under what’s going on right now. We’re tithing for the benefit of huge financial institutions be they investment bankers, insurance, or mortgage brokers. They’ve become the residents of the neoGothic cathedrals of the 21st century dark ages of America. We’re back to ‘Still Hungry in America’ and this is ever so wrong.
Oh, meanwhile, via CNN breaking news:
The Dow hits 10,170 in intraday trading, its highest level in more than a year.
Going to donate some does to homeless shelters...
Fall might be the breaking point hehe... the gradual descent into fear will happen all summer.... unemployment benefits will be running out...
Also, note that self-employed individuals are not eligible for unemployment... so if your state has a high number of self employed individuals, the numbers for unemployment may be low. Michigan is a top five self-employed state, but our 18-19% unemployment is more like 24-25%. That's way ugly... and it won't get better when employers have to let people go to afford the taxes and penalties of the healthcare bill.
Bread lines here we come....
Trial lawyers could win bonanza in health care reform
By David Frum, CNN Contributor
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
* The House bill passed Saturday night protects the fees of trial lawyers, Frum says
* He says states that have capped fees have seen increase in doctors
* When Texas capped fees, lawsuits fell and doctors moved to the state, he says
* Frum: Trial lawyers are benefiting because they provide campaign funds for Democrats
Editor's note: David Frum, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, was a special assistant to President George W. Bush in 2001-2002. He is the author of six books, including "Comeback: Conservatism That Can Win Again," and the editor of FrumForum.com
(CNN) -- You've heard the saying: "In war, amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics."
The political equivalent: "Amateurs talk ideology -- professionals talk interest groups."
Small but sophisticated interest groups use big political battles to gain special advantages. Health care reform is, of course, the biggest battle of them all, with trillions of dollars at stake.
On Saturday night with the House vote in favor of the health reform bill, the trial lawyers sliced themselves a nice little piece of that bonanza.
It's Section 2531 of the bill -- to be precise Section 2531(4)b -- and it provides as follows:
The new health bill will empower the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make grants to states that reform their medical malpractice systems. There are just two conditions: Those reforms must not "limit attorneys' fees or impose caps on damages."
Which is like saying that we're going to encourage you to develop a personal weight loss plan that includes neither exercise nor changes in diet.
Here's how Section 2531 works. Over the past decade and a half, states have reacted to abusive lawsuits by imposing various restrictions on personal injury awards.
In California, pain and suffering damages cannot exceed $250,000. Attorneys may collect no more than 15 percent of malpractice awards over $600,000.
The impact of these kinds of reforms can be dramatic. After Texas capped pain and suffering damages at $750,000 in 2003, the number of malpractice lawsuits dropped abruptly. Lawsuits in Harris County (Houston and environs) plunged by 50 percent.
Fewer lawsuits meant lower malpractice premiums. Texas' largest malpractice insurance carrier cut costs to doctors by 17 percent. Lower insurance premiums attracted more medical professionals to the state. In the 1990s, Texas ranked low in the nation in the number of doctors per person. In the four years after 2003, the number of doctors in the state jumped by 18 percent.
"It was hard to believe at first, we thought it was a spike," the executive director of the states' medical board told the New York Times.
Texas' experience is dramatic, but consistent, with other reforming states. States with damage caps gain more doctors than uncapped states -- and the difference is greatest in the most underserved counties within capped states. Capped states have 5.5 percent more OB-GYNs per person in their rural counties than do states without caps.
But the money saved by insurers, doctors and their customers is money subtracted from the pockets of trial lawyers -- and those lawyers carry real clout in the Democratic Congress.
The trial lawyers' national PAC, the American Association for Justice, was the second-biggest source of PAC dollars for Democratic candidates in the 2006 election year: almost $2.6 million. That same year, Iowa's trial lawyers elected a former president of their association to Congress. Had the National Enquirer been less inquiring, a former trial lawyer named John Edwards might well be serving as attorney general right now.
Huey Long once summed up the professional politicians' credo:
"Those who support me early will have my close attention when I win office. Those who support me late will have my attention when I win office. And those who oppose me --" and here he'd wink -- "they'll get good government."
We all know what Long meant by "close attention," and his old party apparently still lives by his rules. On Saturday, House Democrats have delivered some very "close attention" to their friends in the trial bar. The question is: who will stand up for good government for the rest of us?
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Frum.
Getting ready for a short on the next crash.... I'll revamp the IBOX for some interesting short plays... I really feel the Bradley chart will pan out... crash is coming... justification for a second stimulus, Fed will then tighten rates... depression for most of next year.... sorry to be so glum, but the Bradley has played out to a T.