Posts Tagged ‘socialism’

Former left-anarchist, now anarcho-capitalist, answers criticisms

February 21, 2014

After commenting on this web page about dictator Maduro’s abuses against demonstrators and his armed forces and police shooting at them (one of their killings -with police shooting an escaping protestor in the back and– was caught on video and is posted at Univision). The author there (Roblos Ricos?) apparently blamed the killings  on “rightists”, although most of the violence was done by Maduro’s authorized armed enforcer groups, police and his own paramilitary..

After commenting about Venezuela, I noticed the anarchist references. In college, after my Marxist phase, I “progressed” to anarchism, or most would call it “left-anarchism”. My Russian teacher and me were the only ones I knew of there.

I’ve learned a lot since then. Reading one of the anarkismo links I must comment on a couple of possibly honest mistakes about anarcho-capitalists, as it seems like one that actually thinks rather than doing the echo chamber yelling at the guys not on their team.

One is that they seem to confuse Ron Paul and his son Rand. They are very different. Ron Paul is honestly and consistently pro-freedom in all his positions and votes.

Anarcho-capitalism is, in fact, totally AGAINST the abuses of big corporations, who are only able to get away with the worst abuses by hiding behind the platitudes of their cronies in government.

In fact, you can find links to information about their abuses on their well-read sites. Militarism, corporate abuses, and the like. As a matter of fact, to help un-confuse the deceitful use by political oligarchies of the language, I call the statists with the term “left-fascists”, because they have no problem pretending that you have “ownership” or title, when they can tell you what you can and can’t do with it, or simply seize it for their developer buddies like happened in the Kelo v. New London suit.

Anarcho-capitalism involves the strict application of the non-aggression principle, which is that people have the right to be free of aggression. The aggression is any act of force or threat of force to induce an action on the part of another, or fraud (which is another aggression), or the act of theft against an individual.

No worker of any proletariat wants anybody stealing from them. Every one of them aspires to better his material lot in life. In fact the very criticism is a recognition of the very fact that every person should enjoy the fruits of his own labor.

For a young couple or small family, that might mean being able to save enough (wealth, small as it may be) to invest that capital –yes CAPITAL– into a small entrepeneurial effort, such as a sandwich or ice cream truck.

(I’m also posting this comment there. After all, I used to an anarchist with similar thinking.)

Minimum wage

January 26, 2014

Henry Ford used a manufacturing technique that was relatively advanced for the manufacture of horseless carriages. This technology, like most such advances, allowed and even required a division of labor that dramatically increased the productivity of manufacture, and this in turn allowed for a dramatically lower price for the automobiles he made.

The combination of productivity enhancement (assembly line technology) and sales volume in a free market context (cheaper horseless carriages) combined to allow him to pay enough to hire the workers with the best work ethics.

Of course, being a pretty smart salesman and public relations brain, he made it sound like he paid his workers more to make himself richer. Yeah, right. He also sold you a Brooklyn Bridge. 1908 was also the time of the presidency of the most famous “progressive” president, and so the doublespeak was strong at the time.

Henry Ford only used the lying doublespeak of the left-fascists of the day to promote his car and make it sound more “affordable” than even the technology allowed.

It is no anomaly that South Korea has the 12th largest economy in the world, about FORTY times bigger than North Korea’s. North Korea allows ZERO “unfettered capitalism”. South Korea allows a lot more than the USSA. They started out at the same economic levels at the end of World War Two
http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/south-korea.north-korea/economy
..Those are numbers that the Keynesians hate and that’s why you never see them talking about it in the left-fascist news cartel sources.

Singapore has one of the lowest tax rates in the world and has the highest per-capita GDP in the world.

Hong Kong with its capitalist success and freedom for doing business (for both poor and rich), that Beijing decided to keep their economic regime (and a lot of the political freedom they had), and even opened more zones to replicate it.

Chile freed the market from a lot of its fetters and chains that had been imposed by the Marxist Allende, and has become the first and so far only Latin American country to join the club of developed nations.it is certainly the richest.

In fact as part of their legislative project to find a way to get free from so much poverty, Honduran legislators and officials invited business executives and government officials from Chile to Honduras to share what they’ve learned. They sent delegations to Hong Kong, Singapore, Chile, South Korea, to learn from their successes, and the special economic zone established by Abu Dhabi.

OF course they learned that you cannot decrease poverty by subsidizing it. You help the poor by letting them enjoy the fruits of their labor and you let them do business as they see fit on a level playing field, and eliminating the confusing maze of rules and regulations that keep them down.

//

//

Perversity of Modern White-Collar Criminal Remedies (The Daily Bell)

January 12, 2014

The Daily Bell – Perversity of Modern White-Collar Criminal Remedies:
http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/34906/Perversity-of-Modern-White-Collar-Criminal-Remedies/

This is a fatal disconnect. Washington’s Blog and others seem to assume that if regulation is followed up by aggressive enforcement and incarceration, then honesty will increase and people will be better behaved. But so far as we can tell, it has never been proven to be the case that regulation and authoritarian enforcement cures wrongdoing. It is the history of empires to create a climate conducive to corruption. The corruption is then engaged by the very elements of empire that have nourished the corruption to begin with. Certainly there is wrongdoing aplenty. Here are just some of the recent improprieties by big banks, according to the article:

  • Laundering money for terrorists (the HSBC employee who blew the whistle on the banks’ money laundering for terrorists and drug cartels says that the giant bank is still laundering money, saying: “The public needs to know that money is still being funneled through HSBC to directly buy guns and bullets to kill our soldiers …. Banks financing … terrorists affects every single American.” He also said: “It is disgusting that our banks are STILL financing terror on 9/11 2013″.
  • Financing illegal arms deals, and funding the manufacture of cluster bombs and other arms which are banned in most of the world
  • Handling money for rogue military operations
  • Laundering money for drug cartels. Indeed, drug dealers kept the banking system afloat during the depths of the 2008 financial crisis). A whistleblower said: “America is losing the drug war because our banks are [still] financing the cartels”, and “Banks financing drug cartels … affects every single American”.
  • Engaging in mafia-style big-rigging fraud against local governments
  • Shaving money off of virtually every pension transaction they handled over the course of decades, stealing collectively billions of dollars from pensions worldwide.
  • Manipulating aluminum and copper prices.
  • Manipulating gold prices … on a daily basis.
  • Charging “storage fees” to store gold bullion … without even buying or storing any gold. And raiding allocated gold accounts.
  • Committing massive and pervasive fraud both when they initiated mortgage loans and when they foreclosed on them.
  • Pledging the same mortgage multiple times to different buyers. This would be like selling your car, and collecting money from 10 different buyers for the same car.
  • Cheating homeowners by gaming laws meant to protect people from unfair foreclosure.
  • Committing massive fraud in an $800 trillion dollar market which effects everything from mortgages, student loans, small business loans and city financing .
  • Manipulating the hundred trillion dollar derivatives market.
  • Engaging in insider trading of the most important financial information.
  • Pushing investments which they knew were terrible, and then betting against the same investments to make money for themselves.
  • Engaging in unlawful “frontrunning” to manipulate markets.
  • Engaging in unlawful “Wash Trades” to manipulate asset prices.
  • Manipulating corporate bonds through derivatives schemes.
  • Otherwise manipulating markets.
  • Charging veterans unlawful mortgage fees.
  • Helping the richest to illegally hide assets.
  • Cooking their books.
  • Bribing and bullying ratings agencies to inflate ratings on their risky investments.
  • Violently cracking down on peaceful protesters.

And yet … at least some of what is mentioned above is questionable from a criminal standpoint. Things like market manipulation, wash trades, frontrunning and other “crimes” are a function of a marketplace that has gotten too large and in which too many titanic firms trade. They simply can get away with more, and it is impossible to police much of what is taking place.

The solution is to reintroduce competition and let customers themselves sort out the “bad guys.” Unfortunately, regulations and judicial fiat make this almost impossible. The competitive market cannot perform its curative function. In its place we have regulatory democracy and occasional prosecutions.

The real problem is not “criminality” but bigness and most importantly state-enforced bigness. Let us ask: Where does this bigness come from? In fact, it comes from the state enforced immunity of corporate personhood. Wall Street firms, like large corporations everywhere, provide virtual immunity from consequences for those who manage them.

When one works for the state these days, one can use the threat of terrorism to repel accusations of almost any criminal or violent act while in Leviathan’s employment.

Similarly, corporate personhood inoculates those at the top of corporations from the consequences of their actions. They are usually not sued. They are certainly not jailed. The corporation itself – with its overflowing coffers – is subject to the “punishment.” And everyone moves on. -

 

//

Left-fascism is marriage of Big Crony Capitalism with “Socialism”

January 12, 2014

Left-fascist groupies are so clueless sometimes.
I don’t know why Dick wants to flaunt it so much.

The idiocy of so-called “left-right” politics, party political groupthink fads, is shown when you analyze down to the legislations and “quo bono” (who benefits?), and you see who contributes to whom.

The Chamber is so full of people that absolutely love big government and regulations that they help write, that he hates the people who are fighting for the rights of the “little guy” to do business free of business-killing extortionist tax theft:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/01/08/donohue-chamber-will-oppose-some-tea-party-candidates/

This is a demonstration of what I mean when I say left-fascist: it’s the marriage of people the Media likes to call “rightist” and the special interests they would call “leftist” if they were consistent. The parties play along. Dems pretend to rant and rave against Big Business and demand agencies to control them, and then invite Big Business to write the legislation (as long as they make some contributions to their PACs), and as long as Big Business agrees to let them buy the poor man’s vote with freebies.

The party-boss Repubs pretend to demand business-friendly policies and legislation, but then they invite Big Business (like the big contributors to the USCC budget) to help write the business-friendly legislation with both the regulations and rules that stunt smaller competitors, plus, write all kinds of payouts to the contributors.

Well, looky here to see the employers for the biggest contributors to Barack Obama:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638

Among the top donor companies are Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, JP Morgan Chase, Google, Citigroup, US government employees (surprise!), Time Warner, Sidley Austin LLP (who dey?), National Amusements Inc, and IBM Corp.

And ONLY the gullible continue to think that Obama favors the poor over his ruling class buddies?! People, the biggest supporters of the Bolsheviks were capitalist tycoons “robber barons”!

//

Economics, efficient war machines are bad things, and the non-aggression principle

January 12, 2014

A thank-you to “uldissprogis”, who provides some cogent and articulate points to ponder. He seems to be almost as wordy as me when he’s emotionally engaged with a topic, as I am. He has given us a lot to answer.

http://trutherator.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/efficiency-and-government/#comments

I understand this passion to help change the world, make it better, help the poor. Even though my father’s weekly sermons, full of all the compassion for the helpless and the needy that Jesus Christ showed in his life, ministry, death and resurrection, must have had something to do with this drive (in my case) to help others, I learned to apply this to Communist thinking. Spreading the wealth.
The following post is context for the article below:
http://trutherator.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/efficiency-and-government/

Eventually though I learned that not everything we are told is believable, whether it be at schools, colleges, from media, and from the pulpits of the land, or from the political class.

I’ll just answer a few concerns.

He was basically in favor of uncontrolled capitalism in private and business lives. I disagree with him [Ludwig von Mises] and believe that the national government has a role to play in private charity.


Point one for this: There is a common misunderstanding about the two approaches to two different spheres of action that we know of as “Austrian economics” and “libertarians”.

Austrian economics is the study of economics. Some who don’t understand it call it “not rational”, whereas its foremost figures study it very rationally, intellectually, and most of all, logically. “Austrian economics” is the study of how economics actually works in the real world. von Mises is one of the best known of these scholars.

“Libertarianism” is the political philosophy most associated with Austrian economics. But its basis and philosophy is different, although I’ve noticed there is tremendous overlap among the followers of each.

The summary definition of libertarian thinking is the “non-aggression principle”. That’s an ethical principle, or moral principle, not a scholarly principle. It’s a guiding principle for human action, whereas Austrian economics is the study of it.

On the other issue, if the “national government” has a role in any “charity”, then by definition it is not a “private charity”, and that means the “hybrid” charities too, for example, the Bush-era government money for “faith-based programs”, which are now the Obama-era “faith-based programs”.

Payoffs from government to do “charity” work tend to subtly influence the “charity” to play nice with government, making them de facto advocates of those who continue and expand them, and against those who would stop them.

It’s interesting that after reading as much of von Mises you did, that you would still hold the idea that somehow government can solve the problems of the poor. I admit, depending on which of his writing you read, it is scholarly and it is a slow-walk.

The principles are clear enough, though, if one takes the time to think.

In my years as a missionary, in which we distributed food directly to the poor in the poorest barrios south of the border, visited with people, distributed clothing, ministered to people in hospitals, prisons, orphanages, I can guarantee you that each of our young 1970s era missionaries did much more good for many more people than the average federally funded social service worker.

Some of them had been heroin junkies themselves, healed going “cold turkey” after accepting Christ right on the beach and joining the work then and there. Another had been a diamond smuggler, another was a drug dealer who had cops on the payroll to keep his corner spot safe for his trade.

All government can do is to steal the resources from somebody’s fruits of his labor or investment to give it to someone else, but of course making sure the tax man (the one that tells you how much to pay, takes his cut. Got to have the enforcers on the take, too, after all.

The best results for the poor abound when the force of a gun (of the law) is removed from the equation. When each person can enjoy the fruits of his labor and invest it as he wishes, then everyone gets a win-win. That way each person gets more value for what he gets than what he gives, because otherwise he wouldn’t deal.

You mention the Internet. Up to now, the USG (government) has let it (kind of) roam free. So far anyway. That’s why we get the convenience of it.

Most monopolies are government-enforced. The AT&T phone monopoly lasted several decades, by federal mandate (dictate). The price was subsidies for local calling.

Phones dialed over land lines. Finally rivals were allowed to sell competing phones.

Then came cellular phones. The market was much more free in the US for cell phones, and we got an explosion of companies, distributors and innovation competing in the marketplace for your dollar, and the result is.. drumroll, please…

Now, you have a proliferation of cell phones in the poorest countries, driven there by the state-dictated phone monopolies over land lines.

And you mention the minimum wage. The dictator Manuel Zelaya ordered a doubling of the minimum wage in Honduras in his 2005-2009 reign, and 150,000 –that’s one hundred fifty thousand of the poorest in that country– lost their jobs overnight. Because the Mom and Pop stores could not afford to pay it as they were barely afloat themselves.

Labor unions push the minimum wage as a recruiting tool and to keep the labor market small. Actually, it’s not so much the unions as the union bosses lining their coffers.

Technological advances are good, and will help all people as long as the government keeps out. (Or gets out at least first).

Before there was government, there was trade.

Then came chiefs controlling their people, then came raids on other tribes and either looting or demands for tribute (another form of looting). Then came empires, built on the force of their own hegemony enforced at the point of a sword. Bread and circuses for the Romans, crumbs and gladiator service and other tribute for the conquered.

As for moral teaching, if you supposedly “realize” (with some reason) that the “new world will be controlled by international banks, international businesses etc. down to the control exercised by the individual who will have little chance of challenging the big corrupt inefficient boys”, then understand that the forced teaching in state-run schools of any moral code at all, whether it’s my Bible-based one or your “secular” one, in reality is going to work against you.

It’s something I realized while I was still a Communist, and it turned me at that time into a “syndicalist-anarchist”. Dictators that rule in a dictatorship, no matter who they are, are not going to give up power “just like that” like a finger snap. I realized at that time: If you can’t trust people to govern themselves, how can you ever trust them to govern somebody else? Forget it. Criminals that do their work by force don’t “live by the rules”, and neither will governments that rule by force “live by the rules”.

When the Israelites finally demanded a government of Samuel the prophet, he warned them. God told Samuel they had rejected God, not Samuel, because now they wanted to be ruled by a man, a king, instead of being governed by the rules laid down for them by God. God had Samuel warn them: A king will put unbearable burdens of taxation on you, he will take your sons to war, and generally ride roughshod over your lives.

That’s exactly what they got. Solomon’s tax burdens were the grievance that split the kingdom and led the northern tribes to idolatry and ruin and captivity, and almost all the kings were abusive.

You probably are already familiar with it, but here’s a thinking man’s source on climate science and a place to find what real climate scientists are saying about it:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/

Note that biodiversity also provides an example of what I’m saying on government and laws and good intentions.

Never mind all the evidence that it’s a sham cause invented to divert attention from the real poverty-making problems like crony capitalism and the marriage of the biggest corporations (i.e., of the U. S. Chamber of Commerce with left-fascism, in their multimillionaire tirade against “tea party” candidates. They will back “pro-business” candidates they say, by which they mean supporters of crony capitalism.

Why are the foundations established by the very richest tycoons always supporting socialist causes, at the same time they support political forces that produce propaganda in favor of more “social justice” and command-and-control government?

In the first half of the 20th century, wood ducks were in danger of extinction in the United States. Long before environmentally oriented laws.

Farmers across the country heard about it and started setting up crooks in the rivers and lakes on their land and leaving them be to attract the ducks and make them welcome. The population exploded and now they are prolific, and have been for decades.

Today, however, a farmer that has no such ducks on his land would be stupid to do such a thing, because if an “endangered” species makes a home on his land then it becomes de facto property under the control of the same government that does everything it can to strengthen Big Agriculture in its struggle against more efficient single family farms, who are struggling against Big Brother dictates like this one.

Farmers in California had to watch their houses burn in wildfires, because they were prohibited from preparing their property to protect the houses, because it would make like more difficult for one particular wild breed of a kind of rat. How loco can this get? You can’t make this stuff up!

And the guy in Louisiana who created a watering pond for his animals, then filled it in when he didn’t need it anymore and was fined thousands of dollars for destroying a watershed. Crazier and crazier.

One more thing. Too many people have had the new rulers’ indoctrination in state-run centers, on history. They left out a lot.

For example. St. Patrick’s effective crusade against slavery than began the cultural shift that made it taboo until later, and something the slavers in more recent centuries had to keep out of sight of Europe.

Patrick’s legacy of literacy in Ireland spawned a voracious literary appetite in Ireland that found its cultural way back the British side of the water and saved the classic literature of Greece and Rome away from the book-hating hordes ransacking the continent.

The practice of Christians during the earliest days led to the saving of many infants from the practice of infanticide of those days. Some of them even waited under bridges where babies were thrown and they would catch them or rescue them, and mothers began leaving them on the doorsteps of a couple they knew were Christians.

Christian monks shamed the Roman public into slinking away from gladiator battles, in at least one documented instance one gave his life, Telemachus.

Again, an inefficient process with libertarian freedom is way much better than an efficient war machine. Technology can be used for evil or for good, although some technologies lend themselves more to one than the other. Cars are generally dangerous, computers and electronic communications are generally benign and beneficial in their applications.

What’s wrong with respecting the non-aggression principle as the working rule for everyone? Nobody is compelled to do anything by force or the threat of force or by fraud (which is a force-by-stealth). Let them do business as they will within that principle.

This is not even as strong an ethic as the Golden Rule.

//

Socialism Cannot Save Anything

June 30, 2013

Somebody wrote a piece at The Sleuth Journal, a web site magazine that usually runs interesting and informative pieces about oppressive practices of government:

Socialism Can Save Our Cities & Small Businesses | TheSleuthJournal
http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/socialism-can-save-our-cities-small-businesses/#comment-1077

Socialism cannot save our cities and small businesses, since socialism/fascism caused the problems in the first place!

There’s already too much concentration of economic power in government and quasi-government hands, in lockstep with the very biggest bankers and corporate heads.

* Community owned mortgage banks, and credit unions, are helpless and hopeless against the power of the Federal Reserve Bank. By the way, the Fed is one of a couple hundred central banks around the world, and establishing such central banks was part of the COMMUNIST platform. Why did Karl Marx want to help the most devious of the bankers?

* County or City Owned Power Companies — Oh yeah, that’ll help, There are already a bunch of them, known for cronyism and corruption, because now the political bosses are in charge. They’re not magically made more pure just because they get to boss the lighting utiility, but now they don’t have to worry about saving the owners money, because they’re government!

* The Millionaires Tax — Oh yeah, that’ll help jobs. The guy doesn’t even try to pretend taxing 50% over a million has anything to do with helping the poor, except the proposal for a referendum. Never mind the ethics involved in all socialist and fascist proposals, of stealing money from somebody. Like the bloody Bonnie and Clyde, they “go where the money is”, except it’s less noble than Bonnie and Clyde because at least the robbers want it for themselves, whereas socialists just want to pull them down here to poverty with the rest of us!

How about let them use that money to give a raise to their workers, hire more workers, invest in more productive activity? So what if they sit on it? If it’s in savings, it’s getting loaned out to others doing much more productive activity than for warfare or for agents to spy on us.

* 25% solution — Finally, a good idea, cut down military spending. Better yet, Obama or the president could just order them home immediately, like Ron Paul said he would.

* Public funding of all elections — The worst idea yet. Let government determine who gets a chance at forming part of the government. The most radical election year was 1968 when McCarthy got five millionaire backers to challenge the warfare machine. Those donations would be against the law today, because we already have too much campaign finance reform.

Imagine that. A socialist proposing that legislators like John McCain make the rules for who gets money to campaign against them. Real smart.

* Medicare and dental care for all — except for the ones denied by the one gatekeeper with no recourse and no competition. Better to get government spending out of it altogether and nix the corporate deductions for it –they still today don’t let individuals get the deduction– so the prices will drop to affordable. Instead we got hikes in premiums with the Unaffordable Act, companies are dropping coverage, and dictates all around and the people get less choice than ever. Doctors dropping out too, the best ones that have enough are retiring.. Now functionally illiterate “graduates” of government schools who can’t read cursive are going to take care of us. Thanks a lot, socialism.

* Nationalized weapons industries. — Oh great. Make them as efficient as the post office. By cutting corporations out of the loop for the dictator, it’ll get better? The “profit” in war will be the political cronies. That’ll work as good as it did for education, and that’s going gangbusters, right?

==> I’m not a “talking head” or politician or Old Media. I’m a Ron Paul fan, anathema to Shadow Government. We cannot be accused of shilling for the richest. But socialism is a downhill slippery path to tyranny. There are over 100 million humans sacrificed in the 20th century to the god of government.

But. Socialist talking heads are indeed shills for the richest and most powerful clique of plutocrats on the planet. George Soros is no starving peasant, and he and his peers at the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, and a lot more, they fund armies of writers and journalists to write articles that praise socialism on 100s of web sites all over the Internet.

I found that out when I battled the lies in 2009 when Honduras asserted its freedom and sovereignty against the socialist-orchestrated attack on it, when the Obama administration joined Chavez in trying to force that country to put the dictator Zelaya back in, who was running his own auto-coup against his own government and against his republic, using fraud for cover. And 80% of Hondurans backed Micheletti against that Chavez-puppet demagogue.

National and International Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Are They Different?

June 4, 2013
Cover

Cover (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Socialism, Communism, Fascism, they are all the same in the idea that an [ahem] “enlightened” [suppress guffaw here] ruling clique should rule over all of us, justified by the same excuse used by all tyrants and all dictators of all times: It’s for “our own good”.

National socialism and international socialism are based on one tiny gang of dictators.

Among those who are sincerely interested in doing good, central planning of any category  comes from a momentous hubris, albeit often unconscious hubris. They know what people should do, so they force us to do it. Claiming a majority vote is not a use of force is a cheap intellectual cop-out once we accept the reality, because all government relies on the use of force.

I once was one of those inflicted with that hubris, thinking that a Marxist revolution was the best thing for the peoples of the world. But Marxist revolutions were always ugly revolutions. But Marx’s idea of a transitional dictatorship bothered me until it broke out into “anarchism”, what libertarians would probably call “syndicalist anarchism” or  “left anarchism”.

If my neighbor John Doe takes something from the other neighbor Mr. Jones and gives it to me because I need it, it is still THEFT.

It is theft whether Mr. Jones is a billionaire, millionaire, or earns more than a quarter-million dollars, or not. If he stole it, he stole it. It is still THEFT.

If neighbor John Doe organizes the neighborhood, the whole city or county, and then the state, and gets a majority vote to take something from the other neighbor Mr. Jones by force of “democracy” to give it to me, it still does not make it okay. It is still THEFT.

To such theft, I DO NOT CONSENT. No matter how much good it does me or any other neighbor.

If you do consent, you are accessory to theft, once your sin is exposed.

I gave nearly twenty years of my life to missionary work, and helping others, helping them. Against such love there is no law.

Against theft, there is: Thou shalt not steal

 

Socialism spends your children’s inheritance, and ours too

November 18, 2012

You ARE spending all your children’s inheritance when you think you get the state to pay for the nursing home and someone to change your diapers. The state pays for NOTHING, ZILCH, ZIP, NADA.

The ethical problem for takers is, they’re spending not only their children’s inheritance, they’re spending EVERYBODY ELSE’s inheritance with it.

The STUPIDITY of it all is that when the bill collector comes for his pound of flesh, the taker will whine and complain still blame the rich, blame God, blame anybody but the looting.

But by then there won’t be any of those “rich”, because the trouble with socialism is that you soon run out of other people’s money.

Except the small subgroup of the rich that has been pushing the socialist meme will have control of it all, including the “souls of men”, having converted religion into a merchandise.

We have been warned as a nation. The Federal Reserve is now a topic, and it is the most visible tool in the hands of this billionaire socialist/fascist ruling clique.

It is a private sector bank cartel with complete monopoly over all our currency, and most of the members of BOTH parties protect it. There is a small crack in their wall but they have all the money they care to print.

Now they’re in the open and they’re racing against time before there is enough momentum from the people to get the BIPARTISAN cronies in the Congress to do something about it, or a LIBERTY-minded new party gains a foothold.

 

Found: Graphs showing economy’s “performance” 2009-2012

April 7, 2012

Obama Bashes Bush & Says Election Will Be “Fun Debate” …(Between Socialism and Freedom) | The Gateway Pundit:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/04/obama-election-will-be-fun-debate-between-socialism-and-freedom/

I was quite impressed at the collection of graphs on the web page. They quote him saying “It’s always good to have the truth on your side”.

That much is true, but it’s out of context, because the truth does not help his message at all. “The truth is lies” one might say. Oh well…

Look at this quip they included from the AP:

Obama revisited many of the same arguments he made earlier in the week during a speech to newspaper executives, in which he framed the election as a choice between his work to use government to help people prosper and Republicans who would let average Americans struggle while pushing policies that help the wealthy few.

The charts they generously shared with us show how much his policies are helping crush the middle class.

A Christian writer once said, “God must really love the poor, he made so many of them!”

But it seems socialists and leftists don’t think God made enough poor people, because they are making so many more of them.

But since are mostly in the employ of a selected group of super-rich, aided by idealists who are deceived by the academic demagoguery like I once was, they can’t really touch those super-rich. So they push their potential rivals back down, using glass ceilings crimping small business made of regulations, a legal counterfeiting operation that robs the poor and middle class every time they “print money”.

Aaron Task writes disinformation spin for the Fed

January 26, 2012

Here’s where his article appears at yahoo:

No, the Fed Does NOT ‘Print Money’: Just Explain It:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/no-fed-does-not-print-money-just-explain-150433185.html

This is from the “Give Me A Break” Department.

In the third paragraph, the guy couldn’t help but let slip why they are publishing this article now, probably setting the stage for a bit of another illusionist’s deceit it their bag of tricks to save the rigging somebody apparently set up for the election.

All you guys who are in your first class of Economics and Finance They Never Taught You in School, who are asking “what somebody?”, either keep your dial tuned to this station, or, just simply Follow The Money!

Hey! When Ron Paul talks about “printing money“, everybody that supports him ALREADY KNOWS he’s talking about MONEY SUPPLY, not printing presses!

Here’s LOOKING AT YOU, AARON TASK! —AND YOU KNOW THIS!

In fact, Ron Paul took note during a congressional hearing once that the Fed has stopped publishing their estimates of what they call “M3 money supply” which Aaron Task knows is more what Ron Paul is talking about when he says “printing money”, saying they could not estimate the figure anymore with sufficient accuracy. Ron Paul rightly observed that it’s a good guess that their real reason is that Americans would be shocked at the figures.

All the manipulations that Mr. Task listed that the Fed does to control the real money supply, that is what they do.

BUT HERE IS WHAT AARON TASK DELIBERATELY LEFT OUT, because I think he knows a little more than he is explaining, so I will “just explain it”.

The Fed DOES put out dollars in circulation now with electronic entries authorities by the selected persons at the Fed, and Quantitative Easing is exactly what is meant by “printing money”, meaning putting dollars into the money supply (now mostly electronic transfers anyway), which has the same effect as printing press dollar production, only worse and faster.

If buyers around the world were not eating up all this cash by using it to buy Treasury Bonds and other means, the dollar would have crashed a long time ago.

The big money players around the world have lost confidence in the stability of the dollar, and the “full faith and credit of the United States” has lost its polish, and even the guys in charge of the American economy (the administration) and the guys in charge of manipulating our money (the Fed) and the central banks around the world, have said they need to study a transition to another worldwide currency.

But they are already married to the dollar, they have gobs and gobs of dollars, and they want to get their money’s worth, so they are riding out the dollar, this “green paper pig”, a  balloon they know is about to go bust, while they work out how to do it. And whatever deal they cut, we all know that what they have in mind is making Americans pay, the American economy. They may market it here in the USA as a “tax on the rich”, but they know it will be our blood, sweat and tears they will  require.

The only presidential candidate telling the truth to the American people about all this is of course RON PAUL. The detractors are committing big sins of omission, in what they are NOT saying, what they are hiding from you. (Here’s looking at YOU, Aaron Task).

And the truth is, that every increase in the money supply is grand theft larceny from the pockets of the poor and the middle class. That’s inflation, a word that does not do justice to the value it robs from the dollars the poor use to buy food and gasoline and pay rent. This is the kind of deceitful theft that the Bible calls a “false balance”. The “false balance” was what merchants of old used to cheat their customers, like pretending they were selling you a pound of wheat when the stone they used in the balance was actually lighter than a pound and the buyer was getting less that he was told.

Proverbs 11:1 “A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.” (Proverbs 11:1).

John 8:32  And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 150 other followers